The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-06-16

Camp Floyd mining district are on liie
anxious seat; in fact, they have made
a discovery that is causing them a
great deal of anxiety and worry, ana
in many instances considerable work
and expense. and some OF them are IL
p ale to lose all of their holdings that
are :ocated in the Utah county portion
of Camp Floyd mining district.
The section of Utah county embraced
Inv the district is what is known as
fne Fort Critceuden military reseTvaz
ton. This reservation was thrown
open to settlement on April 8, 1893, ana
it is claimed by many that locations
made prior to this date were Invalid
and void.
It took the people a long time to
wake up to this fact, however, and 1t
was not until a week or ten days ago
that the jumper began to get in ms
work. The word was then soon passed
a,onc the lire and now there is great
activity in the location business ON
ground on the old reservation that was
located prior to April 9, 1895. In num-
her of instances several claim owners
have relocated their own CLAIMS, winch
necessitates the doing of the required
amount of assessment work over again /,
bls bv far the most of The localloIs
are being made by jumpers, as they are
termed. and claims on which thousands
of dollars have been expended in de-
velopment work, have been filed upon
by them.
A Herald reporter met a Mercur
,.s,airnlnlde1- Yesterday who was cousad-
erabay exercised over the matter. rms
gentleman was getting out relocation
or amended notices, and he stated that
If the locations made prior TO April 3,
1895. were not legal, that a, great many
claim holders. who had acted In good
Faith, would lose heavily.
The reporter then tried to hnd OUT
the exact status CT the affair, but with
Indifferent success.
Judge Dickson cited him to the act
of July 5. 1854. which is an act to pro-
vide for the disposal of abandoned and
useless military reservations; but the
Judge was under the impression that the
president must open these reservations
by proclamation. He was OF the opin-
ion. however that the "sooners" could
beat the jumpers in courts of Justice
Hon. Byron G-oo. register of the
limited States land office, stated that
the Crittenden reservation was opened
unon the receipt of the following cir
cular letter from the interior depart
menf, which reads as follows:
April g. 1895.
Ssr-The records of this office do NOT
show that you have heretofore been
furnished with copies of executive or
ders of July ., 1885. and July %. 1884
or 50 much thereof as relate to the mill.
tarY reservations OF Forts Cameron
Cri1tenden. Rush Lake and ThoTnbuTg
in Utah which were transferred to the
o0ntrot of the secretary of the interior
fer disposal under the act of July 5
1884
I therefore enclose herewith a copy
Of the executive order of July . 1885
relating to Fort Cameron and so mucf
Of the executive order of July %. 1884
as pertains TO the other reservations
above named.
You will note the action taken as per
copies of executive orders herewith
upon the proper records in your Office
and acknowledge receipt hereof
Yours truly,
s ". LAMoREAUX.
Commissioner.
Mr.. Groo. on being asked how he in
terpreted the above. said that he coulS
not express an opinion. as. in casr
Of any controversy between claim
would have to be brought before tbs
land office for hearing, and he couit
not consistently PREJUDICE them.
There are q. variety of opinions re
gar4ling the question. Some hold tina
locations made prior 10 April 5. 1895
were Invalid: while others think tina
they VIII stick; and still others hols
than the reservation was opened 70
mineral locations in 1884
1Fes..7,sr ~ ktH 1O4l, ;,,s-S
In mentioning this matter, says:
Quite furry was caused in minin,
circles Wednesday by the report tina
the government woaI}d not recogniz
the validity of any locations made on
the Fort Crittsnden military reservatio
p5'ior TO the opening of said reservation
April 9. 1895. should there be any con
flict by clairn-owneTs who made thei
locations Subsequent to that date Thi
decision involves some of tine mos
17aaVRbl.. property in the district an.
the owners thereof have been getfin,
a. great move on themselves in re-Ihcat
ing thu ground, or rather, in MAXIM
new locations. A number of antFaDri
ties have been consulted ON the cues
ton and there seems to be a difference
Of opinion On the subject Dickson hold
that the old claims are valid Will
Perks and others claim TO the con
trsry.''
The Jack Of knowledge on this sub
iect is bound to make a. great deal O
trouble and litigation. and II certainl
looks as if the government was sreatl
at fault in that il permitted location
10 be made on the reservation; or.
ii was open to the public. tslet IL di
nof make the fact known by proclame
tioa or publication.
----------------