Bisbee daily review., 1906-04-22
LAND OFFICE MAKES IMPORTANT RULING The Opinion Full Deciding the John Daisy and Julia Cases in this District Which Lays Down the Rule
 For Mining Patents

A decision of importance to all min ing men of the Warren district and elsewhere in Arizona has just been rendered by the Commissioner of the General Land office at Washington D. C..
 The decisions were rendered in the application by the owners for a patent to the John Daisy and Julia mining claims both located in this district The cases had been previously tried before the Receiver of the Tucson land office but appeal was taken by the contestants to Washington. The decision of the Commissioner in the John Daisy. ordering a patent to be issued to the owners of the claims. re gardiess of the protest of the contest. arts, lays down the rule governing the proof that may be considered as to the mineral character of ground in ques ton and the probability of mineral values in claims that does not appear on the surface, but may be proved, by the character of work done on sur rounding claims: Quoting from the dc cision of the Commissioner. in the John Daisy case, he says:
 The tract of land covered by the John Daisy mining claim is compara. 73.@1Fely rough being cut by a gulch or
 Rter course which passes through
 ensiderable portion thereof but DOT
 #ns seem to be level enough for the
 ecsion of houses of which a number &Fe been built upon the ground some
 them having been there for many 5ears with the consent of the mining & Claimants, others being erected more recently The land is of no value fof < agricultural purposes and there is lit ., -1.4t hot ntraf The John Daisy lode mining claim was located many years ago by one Michael O'Reilly and passed into the hands of the applicant for patent b- purchase from the estate of the orig inal locator. Some testimony was SUD mitted in support Of the allegation oi the protest that the land was placer in character but this allegation was not sustained, the weight of the evi dence going to show that il is of nc value whatever as placer ground.
 Considerable work has been done on the claim in the way of development either by the claimant and his grantol or hy other parties prior to or sub seguent to the date of the location or which the application for patent l: based. Some testimony was submit ted so the effect that the work done by the claimant or his grantor did not amount to $500 in value. a supple mental affidavit having been filed to this effect by the protestants during the hearing, but as this point was not made an issue in the hearing as CT dered and the claimant had no time or opportunity to prepare defense, the testimony relative thereto will bt disregarded.
 al m fhf claim was referred to in the testimony as the Hog Riely' tunnel, which is about fifty feet under ground and is approached by an open cut foul feet wide, If feet high at the door and 8 feet long. There is also a cross cut to the left seven feet long and drift to the right 15 feet long neaI the point where the tunnel entered cover. This open cut and tunnel is run into the bank of the gulch herein before referred to.
 "Tbe witnesses agree that no indica tious of mineral were found in any oi the workings other than those describ ed. but differ radically as to what l; disclosed in the tunnel and connecting workings. The testimony went into this feature of the case minuteiy and there is no difficulty in reaching ar opinion relative thereto. The cut and tunnel with it's side workings art in what the witnesses for the protest ants called wash or cemented sand gravel and boulders, and the witness es for the applicant. called conglomer ate. This formation shows in the cut near the tunnel entrance and in tn :, side workings streak of copper stain. according to the protestants or [ vein of carbonate Of copper according to the view taken by the other side This streak does not apear to be en closed within walls of rock in place or to have the characteristics of weir as a vein is commonly defined. Tn streak which is narrow is not show, in the face of the tunnel. l think tho conclusion is fairly to be drawn iron the testimony on both sides that ths copper disclosed WAS brought fhers in solution in water at some time lon' past and deposited in the then exist ing surface formation
 "Assays made of samples taken from the workings by both parties differ materially running from a trace to 10.60 per cent in copper. It might be noted here that the principal diff ference between the two parties in their testimony Is as to whether this should be defined as a slight copper stain or as carbonate of copper, the one seeking to leave the impression that it is of slight or no value and the other that it is regular deposit Of ore in place.