The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-11-13

ing o. this uew Law passed by congress, rs
great number Of miners have not done
their assessment work this year because of
the passage Of the Law suspending work
Tor the year 1855 c. ". JoYsT.
SEATTLE, Nov. 10. Issa
To THE Eprron: In this mornings issue
OF the PosT-IsrELLIsEscEz my attention
was attracted 10 your reply TO the question
propounded By "Miner" respecting the
necessity of performing annual labor or
expanding in improvements for the year
isss the sum of 500 required by Law on all
unpatented mining claims by the owners
OF such claims. As I understand the pres
ent Law ON this subject, the owners of
mining claims. being natural persons. are
absoived from the performance of labor
thereon. and from expanding any money
in Improvements thereon. for the year 1898.
The act of congress passed May 10. ISL
contains the following requirements: On
each claim located after the 10Th day of
May, 1872, and until . patent has been
issued therefor. not less than 800 worth OF
labor shall be performed or improvements
made during each year" In case of fail
urc TO comply with these requirements
said act declares that the claim or mine
open to relocation in the same manner as
II no location of the same had ever been
made. and the original iocator's rights
therein forfeited, unless he or his heirs
shall have resumed work upon the claim
after such failure and before such reioca-
ton.
By act of congress approved January p,
1850. the said act of May 10, 1872, was
I'D h.. 81 rsk<A -
which annual assessment work shall be
performed on all unpatented mineral
claims located subseq nent to the 10th day
of May, 1872, to commence on the first
day of January succeeding the date of the
location of such claim.
The states and territories of tie United
States. and the miners of each mining dis
trict are empowered by the laws of the
United States to make laws and regula-
tons governing. among other things, the
amount OF work necessary to hold posses
sion of mining claim, but such rsgula-
tons shall be subject to the requirements
laid down by the United States statutes,
and must not conflict with the same.
The last legislature of the state of Wash
ington enacted a law containing the same
provisions on the subject Of the annual
assessment work to be performed upon
minisg ciaims as are prescribed by the
laws Of the United States. This act was
quoted in this mornings paper in your
reply 10 the question asked by Miner"
A few days ago noticed in the columns
of the PosT-IsTELIIGEscER that q bill had
been passed by both houses of congress,
| and would probably be approved by the
president, which. If IL becomes q law, will
suspend for the year 1898 the provisions of
section numbered 2324 of the Revised Stat
utes of the United States requiring 500
worth of labor to be performed or improve
ments made during each year on each
claim located after the 10th day of May,
1872, and until patent has been issued
therefor. so that no mining claim which
has been regularly located and recorded as
required by the local laws and mining reg
| ulations shall he subject TO forfeiture for
non-performance OF the annual assessment
for the year 1893.
From the foregoing statement of the law
this question arises: Was this act of the
state Legislature but a re-enactment of the
laws of congress, or was 1t aecumulatiye
legisia.ion7 The state act gathers to-
gether the provisions of the original act of
congress on this subject and those Of an
amendatory act. 1t it was accumuIative
| legislation, then 500, in value of either
work or improvements, had TO be expended
annually on a mining claim 10 hold IL.
/ IL 10 manifest this vas not the object
| Conceding To this act of the state IegisIa-
tnre an intelligent object, it must have
| have been founded upon one or all of the
| three following reasons:
First--As the laws OF congress were not
accessible 20 great majority of those who
are interested in the subject matter Of the
legislation. il might have been deemed
| beneficial by the legislature TO re-enact
these provisions of the two acts of con-
| gFess, so that they might be accessible
| 10 all.
Second-As the Law of congress fixed the
| minimum amount OF the value of the
labor or Improvements. and gave by i'm
I plieation the power to the state legislature
| 10 tx greater value, but not less value.
| TO be expended on claims located after
/ May 10, isf2. and rs uniformity in such
| matters was desirable. the legislature
adopted the same rule as that prescribed
/ by congress. If the legislature had Il xed
! $50 as the value Of the labor or improve
F, ments 20 be expended on each ella m an
naaily. then it would he manifest that the
/ suspension of the act of congress for one
/ or more years IN this REGARD would not
release the claimant from the expenditure
of the additional $50 required by the stats
| Legislature
Thisd-As the requirement, is that the
acts not only OF the mining districts. bat
| OF the state legislature must by in har-
mony. and not in conflict With or incon-
sistent with the Law of congress If
| the law Of congress 10 suspended
| for one or more wears does not
| the state act in the very words of this law
of congress. If IL survives in the meantime
come in conflict with this suspending act
OF congress7
The title TO mineral lands 10 In the gov.
ernmsnt OF the United States ana not in
| she state. For a claimant TO obtain title
20 these mineral lands he must comply
with the laws Of congress. and certainly no
provision Of the state legislature incon-
sistent with such law of congress could be
urged TO defeat the contamination OF such
| title. The last act of the legislature Of
this state on this subject is amendatoFy OF
prior general act. and of particular sec
ton Of such general Act The only change
Is in regard to the time when the labor
was 10 be performed or the improvement
made, all else is merely recital From the
above considerations. If the bill above re-
ferred TO becomes Las Of the United
States, Is IL not doubtful 10 say the least.
rpas.3tsu.a 81 ahn~ - -.,orS~ L. -.