The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-08-21
MINERS LEGAL TROUBLES.
STATE LAW PROBLEM.
THE RED DOG SUIT.
SUBMARINE MINING

denly appeared a boom In mining law.
The miners of California have a variety
of important legal problems to interest
them and mining lawyers are sitting up
nights calculating the range and velocity
OF constitutions, Federal and State stat
utes ana legal opinions, including their
own.
The big question of. whether the State
mining law of 1897 is or is not in force
is the chief one. Since the announcement
In Inc Call few days ago that Attorney
A. II. Ricketts,, chairman of the mineral
lands committee Of the California Miners
ASSOCIATION, had discovered a fatal blum
der in the repeating act of March 20, 1899,
ana that the law remains in force, there
mas been great deal of inquiry and dis
cussion all over the State. During the
past week a number of lawyers have
formulated opinions on the grave question
ana number of intelligent mining men
nave expressed lay opinions.
AS IS understood by those who have
given the matter attention the repeating
act as passed and approved reads: AN
act to repeal an act ETC.. is hereby re-
pealed." Had entitled" been used in
stead of Ito repeal" the intention of the
Legislature as expressed correctly in title
would nave been accomplished. AS the
act reads it repeats IAN act to repeal -
ana there was no such act to be repealed
The whole question is, Can the court, I'M
DER the rules and laws governing judicial
construction of statutes, correct the blum
ger by eliminating ito repeal" and read
ing entitled in its place? Mr.. Ricketts,
opinion Is that since the language is
clear and definite the court must accept
the language as it stands, there being no
ambiguity. Other mining attorneys hold
the same view.
But other lawyers as strongly hold that
the court may so correct the blunder.
Judge ]. NJ. Walling of Nevada City has
ha
a lengthy opinion to that effect. He cites
numerous cases to support his contention
that correcting clear mistake of the
use of a wrong word in statute is not
an assumption of legislative powers"
In People VS.. King, Is Cal, IA, the SUI
preme Court substituted 1906 for "293 -
was substituted for without" The fol-
lowing is another of the opinions of the
week:
Editor Call: In the issue Of Toe Call of the
peared relating to the act repeating the min
ing location law of 1897. This article has given
rise to a good deal of speculation and inquiry
as to the present status of the laws of this
State governing the subject. Mr.. Ricketts, and
authorities are quoted to show the law of 1897
is still in force. l have received an inquiry
as to the effect of the repeating act and have
advised that it repealed the act of 1897. BY
reference TO the title of the act chapter CXIII
page Jas. Stats. 1899, 1t will be seen that the
act of March 81. 1897, was that which the
act repeats, though section l. of the repeating
act. reads: AN act to repeal etc, instead
of AN act entitled an act" etc. 1t was held
in Savings Bank VS.. Burns, 104 Cal, 47S, that
where the act is ambiguous and of doubtful
meaning application, 1t is competent to look
to the title of the act and to read it in con-
nection with the body of the repeating act
to determine the intention of the Legislative
body, and a similar act was upheld. This
decision of our Supreme Court follows those
VS.. Western Car Co. 102 U. S, l. and Wilson
vs.. Spaulding. 10 Fed. Rep. 304. So that read
ing the title and the body of the act together
IT is plain what the legislative intention was,
though crudely expressed, and the conclusion
follows that the act Of March q. 1897, stands
repealed. y E. NJ. CALVIN.
Mr.. Ricketts, admits Mr.. Galvins argu-
ment Us far as 1t goes, but holds that in
this case there is no ambiguity and doubt
full meaning. Judge Walling does not
take the title into account at all. Be
sides the raging conflicts of lawyers there
are many miners who are being sustained
by faith that If the Federal law is COM
piled with substantially and in good faith,
justice will somehow preserve mining To-
cations to those who didn't know that a
State law was also in force. Such faith
is probably confounded, for if a State law
is in force and is valid 1t must be COM
piled with. Many cases involving mil
lions have turned on the location and re-
cording of claims according TO district
tricts may supplement the Federal re-
quirements, as the Federal law distinctly
allows, ignorance Of their existence would
appear of no more protection than igno-
rance of the Federal law itself.
When the doctors Of the law disagree
so widely we will have to wait and see
what the Supreme Court says about 1t.
Meantime locators should carefully OBJ
serve both the Federal and State laws
and the laws Of their mining districts If
there are any. Claims located since the
supposed repeal last spring should be
promptly relocated according to the State
law. which miners all over the State are
busily looking up.
Through his close study of the law in
the past few days Mr.. Ricketts, has dis
covered something else new, he believes.
of $50 worth of work in sixty days is in
valid anyway He holds that it is in con-
fict with the Federal law because the
latter allows locator to hold a claim by
doing 800 worth of work by the end of the
calendar year after the one in which the
location is made 1t is the time and not
the assessment that is invalid, he holds.
The State may require additional assess
ment work and regulate the manner of re-
cording, etc, but the additional assess
ment work must accompany the time
is correct. another trouble will be on hand
If the State law is held to be in force.
Besides the State law middle the
miners have the validity of the Caminetti
law on hand in the injunction suit re-
Gently brought by the Anti-Debris Asso-
citation, in the name of Suffer County,
against the Red Dog hydraulic mine of
Nevada County. This mine has been
operating behind restraining dam
built according to specifications approved
by the Federal engineers composing the
California Debris Commission, and in
spected and licensed by them. The suit
asks that the mine be enjoined notwith-
standing the approval of the California
Debris Commission, and thus the vital
feature of the Caminetti law which puts
exclusive control of hydraulic mining on
the watersheds of the navigable streams
of this State in the hands of the commits
sion, is assailed. If the Red Dog mine
may be enjoined, any other hydraulic
mine may be shut down at the discretion
of court, and the discretion of the en-
gineers goes for nothing.
AS this is test case, the California
Miners Association will defend the suit
vigorously in the interest of the industry,
and the Red Dog Mining Company has
resigned control of the defense to the
association. Last week the committee re-
Gently appointed to provide counsel en-
gagged c. w. Cross, who will direct the
defense. The suit was recently trans
ferred to the United States Circuit Court
by the Superior Court Of Suffer County
and has now been remanded to Suffer
County, where it will first be heard The
%t.l,1 Nie-Ae lNrr1 NtN, A,.1