The weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1878-1881, 1881-01-18
sUR MINING LAWS.

when parties claiming mineral lodes are re-
quired to commence to represent them. 1t is
commended by many that a claim which was
located, we will say, on the LIST day of July,
1880, shall be represented by the claimant or
his agent on the 1st day of January, 1881 and
that the labor then commenced shall be con-
tinuouslv applied until the amount required
by law shall be expended. Others, again,
hold that representation may be made at any
time during the year subsequent to the loca-
ton of the claim. We know of no case that
has been brought before the courts, in which
the determination of this point was involved.
But according to the opinion Of those who
have given the matter study and thought,
mining claims may be legally represented at
any time within the LIST day of January and
the 31st day of December subsequent to the
location of the same. There is no doubt,
that should a mining suit involving this point
come before our courts a decision sustaining
this OPT Mon would be rendered. An adverse
decision would certainly work an injury to
our mining interests. In many localities, it
would be inconvenient if not impossible to
commence the representation of lode claims
on the LIST day of January of each year. The
deep snow that generally lays on our noun
tain ranges, the only place where lode claims
are found, renders it extremely difficult, if
it does not interpose an insuperable barrier, to
reach them during the winter months of the
year. If the law contemplate such an alb
surd procedure that lode claims shall be rep
resented on the LIST day of January, nature
virtually estops a compliance with its provi-
sions.
There is still another proposition to be set
tied iii regard to representing a claim. The
present law governing the case was approved
January the 22d, 1880. Now, we will sup
pose a man locates u claim on the 1st, I'd or
Sd day of January, 1850, and does 500 worth
Of work upon it before the I'D day of that
month of the same year. The question that
arises is, does this work hold the claim until
the I'D day Of January, 1881, or only until
the list day OF January 1880. On this point
there exists a great diversity of opinion. As
we understand It, Commissioner Williamson
contends that 1t holds the erouud until the
3lst day of December following and nc long
er, While some Of our best mining lawyers
maintain the work holds the ground until
the 22d day of January 1881. Here is a wide
opening for future litigation which should be
closed by the enactment of a supplemental
hill by congress that would define the true
intent and meaning of the law of January
I'D 1880.
1t is claimed also that our mining laws
give to capitalists a too great advantage of
labor, that he can by sheer force of wealth
Dust the rightful holders or claimants Of a
mine from possession. This is WOO one spirit
aud intent Of the mining laws OF the United
States, but it is stated it is true in practice
and has too often been verified, especially in
the Comstock lode in Nevada. Colonel sam
uel Brannan, an old time Californian, saws
that the Mexican mining laws are much su-
perior to ouls. He says that in Mexico the
poor man who finds a mine is protected in
his rights to it though from his poverty he
may not be able to hold continuous possess
sion and the title enures to his heirs after his
death. he further claims that E'this and
other advantages will draw a great many
AA''H4' vi Il 1 dlilE SItDE States I
and territories to Mexico where they Will
have the additional advantage Of being able
to secure claims to agricultural valley lands
situated near the miues."
The San Francisco Chronicle, in
ing on this assertion, uses the following per-
tinent and well-t!med language:
"We are not prepared for a general confu-
| tallDn OF LlltSR ufDimSIt1OnS Rtt 90 Ma hnr
leans are not, While the Americans are. a lii
S!ous race, We suspect that when the laLLt r
snail nave secuted a considerable footing in
the Mexican mines, there will occur the same
difilculties OF adjustment under Mexican laws
between tie rights of capital and lab0r-or
rlch miners and poor ones-that are with
good reason complained of in this and other
mining states. We do not believe that any
cooe OF laws can place the claim of a peor
man on so firm a basis that d rich rascal NAV
lo1 De able to worry the poor man out OF
some OF his just rights in the courts. Il IS
the lesson OF experience here that the law
yers always make common cause with TN,
ilch They will do the same in
Mexico. "
In saying this much We do not blink tLo
necessity, of great and radical changes in the |
mining laws OF the United States. Ii was a
MISTAKE resulting IN part from the necessitv
OF the SITUATION here from 1919 TO 1852 to eLas-
Va'e the rule Of the particular placer 10 fine
dignity OF a law. Ii was an inexcusahia
oiuhaer OH the part OF congress to allow his
RUE TO obtain a permanent f~oo,I,0rd. I'M
iater ehofts OF congress to make someLhiup
IKE a mining code were III merely tentative,
resulting less from a knowledge than want If
knowledge on the subject, aud in part. Too.
from a We'l-grounded fear Of wonopoly. The
elhie VIII coine-the sooner the better for the
solio interests OF every mining state and ter
litory-when congress will have to lake ihe
SUBJECT resolutely in hand as a thing demand-
ing as much attention as the tariff, the pres
erVatioh 81 the public domain, or any other
matter OF legislation, and in its wisdom evolve
q mining code SnLisfnnLnrr tn k1al ILn ni.L