The Ketchum keystone. [volume] (Ketchum, Idaho) 1885-1899, 1890-04-12
Senator Stewards Mining Bill.

A correspondent of the Mining
and Scientific Press, of San Fran
cisco: has had lengthy and argu-
mentative communication in the
two last issues of the Press relative
to the defects of the proposed new
mining law now before the Senate
for it's consideration. The writer
of the article is well known both in
California and Nevada as practical
prospector and mining man, and is
entirely familiar with the features
of the present mining laws and
thoroughly competent to point out
the imperfections Of Senator Stew
arts proposed law and the results
that would follow in the enactment
of it. We regret that space pre-
vents US from repubiishing entire
the authors logical and comprehen-
sive review of the measure now be-
fore the Senate We, however, give
below summary of the writer's
reasons why the Stewart mining
bill ought to be rejected:
1st. It prevents discoverer even of a
new mining district from locating more
than one claim on lode, and gives loaf
ers chance to locate extensions and wait
for him to develop mine for their bene-
fit. It also prevents him from meeting
the demands of capitalists for groups of
claims which can be opened by central
works and where litigation by adjoining
claimants would be impossible.
Cd. 1t prevents miner from correct
ing a defective location by making a re-
record, and invites Jumpers" to hunt up
and jump all imperfectiy described lodes.
81. 1t does away with the requirement
now in force, that a location should be so
described relatively to fixed natural Ok
jects as to prove its whereabouts, and sub
stitutes an indefinite description. which,
if adopted, would admit of floating"
claims being taken up such as were pro-
ductive under the law of 1886 Of endless
litigation.
4th. 1t entirely relieves the rich man
who spends $1,000 in some undescribed
way for the benefit of five placer claims
each Of 100 acres, or of an equal number
of lodes, from working any Of them,
whereas the poor prospector who does
not possess that sum or cannot undertake
80 much work, must do 500 worth of
hole digging labor on each of his five
lodges or his title thereto will lapse.
5th. 1t changes the present law which
most benefcentIy gives the owner of a
series of veins the right to concentrate
his work in a tunnel, or on one of them,
and substitutes a measure under which
credit for assessment labor in tunnel
would be allowed for one lode and no
more, and surface work would have to
he done on all the others of the series,
even if during the year there had been q
thousand feet of tunneling done for the
development.
9th. It requires under the penalty OF
forfeiture that every owner, no matter
| how far he may be from a notary public
or the county seat, should record an atti
davit for the annual work done on each
of his lodes, and if such affidavit is lost
on the way to the recorders Office, the
claim it relates to will be subject to re.
| location.
7th. 1t proposes to legalize records as
to forfeited titles and affidavits when they
are made with local mining recorders
thereby ignoring the fact that such rec.
ords are liable to be burnt, lost, OF
changed, and that mining titles might in
consequence he imperiled.
8th It will enable mining incorpora
tons in different States to compel liti
giants in the mining districts where they
are operating to appear wherever they are
pleased to command them for the taking
of testimony, whereas at present thi'
must be taken in the land district where
the mines are situated; and
Finally. The changes proposed in the
mining statutes by Senator Stewart woult
if adopted not only promote litigation
but would compel the Land Office Il
issue new rulings and would also keel
the courts busy for years to come, trying
to discover their meaning. In place o
improving the present law, they woult
| greatly injure it and check mining ope
ratiOns. Should the measure pass, it re
quires no prophetic power to foresee |
time. not far of, when the cry for its re