The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-06-14
MEXICAN MINING LAWS.
HOW THEY DIFFER FROM THOSE
OF THE UNITED STATES.
Some Important Points in Their Fa-
vor-No Gross Claims or Apex
Decisions - Everything Under
Your Claim is Yours.

Your Claim is Yours.
City of Mexico Correspondence Globe
Democrat: To the investor who con-
templates putting money into Mexican
mines. as well as to the prospector who
is locking to this country as new
field for his endeavors to make another
raise, a comparison of the mining laws
of Mexico with those Of the United
States, as well as the natural conditions
of the two countries, must be matters
of vital interest. In order that the
legal aspect may be fairly presented
and proper deductions arrived at, II IS
necessary to consider a few of the lead
ing questions which have arisen out OF
the mining laws and been determined
by the highest courts in the states
In the first place, the federal laws
of the United States provide that any
citizen may go upon the public do
main and prospect for the precious
metals and if he finds mineral-bearing
rock he may locate one, or as many
claims as he pleases. In general,
mining claim in the United States and
British Columbia consists of a plat OF
ground 500 feet wide by 1,500 feet long,
=
of the mining districts in the states and
territories have diminished this area,
and in Arizona claims are 600 feet wide
by 1.590 feet long, but. as rule, 300
by 1,500 feet constitutes a full claim
in most districts. The law further pro-
vides that the discoverer must define
his discovery by stakes or proper land
marks, and it gives him so DAYS in
which to sink a 10-foot shaft, or oDen
In if1a 70 rexr
and record his certificate of location
Having done this he has complied
with all the law requires TO give him
a prima facie right TO one claim, or as
many more as he may have done -he
requisite work upon. This work done.
the discOverer need do nothing more
for one year.
The law further says that. in order
10 hold the locations made, the owner
shall exDend in development each and
every year upon each claim the sum of
500, or as wages may vary in different
mining districts il has been construed
to mean that he shall do 800 worth of
work. paying the regular wages in each
particular district and working the
number of hours in vogue in the same.
This done, the locator must file an aft
davit of annual labor performed, and
this viii entitle him to hold the claims
for another year. Should the locator
desire a patent to his locations the law
provides that when he shall have ex-
pended $500 upon each claim he may
make an application TO the government
for patent by having a proper
survey made, advertising in the proper
newspapers for a specified length of
time. and in the event that there are no
adverse claimants 10 the property in
question, when the time has expired
and the requirements of the law have
been complied with, The general gov
eminent grants a patent. or title in fee,
which can not be attacked except for
fraud. A patent having haan obtained.
the owner is no longer obliged to do an
nual labor, or continue any work what
ever. and so long as ne pays his an
nual taxes. which vary according to-
assessment. his rights remain the same
as those of any other owner of real
estate. Should. however. a locator fail
70 do his annual labor, the law provides
that the locations made revert back to
the public domain and are subject %
relocation Just the same as though no
discovery had ever been made. These
in general terms are the requirements
of the law in the mining states and ter
ritories of the United States and British
Columbia. f
While in general the law is fair, Ger
tain abuses have risen out OF it ard
certain decisions have been rendered Ly
the courts of last resort which may be
pointed out here n the first, it is 4
question whether a prosrectOr ought 10
have the right to locate more claims
than he can work, or IN other words.
whether he ought 20 have the rigs: to
bite off more than he cal. chew As
before stated, all ne needs to do is ten
feet of work on eecn claim of ten acres
in order to hold it for one year II
thereafter he does not perform mis- an
nual assessment, he may let it 20 by
default and on the frs. - the year fol-
lowing he may relocate i. himself and
keep on relocating from wear to year
ad infinitum.
Assuming that ma has made what
are considered by others as good luca
lions and let him De a bad man and
fail to do his assessment work. his
will take good care not 70 in
terfere with his rslOcttiJn, because of
fear Of personal DANCE. wEile If he IS
popular with his follows. they VII not
interfere with his pl ans for the reason
that he is a good fellow Every MINER
knows of instances whore development
has been retarda1 fc.' 10th reasOEs-
Another disa Vantage in the states Is
that if . man ma,l.-s i valuable lis
cCvery, no 500 rsr Is the fact m%ce
known than one or moro individuals
will make locations across his lain,
which results too often in endless liti-
cation. It has heen said that there
never was a good mine discovered that
it didn't involve ono o. more lawsuits,
and this is generally trIe.
The courts in the United States haze
modified the @rr al INTERPRETATION of
the law in two particular instances It
used TO be supposed that if a man bad
a title in fee simple 10 a piece of sTcund
his rights eXtende 50 far Us in tht cir
as he chose to 81 AMI as far down mo
the earth as ne chose u dig within
the borders of his prn'erty Not 50,
however, in mining. In the famous.
and by some con ;idercl infaIunus.
apex case it was held tia. II u Par
ticular vein. instead IF being vertical.
happened to be horizontal, the rerson
having the apex of the l)de Nigh. fol-
low it outside of his side lines mo his
neighbors ground. ani this is The Law
today.
A good deal Of Litigation has also
grown ont of he Interpretation Of
what is meant by annual labor, OF he
expenditure of 500 yearly on each
claim, as above stated. In thu case OF
Boyd ct al. VS.. Quimby 81 al, which is
one of the leading cases ON this point,