The San Francisco call., 1896-03-12
Errors of the Commissioner of
the Land Office Pointed
Out.
PRESENT LAWS INEFFECTIVE.
Prevailing Conditions Are Satisfactory
to the Railroad Companies
Only.

WASHINGTON, D. c., March 1.-THE
California delegation to-day sent the fol-
lowing letter to Hon. Fred T. Dubois,
chairman OF the Committee on Public
Lands of the Senate:
Regarding H. R. 5S19, and letter 3, from
the honorable Commissioner of the Land OF
flee in relation thereto, dated March 4, we de-
sire to say: The criticisms of the Commis-
sioner may be briefly Indicated as follows:
First-The honorable Commissioner says:
"The lands to be classified under the bill be-
fore me are situated within old and well set
tied communities, are generally surveyed
lands and presumably have been thoroughly
examined and explored by prospectors"
The Commissioner then draws the conclusion
that the lands which have been thus explored
and prospected should not be made the subject
of further examination and classification.
From our personal knowledge OF the situation,
we are able to state that the Commissioner has
fallen into error to the result OF former pros
pecting in the mineral regions OF California.
The hasty, superficial and me ethodless prospect
ing of earlier years in our State is but now
giving place to scientific and skillful methods.
Abandoned mines are being reopened, more at
tention is being paid to the development OF
our mineral resources, and, in short, capital is
being attracted to the mineral regions of Cali
fornia as never before in the history OF the
State, since the first few years Of feverish ex-
citement following the discovery of gold on the
American River in 1S48.
Furthermore, many small claims in the
mountains are held by men of humble means,
which claims have not yet been patented. but
are held by work and possession under the
Federal mining laws. The owners OF these
small mines, living, as they do, in isolated
districts, far removed from populous centers,
frequently have no notice of intended patents
to railroad companies, and their claims are
consequently swallowed up by railroad patent.
1t is impossible within the brief space OF a
letter to explain the situation as it exists or to
state all the reasons why the classification
sought for should be made. We may say how
ever, that it is Il well-known fact among the
miners of California that prospecting along
methodcal and scientific lines has just begun
in California, and that it would be severe
blow to the development of the mining indus
trg well as grave financial loss to the
United States TO permit any considerable por-
ton of the mineral lands of that State to be
patented to railroad companies.
Second-1he honorable Commissioner says:
"The cost of examination and expenses in the
Idaho district was 6.2 cents (per acre. of
course), the cost in other districts (Montana)
| ranging from l. Is to 2.3 cents per acre" Just
why the classification in California should
cost 6.2 cents per acre and why Idaho should
| be taken as q standard of comparison is not
| clear. The contested lands in California lie
| mostly in the Central Pacific and California
and Oregon grants. The unpatented lands
within these grants comprise altogether ], 33 l.,
| 494 acres, or less than 100000 acres out OF
100000 to be classified. A good many thou
| sand acres of Central Pacific and California
| and Oregon grants lie in the Sacramento Val
| ley, in Butte and Tehama counties, while
| other portions thereof are in barren regions of
Lassen and Modoc counties. Less than mil
lion acres within the two grants above men,
toned would require careful examination.
Proceeding southwark through the San
| Joaquin Valley and over the Tehachapi
Mountains into Southern California the work
| of the Commissioners will not be difficult.
| This matter was fully explained orally at a
recent meeting of your committee and need
not be repeated here. We can see no reason
| why it should cost more in California than in
Montana. On the contrary the very fact, as
stated by the Commissioner, that California is
an older State and her lands better known and
| understood would make the task of the Com
| missioners for California easier. The evidence
| OF witnesses would be more easily obtained
| and an examination of contested lands more
| quickly made.
| Third-The honorable Commissioner sug-
| gests the following amendment to section
3 OF the bill under consideration, namely, by
adding to section 3 the following language:
| "And provided further that this act shall not
| apply to any lands in which publication has
been made or been ordered made by the Gen.
| eral Land Office under circular of the De-
| partment of the Interior, approved July 8,
| 1894, and that all such lands so published or
| ordered to be published shall proceed to
patent under now existing regulations.
The exclusion of published lands as sug-
gested by the Commissioner, while 1t might
| save the Government the small expense Of
publication already incurred, would lose to
| the United States and to the miners large
portion of the very lands sought to be saved
by the creation of the proposed commission.
| 1t is apparent that the efficacy of the proposed
| measure would be seriously crippled if the
lands already published but not patented
were excluded from its operation. The min
eral lands within these published lands belong
to the Government and not to railroad COM
pan1es, and the reasons that apply to the set
ting apart of mineral lands in other portions
OF the railroad grants apply with equal force
to the published but unpatented lands.
Fourth-In speaking of the recent procedure
| In the land department., the commissioner
| says: "This procedure has protected the rights
| of mineral claiments so well that no COM
plants has been made of its action by them"
Has the Commissioner fallen into an error as
| procedure is strong and universal among the
miners of California. The California Miners
| Association, which is composed of leading
mining and business men OF that state, ex-
pended over $4,000 in the year 1895 in fruit
| less efforts to prevent the patsnting OF mineral
lands to railroad companies. The records in
the office of the Commissioner OF the General
| Land Office have been considerably augmented
by protests. briefs, etc., proceeding from the
California Miners Association The associa-
tion sent personal representative to Washing
ton in the summer of 1895 to lay the above
matters before the proper officials. The fact is
the miners of California have been compelled
to ask Congress for the relief which they now
seek.
Referring to the suggestions made by the
members of your committee to the effect that
the proposed inquiry should be limited by the
exclusion of known agricultural lands, we de-
sire to say that we know of no feasible way to
| accomplish this on tirely desirable result. The
California Miners Association, through its ap.
propriate committees, discussed this very
question with view to modifying the pro
posed bill as above suggested. They discov-
cred, however, that it was impracticable to
designate geographical boundory line that
would properly designate the lands sought t1