The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-01-04
DECISION Is
FOR MINERAL
CLAIMANTS
Have Rights Over the Home
steader in Oklahoma.
AN INTERESTING CASE
lAf:II H;.o C};p,,,l,,c
IN INTERESTING CASE
Decision Will GIVE Stimulus
to Cement Industry.

10 CGIll6Ilt IiluuStiy
Guthrie, O. T, Jan. S.-The much de-
bated question as to the rights of min
eral claims over homesteaderS IN the
Kiowa and Comanche country, seems to
nave been decided in favor OF the min
erai claimants. When the Comanche
country was opened to settlement tnere
were made at the Lawton and FL Reno
land Offices about 1900 mineral niings
The belief of mineral in Comanche coun-
t. has been proven beyond doubt. Es-
recially $ this true of cement. gas ard
oil. That there is gold in the Wichita
mountains there is little doubt Whether
CT not the gold can be found in paying
Quantities, Is the question.
The American at El Reno discovers the
solution by finding a patent for min
ing claim in Comanche county. Upon
examination of the document it showed
that it was United States patent No. a5.-
796 based on mining certificate No. l
in the Lawton land district, patenting to
/. G. Hamilton, S. a. Walker, Sam Laz-
arus. ]. R. Dougan, Leo Jacobs, d. r.
Low, A. NJ Chaain, Zacr Mulhall and
Max Marx, one hundred and sixty acres
of mineral land in section q, township
west The endorsements on the pat
ent showed that 1t was recorded in book
six of the deed records OF Comanche
county at page 20.
Upon inquiry, the attorney said:
"The mining property contains large
deposit of mining sulphate Of lime; 1t is
used in manufacturing what We call ce-
ment or wall plaster. A cement mill Will
be constructed by the owners near the
beds and a spur built to them from the
Rock Island road near Rush Springs.
The mill will have a daily capacity OF
one hundred TONS"
Reing asked as to the procedure by
which this entry was made, he said soon
after the opening of Oklahoma to set
tlement. these lands were all covered by
homestead filings; the owners, however,
made mineral entries for the lands and
afterwards flied in the land office at Law"
ton protests against hte homestead hiings
a s to that portion of the lands which con-
tanned mineral, claiming that the lands
were more valuable for mineral than LOT
agricultural purposes, and asking tnat
the agricultural entries be cancelled as TO
tha mineral lands The mining claim
ants also made application 90 the Law
ton land office for patent to claims
bearinr was afterwards had at the Law
ton land office, witnesses being examined
in behalf of both the mineral claimants
and the agricultural claimants, and after
testimony had been taken Tor several
days the agricultural claimants, real
izing that there was no use OF 1urtner
contention admitted that the lands con-
tanned the mineral deposits, and they
were thererpon adjudged to be mineral
and not agricultural. and the agricultural
entries were cancelled as to the portions
of each homestead which contained min
era, This. however, did not affect those
nortions of the homesteads which did not
contain mineral, and the agricultural
claimants will be permitted TO make hnai
proof as to the remaining parts covered
by their filings.
After the cancellation Of the agricuitu-
raj entry the local land office allowed
the application for patent of the mlnerai
locators. received payment for the land
at the rate of 81 50 per acre and issued
final receipt; the matter was then report
ed by the Lawton land office to the COM
r,;ssioner of the general land office, who
approved the proceedings Of the Lawton
land office, and thereupon the patent
which is before you was issued by the
president.
One other mineral entry OH cement
lands Us since been made by the Lawten
land office, come of the parties being
interested. and the patent ha salso been
issued on that, it being for Acme placer
No 2.
Several months ago an entry was made
at the El Reno land office for Delaware
placer No. /. and final receipt was issued
and the railroad has been constructed
from Cement, oklahoma. to the mine.
and about 100 tons of cement is being
mined and shipped TO HMarlow. where X
is being manufactured into plaster.
Yes. there was some little difficulty
about possession between the agricui-
tural claimants md the mineral claim
ants but L did not amount 10 much. as
tie AGRICULTURAL claimants soon realized
that they would gain nothing by trying
10 prevent the law taking its proper
course as 20 theee mining claims. a ull1-
eral claimant is required to do 500 worth
Of work annually in order TO hold the
claim. but where he is kept out of pos
session by the Illegal ects of another. the
law excuses him from doing the work.
ard the agricultural entrymen soon re-
allied that they were simply delaying the
final decision. and in no way henefitins
themselves
The mineral claims on public lands of
tie Trr'tei states are held by the courts
to be real estate capable OF sale and con-
veyaace. and section go OF the revised
statutes of the Cnited States provides
that no pcssessoTy action between per-
sons in any court Of the United states
for the recovery OF any mining title or
for damages TO any such title shall De
affected by the fact tsiat the paramount
title TO the land in which said minee
lie IS in the United States but each case
shall be adjudged by the law of posses
sion The United States supreme corrf
has repeatedly held that the mere act
Of locating a mining claim by one quail
fed 20 locate IL OF Itself gives hom ar
estate in the land subject only TO the
rights Of the United States; in other
words that il operates as an immediate
grant
Yes. there has been considerable con-
trovcrsy as to whether a mining claim
~g 80