The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1893-03-21
AN IMPORTANT DEC |SION.
Made by Commissioner Stone on
Land in Dispute on Scratch
Gravel.
But Two Of the Many Locations
Made Are Held to Be
Mineral.
Tho Others Are More Valuable for AgrI.
cultural Purposes-Ihe Helena moe
Il Partly Sustained.

NSS'y SVskMbuVus
Commissioner w. M. Stone, Of the gem
eral land Office, has decided tho important
case of Eugene s. Fronoh and Henry M.
Brandagee versus the Montana Mining and
Reduction com any, and George B. Child.
trustee, and Annie Il. Brisooe. TRANSFORMS.
In his decision he partially upholds and
partially reverses ono made by the register
and receiver OF the Helena land office. The
land in dispute Is on Scratch Gravel and
embraced ground claimed BY French and
BrandeRee to be agricultural, and by the
ttansferees of the mining company to be
mineral. BY the decision of the Holena
land Office all Of it was held to be
Agricultural. The commissioner, how
ever, allows mineral entry to be made
on two of the lodes, but declares the
other ground to be more valuable for
agricultural purposes. The history OF the
Case Is as follows:
On July IS. 1890. the Montana Mining
and Reduction company offered for filing
its application for patent for the. Ida.
Emma. Cleveland. Dandy, Bismarck. Star.
Comestock. Alert, Saratoga and Handy lode
claims and the Saratoga No. l and Handy
No. 2 millsites. The application was re-
jected by the Helena land Office. because
portions Of the lands applied for we're in
conflict with selections made by the North
ern Pacific in 1886. The mining company
filed a reliuquishment of all conflicts. and
Of the Comestook lode. Upon this its ap-
plication for the remaining tracts was re-
ceived and filed. Subsequently the mill
uikA opvIiCat{oro -ora ohopNoua1 q w
Keller, owner Of the Fairview lode claim,
fled a protest and adverse on the ground
that it was in conflict with
tho Alert. Comestook and Star locations,
but afterwards relinguished the contest.
entry on the Ida. Emma. Cleveland, Dandy,
Bismarck, Star, Saratoga and Handy lode
claims. exclusions being made of conflicts
with the Fairview lode and the Northern
Pacific selection. On Dot. q. 1891, Eu-
alleging that the ands in question were
non 10 n in character and that the min
eral entry was made for fraudulent pur-
poses. Their agricultural entry had al
ready been refused on the grounds Of con-
fict with the mineral lodes. and their pro-
test asked for n hearing to enable them to
s~ubstantiate their claims.
The Helena land office granted the hear.
ing, and the register and receiver. after
personally inspecting the premises, decided
in character, and recommended that the
mineral entry be cancelled and the home
stead applications allowed. The mining
claimants took an appeal from this decision.
erred in holding that the lone question"
involved in the case was whether or not the
land was mineral or non-mineral in char
acter; second. that they erred in deciding
that the land must contain "as a present
fact mineral in sufficient quantities to
also be moro valuable for mining than
agricultural purposes; that they erred in
holding that a miner while demonstrating
the truth must have ,protection." but that
expenditure of $500 in Improvements upon
his claim and q compliance with tho laws.
allow him to make mineral entry;' and
that they erred in deciding the land not
mineral, and allowing the Homestead
entries.
As to the first specification, Commissioner
Stone concurs with the register and re-
deliver of the Helena office that the first and
most important question is as to the min
eral or non-mineral character Of the land;
'for." says he. 'if the land be decided nom
mineral. the entry therefor must fall
whether made with the Intention of perpe-
tratinR q fraud or from a miaapprehension
us to the facts. In this case the land was
decided to be non-mineral in character,
hence the question of fraud does not enter
into the consideration of the oase." The
consideration of the other specifications. he
says, involve the same question. Continu-
ing, the commissioners opinion reads:
"Ihe land in question WAS returned by
the United States surveyor general as aQri-
cultural in character. Mineral entry was
and the burden of proof rests upon hin
who attacks the validity of the entry.
Hence in this case il d~evolves upon the pro-
testants to prove that the land embraced in
is shown that tho value OF the land in SON.
troversy for agriculture ia very slight, it
being unacceptable to cultivation but
that q secoad growth of grass Is found
thereon. Six thousand dollars have been
expended upon their consolidated claim by
for their outlay has been about $500 worth
of ore, taken from tho Star and Bismarck
locations. From this. coupled with the
fact that no work has been recently done
on said claims, it is reasoned that the
claims oannot be worked at a profit. do
not consider the conclusion fully war
fanted by the premises. Few, il any invest
nents, give immediate returns for the
capital invested. and this is especially true
of the mining business. in which large sums
are often expended before any mineral Ia
taken from the claim. Indeed this IL the
history OF some OF the most valuable min
Ing properties. from which large fortunes
have been made. Further. the fact that no
work Is now being done on said claims can
not be considered as an abandonment
since subsequent to entry, NO work upon
the claim is required.
II am of the opinion that the testimony
in the case clearly shows that those looa-
tions. other than tho Star, and Bismarck,
possess no value for mineral. The fact,
however. that mineral to the value of about
$500 has been taken from the Star end Bis
marck locations, would indicate that these
locations possess some value for mine al, at
least sufficient to overbalanoe their slight
value for agriculture, and it is go decided.
The mineral application is held for cancel
linton as to the Ida, Emmo, Cleveland,
Dandy. Saratoga and Handy locations.
Your decision is accordingly modified"
Tobacco Users Smile Sometimes
When told that tobacco hurts them; their