The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-04-29
RULES REGARDING PLAcERS
y. \. LEWIS SAYS MINING ON NOME
EACH WILL BE RESTRICTED.
aeeults of Investigation ~ wash
ahston city-Departnental Dscis-
ssps Misunderstoea-Hig Tide
rAne Not where Tundra Begins.

~ beach sands open TO all upon his ar
s1val may he somewhat disappointed,
according to w. IL Lewis. weli-known
0eattie lawyer, who has made exhaustive
inquiry into the subject during . recent
vfeit TO Washington. The rulings Of the
hesch claims. Mr.. Lewis says. has been
considerably misunderstood. and niislead-
inr statements have been given out by
PARTIES who were relying upon "a super
ncial knowledge of the facts and no
knowiedge OF the law"
Mr., Lewis was formerly resident OF
washington. where he was private secre-
tary to Justice Harlan OF the supreme
court OF the United States. In that ca
pscity he was attached TO thu Bering sea
tribunal Of arbitration, which met in Paris
IN 1e91-B He has written comprehensive
review OF the Alaskan boundary dispute
FOR leading Eastern magazine, and has
recently been making study OF the Cape
Nome situation. Regarding the latter sub
fect, he has furnished the Post-Intelli-
gencer the following information:
Alaska Miners Are Mislea.
'aThe Alaska mining man who has relied
a. Assurances that he would be allowed
the privilege of free mining on the Cape
Nome beach during the coming summer
eeems doomed to sore disappointment.
mot '. entirely sc ns has n s zen
urn 10 recognize the difference In meaning
between certain common expressions. The
Impression that the term beach meant
he line Of ordinary high tide has been
responsible for much Of the confusion.
Another casise OF the Widespread misun-
dsrsssnding has been ,. the positive state
stood the whole subject, but who were re-
iyinG upon superficial knowledge OF the
facts and no knowledge OF the law.
ut has taken several weeks OF careful
Investigation for me to assure myself what
y the situation with regard to Cape Nome
beaches. and while the result 10 not alto
In min II snowins what a are f.no c@s and what
sFor Instance, in the Logan case. the In
terior department decided. January 3. 1900:
II n perfectly clear that the mining loca-
tious In question. % far a. II Is attempted
BY them to ernbrace lands below the line
ef ordinary high tide, are withou. author
~ OF law and therefore void. and the land
department. IL without authority TO grant
any concessions whatever with reference
TO the desired occupancy or working Of
I'D tide lands for mining purposes or
"Tow, this decision IL a reasonable one,
and was accepted everywhere ~ strictly
In accordance with law. 1t was received
6old from the Nome beaches this summer
With rockers. as thev did last year The
entire disEings wero worked then by the
pnsr, .d ma n. ,.. own r.Esstic Ss and
erAl understanding OF this decision was
that Il made II impossible to secure title
10 any portion of the beach at Cape Nome.
ground for all miners to work rs last year
ACttng upon this suppositon, active steps
were taken and representative sent to
YOU'D s.rm n. mnsss 10 sS rssuies. MN.
Aocs.ssnysns the report Of N. as-
eislon were rsports that the land once
tide would be construed by the department.
IN all cases A. being the upper line of the
beach. that Is 70 SAY, q the line Of tundra
Informed men that this decision had been
confirmation 81 the report but there
WAS told point blank that no such dec.s-
cislon never cosld DO made by the depart
p,ent. that thu line OF ordinary high tide
cenid not BE- ixed OF. changed BY the land
office or any other department In Wash.
ingtor; that the Lord himself had fixed
the lir. OF ordinary high tide. and the
question was not where the land office
sily was. That could be determined only
hy the courts In each individual cast.
where HisA Tide Line IL.
Following UP my problem. l went to
msmbars AZ congress and from them
learned. that II was brought out In the
on Alaska matters that there IL only about
two feet difference between high tide and
low tide nj Cape Nome. And y was the
general consensus Of opinion that the line
beach 10 about half or two-thirds OF the
way down the beach from tundra
Now II. AS we know II 10 he, this IL the
case. and IL tho actual average linf or or
binary high tide u In or baiow the middle
Of the beach, and IL, as 10 reported, placer
mining ciaimr have been staked along the
entire length Of the beach down TO the line
of high tide, where is the poor man to
come In who owns no cleifn, but wants 10
take gold from the beach with his old
time rocker Tie can take out gold below
the iine of high tide, when the tide II out.
OF he can perhaps secure lay from the
more fortunate ppssessor Of placer claim
above the limo q hish tide. There IL no
Tor himself. uniess he can md some new
rich ground or some new construction or
new legislation can be invoked for his pro-
lection
with this In view, something OF an sf.
fort has been made 70 set the land office
10 extend the terms 81 the act OF May "a.
iSN providing for roadway Of sixty feet
s"f a ,ns snsaSsastns ia nS. % at !,
pigAt cover any claims located on the
Nome beach under tho placer mining lava
AND u 10 generally nndsrstood that the
upon inquiry there MAS again me, with .
Polite but emphatic denial aud a wish that
The men who made such statements hal
acquainted themselves with the facts be-
fcfe making such positive assertions
Reach Roadway Cuts No Figur~.
This question came up ia eonnccfion
with the Logan case above mentioned.
ane the secretary said. The effect OF this
provision tpr0x idinx for the @a~fnos road
wxyi has not been sufficiently considered
BY this department 70 Justify any express
stsn 90 opinion at this time AZ the same
time was informed that the department
weuld net conssrae that provision until a
case should he hroagtt before II Oh a con-
tested application for a patent for lard
covered hy the roadway. Such a case can
rot be brought 20 the department within a
Year, - that the decision Win ~ OF no use
20 those desiring to work the eoming sam
mer
and Furthermore. the ofileial with
whom talked and several other proml.
ncrt officials. have assured me that by no
rossitie cunturtion could the act prov ding
fof iAe Roadway be construed 10 AFFECT IN
Any Way claims taken ap under tho placer
mining laws
"a further effort Ia behalf Of the beach
uiners was made Ia the igcey btu before
the house. rats measure was ho~evaF.
% poorly drawn that I, I'D DOT effect the
rarpcse intended for g. as Ii expressly
ssenptea lands inestsd prior 10 It's pass
ass tn seeordanee with The Aei prescribing