The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-06-25
The Law ON Relocation.

VI lOUoSs III tuo AdW Vep01buAcAt VI uAu
ing journal the following appears. which is
valuable for reference, as it covers the
whole ground:
Although section 1924 of the United States
statutes require at least 800 worth of work
to be done ON each lode within each year
after that Of the original discovery and until
the lode is patented, or what is equivalent,
a receivers receipt is issued. the neglect to
years, unless there is intentional abandon
ment Of the claim, does not actually forfeit
the title. To work such forfeiture there
must not only be such neglect, but there
must also be legal relocation before re-
sumption by the owner. The neglect and
complete the forfeiture. The 800 worth OF
work must be done entirely within each
calendar year, between January and
January l, and if $50 worth of work be
done in 1890, and 81 in 1891, the work
for 1880 is not complete, nor that for
1891, until full 800 worth of work shall
be finished in 1891, a fraction of the 800
worth of work done in any one year not
applying or cutting any figure as work for
any other year. If the owner neglects in
whole or in part of his annual work for 1880
or for several years, he still has the first
claim to the lode as long as another has not
vantage of the claim being open to re-
location, the owner can resume work
say on January l, 1891, or at any time
thereafter in advance of such location, and
from the moment of such resumption OF
work in good faith, past neglect is for
given and the negligent owners title is
tor should commence work on January 1,
1891, or at any time thereafter before such
resumption of work by the negligent claim
ant, and then conform strictly to the re-
quirements of the law in regard to reloca-
tions, the relocator's clam is perfected, and
the previous owners claim forfeited.
The question is often asked, what amount
of work must be done by the original own
er, after neglect of a previous years work,
to entitle him to hold the claim? Must he
not only resume work, but also continue it
uninterruptedly until the 800 of work is
completed, or if he should also resume work
and then suspend it, can another party,
during such suspension and before the $1O0
worth of work is completed. enter on the
lode and make a valid relocation?
A great diversity of opinion has been
best mining lawyers hold that the resun.p-
ton in good faith is sufficient, and that it
entities the party so resuming to continue
and complete his 800 worth of work dur
ing that calendar year up to and including
Dec. 81. One of the most prominent cases
of this kind noted in the books was re-
16O, where mine owner neglected his an
nual work for one year, then resumed work
the following year, but after doing about
VI worth of work upon each lode In JAM,
suspended work. Another party
entered and attempted to relocate in Au-
gust. The supreme court of California de-
cided such relocations to be illegal and that
the original owner could have completed
his work any time that year. ''The work
done was actual and valuable. The letter
of the statute uphclds the view. as to re.
sumption of work. taken by the court be-
law. and forfeitures and announcements are
not to be favored by passing them upon
language which does not plainly and I'M.
mistakably provide for them" The Law
may, therefore. he considered as definitely
settled in the direction indicated.