The San Francisco call., 1906-08-10

. Government Il is necessary to perform
!. assess M ent work TO the extent or SlOO
"a claim q year on the basis OF 1871
:e18iirs this calls for assessment work
itE Yard. 50 Aub0ry remarks quietly
10. the extent Of $16S.T0O a year. or
.sgnething more than S993,000 in d
period qf five years. What assessment
work: has been done on the Yard lands
:. Kfibury. considers to be farcical as a
? qualification for holding down mines
for patenting.
: . The Government experts may find out
:.a,ll about the methods that have been
: adopted TO get hold Of the big areas
> and may inquire into the truth Of
8Terinents made by II. II. Yard last
5cgening that he allowed scrip entries
10 prevail over his mineral locations
where. the lands contained large de-
FGsits Of auriferous gravel because II
was 700 much trouble TO go to the Su-
saaville Land Office TO make entries.
: Some statements by State Mineral
6giSt Aubury were published in The
Cau yesterday. Last evening H H,
yard said about the coming investiga-
lion Of the placer locations that he and
others. have made:
YARD PROMISES TO HELP.
IF the Government is about TO act
as has been reported. il is a good thing.
j shall be glad 70 give the Investigators
alIthe help I can. and all the informa-
tion i have is at their command Three
wears ago J. sent 70 Secretary Hitch
cock OF the Interior Department a
map showing all the locations I had
made in Butte and Plumas counties.
Since then I have made a number of
LOCATIONS in Butte, Plumas and several
other counties.
. t'All these locations have been made,
as far as ] know, in accordance with
all lawful requirements. On the loca-
tions that we desired to hold we have
.. regularly performed our annual as
sessrnent work.
In some instances we made mineral
locations and, soon afterward, timber
entries, under the timber and stone
act, on the same lands, so that they
are acOvered with two sets OF entries
In other cases we have contested tim
ber- entries, and in every such instance
our mineral claims have prevailed in
the local Land Office.
- I'VE have allowed scrip entries to
prevail over our mineral claims with
cut contest This was allowed simply
= becamse of the trouble involved and the
= -eoFaPa rative inaccessibility Of the
local Land Office at Susanville, in Las
ser County. These lands are undoubt-
edIy mineral. They contain large beds
. Of -auriferous gravel. The particular
lands to which I refer are the Jacob H
. Cook or Santa Fe Railway scrip en-
tries, Immediately west Of Indian Val
Icy -Plumas County, in two townships.
ANTICIPATES NO TROUBLE.
- Il anticipate no trouble from the
- coming investigation. I do not know
that any false affidavit has been made
and know that I have not caused the
making OF a false affidavit. None was
necessary
In the placer locations we complied
strictly with the law and followed the
= usage Of the past thirty years. I took
advice from the best lawyers in Cali
fornia to learn whether there was any
local law or custom other than those in
force in Colorado Utah and Montana,
all mining States"
State Mineralogist Aubury said last
evening that in 1902 Yard located
10000 acres as placer. Since then he
has located 2s5, 200 acres, practically
all being good timber land he also
says that no placer locations have been
made by Yard or by his associates on
lands that are not timbered-