The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1891-05-25
MINERAL LANDS.

lhASS 5Li0A aJSG otlhl1 pin
MINERAL LANDS.
Major Maginnis Back From Washington
and Explains the Situation.
Major Martin Maeinnis, mineral land
commissioner for Montana, arrived in
Helena yesterday over the Great Northern.
He was seen by an INDEPENDENT reporter at
his residence last night and asked regard
ing tho nature of his business in Wash
ington.
II presume, major, your trip east was in
relation to the controversy over the min
eral lands?"
eyes. l wanted to ascertain it's exact
status, First, to find out to what extent
company went to the mineral lands. all of
which are expressly excluded from their
grant and in lieu of which they are by the
terms of their charter granted indemnity in
other lands. Also on what ground a claim
on the part Of the company to any portion
of these lands could be set up"
Did you learn their positions?' eyes,
saw Mr.. Lamborn, the land commits
sionsr, and Mr.. MoNaupht, the general
counsel for the company. ! found them, AS
might be expected perhaps, disposed to
maintain the extreme claims of the COM
Dduy. lueB0 are, uEbt, ULlhU Clty AdVC Gut
right to all lands not known to be mineral
at the time their land grant attached, that
is on the definite location of their line
about the year 1882. And secondly that no
lands can be olassed as mineral on which
ore is not found i'll paying quantities, or at
least that ia not more valuable for mining
than for other purposes. All such lands
included in the grant these gentlemen
claim belong to their company, and they
insist that the Sawyer decision, the Colo
RADIO decision, and the recent decision of
the supreme court in the Butte land case
establish this view Of the law in their favor.
They claim also that the company can not
press its right to this class of land, and
take other lands as indemnity in
that there is not Ay sufficient
land left within the indemnity limits, to
satisfy their grant. That there will be a
lack Of four million acres anyway, and
therefore they can not afford to give up any
thing (Which the law allows and the court
awards them" On the contrary, Mr.. Cakes,
whom l also interviewed, took a broader
view; he said that he did not conceive it to be
the intention of congress to endow the COM
pany with any mineral lands, and that he
believed it was rather to the %company's in
terest to have the lands free and open, 80 that
thousands of volunteer prospectors spend
ing their OWN time and money might devel-
Top the mines, build up the country and
make business for the road"
(Which of these views do you think will
prevail with the company"
"Well, the officers of a corporation can
not act with the freedom and liberality that
men can when dealing with their own prop
erty. They are in charge of the interests of
others, and their position makes them take
everything for the company that they can
get. Besides, they are frequently changed.
New policies come in with new men. So
that the only safe way to deal
with a corporation is to join is
sues and oppose them IN all
points in dispute and make the fight to the
end before congress and the courts. That
is my view of it n the officers of the COM
pany professed themselves as anxious for
a speedy and tinal settlement of these vexed
questions"
DO you not think the drift of these re.
cent decisions has been against the people
and in favor of the corporations?"
well, to some extent; there is vet
plenty of room for the supreme court to de-
eide this case in favor of the people and
yet be entirely consistent. do not be-
lieve that the side of the people and the
state has yet been strongly presented. ]
think if we could make a good case in our
United States district court; have it we'll
presented, showing that the claims of the
railroad are against the we'll declared pub
lie mining policy of the United States;
that the railroad has no shadow of right to
any mineral land, explaining and sXpound-
ing all sides of the question, that it might
be shown up both to the district and
supreme courts in such Il light as it never
has been, and in such & manner az to
secure a Judgment for the people. Then
some congressional action is required.
"Is it not claimed, major. that congress
cnn not disturb a vested right or change
the conditions of a contract"
"Of course the constitution governs OIL
that point, but here is u case where Il great
| deal may be lone aver in the proper sur
vey and classitications of the lands. MOI
do | suppose that even the supreme court
would entirely ignore u legislative con
| ST. uction of the charter: a declaration by
congress of what it meant by mineral lands
| when it excluded them from the charter
| have talked to some high authorities OF
this point, and while they all say such =
legislative construction might not be fina
with the courts, they all seemed to agree
| that the courts would be slow to ignore it.,
DO you think that the thing to do is tt
maintain this controversy both in congress
and the courts?"
"Assuredly to contest every stop until G
final adjudication is renched."
ado you know whether the railroad COM
pany will contest all applications for pat
ents OF disputed lands?'
1.-The officers say that they will not do &c
with the intention of defeating may Bona
tide application. But they do make opposi.
tion merely to make a record, SO that the,
will be- entitled to indemnity on other land,
when those covered by the application are
decided to be mineral. This was theil
statement to me, at least. l shall address
them a series of questions on this anu Other
points and let them state their positions il
their own way"
Did you see Secretary Noble and Com
missioner Carter on this question:"
"Yes. l had several interviews. / find
them both sound on tho question. There is
no danger under their administration that
any of the mineral lands of the state will
be patented to tho railroad company pend
ing the decision of the points in dispute.
This settles all present uneasiness. and
meanwhile no effort should be spared to 80.
cure the minerRl lands to tho miners and &c
the state"