Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1907-02-28
MINING CLAIM
DECISION GIVEN
{. A. Hitchcock, Secretary Of the
Interior, Affirms Land Of
flee Action.
INVOLVING ANNA MARIE LODE.
Mining Property at Park city Rcspon-
slblc for Long Communication From
Washington. d. c., To-day.

| NIB Is All eNtrhCt from the uet
cision of the secretary of the interior.
Of Jam "a last in the Anna Marie lode
mining claim at Park City and re-
ceived this morning, at the L. $. land
office In this city;
Where several contiguous mining
claims are held In common and ex-
pendItures are made upon an improve
ment which is intended TO aid in the
development OF the claims so held, and
which is OF such character as To
| rebound to the benefit of ALL such a
| general Improvement is properly called
common Improvement. In legal con-
| temptation these terms import a single
| distinct entity, not subject to physical
| subdivision or apporuopment in It's APP
! pltcation to the claims intended to be
| benefited by II. The entire body of
! claims held IN common, the group as
| IT Is ordinarily denominated not the
| Individual claims separately considered,
| Is the beneficiary on the one hand while
! on the other, the common improv ement
| IN its entirety is the means or agency
! erecting the common development or
| the community benefit Such benefit
| accrues and attaches to, and becomes
available for, the claims as Il body,not
individually, by the very reason of the
ment and as soon as the construction
takes place. The physical act of sink
lng shaft, or driving a tunnel, which
rs common Improvement makes this
so, not the certificate of the surveyor
general to that effect.
Where two or more persons own prop
erty In common each owner has only
an undivided interest therein, repre-
scented by no physical or tangible part
of the property itself but extending
and attaching to the whole thereof. By
simple computation the value of such
interest, based upon the value of the
entire property, is easily ascertained.
Likewise each claim of a group deVe-
oped by common Improvement has an
undivided, but nevertheless beneficial
ana ascertainable, interest in the COM
mon development work BY a calcula-
uon, based upon the number of claims
In the group aud upon the value of The
common Improvement, 1t Is readily as
certained whether the equivalent OF the
required expenditure IN labor and i'm
proNements for the benefit of each claim
is represented in the common improve
ment. and whether more or less, and
also what credit Is available TO such
GAINS as are embraced IN any particu-
lar patent proceedings.
TWENTY-THREE IN THE GROUP.
In the case at bar 20 claims are en-
common Improvement Is valued at si,-
sos, as Is shown by the record. Four
teen of these claims have been accred-
tied with the sum OF $500 each, derived
from the value OF the common shaft.
SIX claims with 5000 each, from the same
source, and three claims are accredited
with nothing from his source. Such a
method Of arbitrarily adjusting the
credit TO be deriv-. From "A common
shaft. merely as to the exisencies of the
case seem 10 require, Is destructive OF
the essential idea inherent IN The term,
n common Improvement. To undertake
to set apart ar apportion physical seq
mett or section, or an arbitrarily frac-
tlonal part, of a common Improvement
and accredt the value thereof to = par
ticuiar claim Is in violation of tho
theory of common benefit accruing
from common Improvement. The
scheme here invoked for adjusting the
monetary worth of tho benefit derived
from common Improvement is, on IFS
face. unreasonable and ieads to a re.
suit but little short of absurd The de-
partment Is of the opinion that it Is un-
warranted and unauthorized by, and
contrary to, the law.
Equally therefore. the arbitrary ap-
porttonments heretofore made of
physical Scgments Of the Silver King
smart TO those claims already carried
10 entry, was IN violation OF this urin.
flPlN. NN W all Ine COMPANY s claims
which had been located prior To the
commencement of tho development
project, which are contiguous upon
the ground and which have been the
bcnsficiaries of that project. tho whole
improvement or project is common.
ana each claim has an equal ana UNI
divided interest therein Tf tho Anna |
Marie IS one NJ those claims. the full |
tacts must be shown. whereby it may |
be made clearly to appear what claims |
OF the group are embraced within the |
common development enterprise aud |
what claims are particularly benefited |
or developed by the drift from the eO0 |
foot level. in order that the duo and
fun share of the cost or value Of the |
Improvement 10 which each Is en-
lilled may be determined. Before any
further assignment Of credits can be |
made out OF the cost OF the available |
improvements, or any of them the |
NUMBER OF contiguous claims having |
a common ownership. to be developed |
through or by means thereof. must be |
shown, conformably to the ruling in 1
the Carretto case
REASONABLE TINE GIVEN
The company will be accorded q
reasonable time, TO b. fixed by vonr
office. within which 10 make an add.
u onal showing along tho lines herein
indicated. II showing i'm an RESPECTS
satisfactory be submitted within the
time so 70 be fixed. and It appears TO
the satisfaction of your office from
the record AS then made up. that the
improvements relied upon to meet tho
statutory requirement relative 10 eN-
penditure are suffIcIcnt In value. and
Of such character as to rebound 10 tho
beneht or The claim In question, the |
entry may stand, in tho absence OF
other objection, otherwise. IL win he
As herein modified. the decision of
lOur office Is affirmed.
The papers are herewith returned.
Very respectfully