The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-09-05
MINERAL RIGHTS DEFINED.
important Decision Laid Down Con
cernng Wichita Hills.


decision in relation to the rights of min
eral claimants in the Wichita mountains
has been handed down by the interior
department. in a letter TO United States
District Attorney Speed. The decision is
far-reaching and is as follows;
Horace Speed, Esq, L. 5. Attorney.
Guthrie, Oklahoma:
Sir;-I am in receipt of your letter OF
August S, 1892. inclosing a communice-
tion received by you from Mr. Z. +.
Moulder. Lawton, Oklahoma, dated Au-
gust ;, 1903, in which complaint is made
of the conduct of certain homestead
claimants in the Wichita mountains who,
it is alleged, are forcibly interfering with
the operations of mining p-ospectors and
locators. In connection with said mat
ter you suggested that some expert in
mining matters should go down there and
see whether that country has minerals in
quantities worth mining.
In reply you are advised that this office
is in receipt from time 10 time of many
communications from agricultural claim
ants and from mineral claimants rela-
tive to the trouble experienced in their
relations with each other. This Office
is of the opinion that the difficulty results
from a Misrepresentation Of the public
land laws Under the mineral land laws
as extended to the Wichita, Kiowa, Com
anche and Apache ceded lands by the
act of June 6, 1900 C31 Stats, 672, 63oi. the
public lands in the territory mentioned
whether vacant or covered by imperfect
ed agricultural claims. are subject TO the
operation of the general mining laws and
are open to exploration by prospeetors
who peacably enter thereon. 1t may be
said that the law gives the miner a IL
cense to enter upon lands covered By
original homestead entries for the pur-
pose of exploration. the courts 10 deter
mine whether he abused this license by
unnecessarily or wrongfully interfering
with the rights of others. In such
case the discovery of valuable mineral
and the location OF a mining claim COW
ering the deposits found would confer up
on the locator a vested right as 10 the
area located and defeat the agricultural
claim to that extent
An original homestead entry may be
contested on the ground that the land is
mineral in character. The mere fact. how
ever. that the land has been located as
mineral is not proof that it is actU-
ally such in character. y location not
based upon a discovery of valuable min
eral is void under section 232O. L. s. Re
vised Statutes If a homestead claimant
believes the land entered by him to be
actually non-mineral in character. OF
more value for agricultural than for min
ing purposes. he would have the right TO
endeavor to maintain his possession and
to establish his contention at such time
as the issue is raised IN TIE proper man
ner before the land department by the
mineral claimants. As you are well aware,
however, this department has no turisdic-
tion to determine disputes between min
ing claimants and homestead eatrymen
as to the actual possession OF the public
land The sole duty OF the department is
10 issue patents to those who appear
rightfuny entitled thereto under the pub
lie land laws. the local courts being the
tribunals TO determine who shall be put
in actual possession thereof
Under the public land laws as applica-
bic TO that section of the country home
stead claimant has the right 10 make
entry of a tract Of land provided he be-
character and can make a non-mineral
affidavit II he does make such entry, he
has ne right to forcibly prevent mining
prospectors from investigating the char
acter thereof unless their operations
should be carried 70 such an extent az
would interfere with his rights As an
entryman Should such operations be
conducted TO an extent that he considers
unnecessary and wrongful. ke should take
the necessary steps to obtain redress from
the courts. The greater part OF the
western country is subject 70 the ssrne
laws and claimants 10 public laEds are
confronted with the same conditions
practically. in this respect. as prevails IN
Oklahoma The people there. however,
do not seem 70 have the same amount
OF personal violence. evidently being ahfe
10 pursue their operations without mate
rally interfering with each other. While
II Is true that the agricultural claimant
does not look with satisfaction upon pros
Meeting upon the Grourd entered ~ him,
he must remember that b has Eafe
such sn;r- upon the condition that fhs
land Is ultimately held n be non-rssneTai
in character Personal violence -
against mining prosp~c:ors would seen 70
r,4 an Indication that h r. not wiling
To have the true charartsT q the lard
determined and have the ss-se diEpsssed q
in accordance with the laws properly ap-
piiczbie thereto ss between The t1o
classes cf claimants tbs oTfcs sees 70
reason why they should ros bFinE The
matter of character q The land before
the department Ii ths rlaznsr q q cksE;sst
Tei5i=r uy,on their ability 20 sabs;aztizte
their cases By testimony
vpoa final za5adscstioa - the csssFs-
ren nat land - mineral 81 - noa-Ezir-
eraI. The party IN wfaes favor tn d@cis-
soa is rendered xi4 be clearly entities
20 The prosectson of TIE co1rts y Hsia-
fslEIug posz@ssioa-
I dc not think thst an sxsra raiuatson -
The land IN that reEscn as % eEsraEis-.
hv a government s1scisL vssid D. q
any practical vAlu>. IN - rEeb ss sch
sxzzainstios sB1ss q recessitT ~ sas~r-
fessI ard the parties tneEaseixsz ~e1.d
he @asssIea 70 h> hezrd before any nStiesz
c9slz &c t2kea adverse - them Fexy