Weekly Arizona journal-miner., 1906-02-07

work must be done each year until patent IS applied for. and a certificate of purchase received from the land office. .. ''.... .st
 Two years work may not be done in one year. But n patent may be ap. piled for whenever $500 worth of work has been done on claim. t.r If the assessr,ent is neglected, and year allowed to pass by without the required amount of work, the ground is open 10 relocation by anyone. But if, no one having relocated it during the interval, the owner resumes work, and duly performs and records it. he is again safe in his title to that time, having full credit for all the previous assessment he has done.
 Assessment work for. any year, may be started as late as December 31 of that year, and if continued daily un. til the si00 worth is completed, the ground is not open for relocation. But if this work, started on December 3l, is not continued on January l, the ground may be jumped on that day and the new location will be valid If completed before the delinquent owner resumes work with the bona fide inten. tion of completing the full require ment for that year. IL is. therefore, safer to complete the assessment for any year before December 3i.
 It Is mistakenly believed by some people that location work may be made, under certain circumstances, 10 serve as a portion of the assessment. For example, on n claim located in Nevada or Arizona on November c, 1905, the location work must bc done, as required by the state law, by Feb. {, 1906. The assessment. to the value of t1oo, must bc done as required by federal law, during 1906. The loca. tion work may cost anywhere from s2o [ sIoo, according to tho difHcul. ties eneountercd; and it is thought by many that the two birds may be killed with one stone. making the location shaft serve as at least portion of the annual assessment. It is unsafe ground to take. The one is requirement. of the state law as condition of acquir. ing title, the other is a requirement. of the federal law as n condition of hold ing title. They are fundamentally se- parate and distinct. each meant yto serve it's own purpose.
 It is argued by some lawyers that the federal law requires only tIoO worth of work within any one year. and that if the location work, required by the state or territory happen to fall within the same year, it may he con. strued as being portion of the annual assessment. The Argument does not seem good in view of the fact tha, the location work is requirement in addition to the anual assessment, i'm. f'''' " '"' Se"ts uuueb uutnOrIty ot the federal act.
 There has, SO far as can be learned, been no decision on this point. "Lind. ley on Mincs,'' states that the point is open. but leans toward the conclusion outlined above.
 It is one of those niee points Of law which will he some day settled by decision costing much money, but in the meantime, mine owners will be on the side of safety by doing both the location work and the anual assessment work. 4 ...
 Every one of these tangled questions which comes up must bring to the pub he mind, more forcibly, the conviction that this country needs, and needs had. ly, department of mines and mining. which shall, among other necessary things unravel the mining law of the land so that ordinary mortals and law. years may understand 1t.