The semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1882-1886, 1882-08-23

Ill 0BStCv8 UUN1 tuDC WV 1VUA Sos"-
is0 Record, August l2sh, In relation
10 the litigation tl,at has recently
ovestsken the people Of Butte. It h
important that the article aud the de-
ei.ion Il contains should be read care
fully, fee the reason that the organ Of
the miniug claimasts last night At
tempted . prevention Of ito meaning.
and throws out Thu tempting halt In
eouclusion In the interest Of Ito nnas-
ten: ut may 10 useful to the lot
ewne. In Butte In guiding them
whether to compromise with claim
ants Ion reasonable terms, u oAssed),
or carry the matter into the courts"
Still Larping On compromise.
It must Be understood that . d.
cision by . commissioner Of the
Land Once has NO binding lsrce Or
ents4 whatever, for the resason that It
10 liable to be ret aside BY the next
commissjOner. But tie decision re-
lerred 70 b IN the almost identical
language OF the law, and will, no
douht, stand while the law stands.
The government excludes froRl the
grant for townsite patents, all valid
miuiug claims prior to the e"try of
the town site and al mines Of gold,
silver, clunal,sr IN" copper. A. the
commissioner very cearly explains.
Subsequent locatoTs cannot maintain
. claim, to mineral on land granted
f,r = TOWNSHIP, for the reason that
the land on which they are situated
b~iongx to the grantees uns;<r the
town.its patent. aid th: title no
h,lxer ren,,Ins In the United States'
As the hecord very forcil'ly puts
the proposition: "A .atent cannot
be legally Issued I" include any ground
already located ard occupied ~ n
mining claim, previously tn the claim,
~ = TOWNSHIP" The Record seems I"
u.e the words ''claiin 10 . tOwnsite"
adviseslly. for the rras.'n that the IS
suauee NJ . pa ent h the perftcting
merely Of y title that hts eus.si.tetl for
some time previous sqsatter's
right. The old legal maxim first In
time first In right, does nat lose any
d It's force l,ecassse su(reslucnt claim
ant happens to hang his claim ON the
mineral land act. The truth Of the
h,,siucss b that the title I" most of the
surface ground In dispute In the
Sa,okcl,ou... suits have titles slsat an
{. date that Of the mineral claimants
l,y al.,ut ten years. The Record says
I'VE ~aun.,t see hNw any
one c.u hope tn hold under the
junior patent. Il Jor'iori. We can''O.
.ee how any osse ram ht'ltl under the
jmmi v title. It makes M difference
for what purpsss any citizen GEES
upon the pul,lic dOsnain-ts: ming.
mining, or ~ y town ut claimant:
his righ's attach from the date Of set.
tlen,ent. IL he 10 qua itIesi citizen
and has MT exhausted bis rights.
Under the light Of this dec:si"n II
.is,es seem incrssiible that sny imicI't.
gent person cs,ul.i have the sus(acitv
to s-sert that the Junior title will
take precedence.
The patent 10 the tOwnsite Of Butte
waa Issued with . full knowledge Oi
all the facts ny the Interior DEPART
,nent, after . hearing Of the claims Of
a.lver.e claiu,apts, and before amy
quarts claims. with p''ssibly one ca
&, ton, w.s ever patented within the
limits Ut the TOWNSHIP Of Butte. 1t 10
mercsp ella pleading to argue that the
plaintiffs have any standing In court.
There has been no lesuauce Of patest
to the same ground. The town lot
owners do not want the quartz; and
the Mineral claimants also do not
seem to care anything sLout the
quartz, but are after what honest
men acquired title to ycars ago.
That II 4 horrible Mot recentDv die.