The Helena independent., 1892-10-12
PTATE KEEPS The LAND.
Decision Of the General Land Office
In a Case Involving a School
Section.
|rhe Local Land Office Held the
Mineral Entry Would
Not Hold.
Land About Three Miles From
the CITY, Near the Brondwater,
was in Dispute.

A decision of the local land Office. in
volving tract of land about three and
.half miles from the city, has been affirmed
|by the general land office. The lands In
pueation are in sections 16, II and 81 near
the Brondwater hotel. August l3. 1887,
Mary B. SperlinR and others fled on a por-
ton Of it as placer ground. Protests were
entered against allowing the fling the allie
CATION being that the land was not mineral;
that section 16 was school land; that Sec
Etions II and 81 we're not mineral lands and
that they were within the limits of the
Northern Pacific grants. July IA. 1880, the
case was heard In the local land Office spe-
cial Agent Haley representing the govern
ment, Attorney General Haskell the state
and John w. Eddy the mineral applicants.
The local land Office decided May %. 1891,
that the mineral land application should
HE cancelled, so far as ii related to section
| 16. The applicants appealed the case to
| the general land office, and tho decision of
that office WAS received yesterday. II af-
. firms the decision of the local Office and di-
! rects that the mineral application of Mary
! Is. Sperling and others be held for cancella-
/ tion. and that hearing be had as to the
| character OF the land in sections IL and 2l.
The general land Office in it's decision.
says that section 16 was returned by the
surveyor general as agricultural In charac-
/ ter, and that the burden of proof was upon
| the applicants to prove that the tract they
had selected was mineral in character. The
decision then says:
1.-The section in question was reserved
4 for school purposes. and to divest the state
/ <,fA he lop ck uh tn nv fh Il
| the land is valueless for strictly agricultural
/ purposes as that it was more valuable for
mining than for agricultural. as the defend
| ant endeavored to prove, but the land must
| first be shown by a preponderance of the evil
| dence to be valuable because of its minerals.
| And to constitute mining land ID must
appear that it contains metal in such
quantities so as to make it available and
valuable for mining purposes. Several lodea
have been discovered in section 16, not in
| cluded in the mineral applications. and
| also in section IT, over the line. The lodes
have been worked in the past. but it does
| not satisfactorily appear that they have
! been worked profitably. and the mines had
| not been in operation for about three years
| at the time of the hearing. As to So of the
s119 of the neA of section 81. adjoining part
are located some placer claims. 1t is ar
| gued that by reason of these lodes anc
| placer mines the tracts included in these
entries are mineral in character; but il
ia not sufficient to establish thai
fact to prove that adjoining lands contain
mines. The lands themselves have beer
prospected and examined by miners sinc'
the COS, but they have never been regarded
as valuable for placer mining. In th'
years 1876 or 1878 placer miner operated oil
the land in section 16, but after two week
trial ceased work because OF its unproft
ableness. and offered the mines to SOM
/ Cinnamon with tho use Of water free, bu
they declined the offer, saying there wa
nothing in the lands to justify them il
working it. In 1880 the mines were aban
doned. Placer mines have not since beel
worked on the lands in dispute. AT tn
time of the hearing there were perhapa
dozen prospect holes on the land in dis
pute, dug at q cost of not over $10O Som
Of these holes were tested just before tn
hearing. There was conflicting testimon
as to the value of the gold found at thes
tests, the pi osecution showing that the Rol
was found not over from one to five color
to the pan. and was insufficient to justif
the necessary expense of mining it. On tn
other hand the defense produced two wit
nesses who swore they found in on
pan as many as thirty-two coarse colors
valued at about five cents, and that tn
value Of the pans ran from five cents dow
to one and one-half cents each. However
these witnesses for the defense were show
not to be entirely reliable, and one of ther
at least was in the employ of the miners
applicants. and one of them told Specis
Agent Haley the land was non minsra
The applicants have not shown they have
water right with water sufficient to place
mine the land in question, and the evidene
shows that there is no available unappro
priated water which can be obtained fe
ehe purpose.
II think that the applicants have fsile
to prove that the land is mineral, and tht
she preponderance of the evidence is to IL
effect that the land is not subject to entr
nader the mineral laws"