Bisbee daily review., 1908-04-09
RECEIVER HAS DECIDED DON
 LUIS DISPUTE
Holds in Favor of Finnerty Who Protests Against Mineral Entries-Not Known If an Appeal Will Be Taken.

.A A decision has been handed down by the receiver of the land office at Phoenix in the case of A. J. Finlerty, protestant, Ys. the Don Luis Mining & Realty Company, applicants for patent, which upholds the contention of the former that the mineral en- tries on the Linnet, Oriole, love, Bennington, and Ajax in the lower end of the districts should be can celled, because of the fact that the applicants for patent did not estab- fish the mineral character of the
 ground. The decision does not, how ever. uphold Finnerty's contention that the ground is agricultural in character The claims in dispute
 lie south os the hills and the town Of Don Luis is located on portion of them. Attorney John W. Ross, of Bisbee, represented Finnerty in the litigation.
 The Don Luis Mining and Realty Company made mineral entries at the land office on December 29, 1906, fer the claims in dispute, and at the same time A. J. Finnerty, whO claims a homestead on the ground filed . protest, Claiming that he had main
 
 on the ground, which according to his i contention was non-mineral in char acter. He claimed further that the property was more valuable for az ricultural purposes than for mining. The protest was forwarded to the commissioner of the general land Of flee at Washington, who ordered a hearing which was held in Phoenix D .f 4T,s ffnn af torneys and witnesses Tor both sides appeared and submitted their eyi dence.
 In reviewing the testimony the re ceiver states that in his opinion the company did not prove the mineral character of the ground, although enough development work had been | done to comply with the letter of the law. He stated that it was well known fact that very valuable mines had been developed in the Warren district at a depth of several hun dred feet in spite of there being no showing Of mineral on the surface, and that these ore bodies might slant so as to underlie the Don Luis ground, but that this fact had not been proved. He held further that no testimony dad been introduced that mineral had been taken from
 the claims in dispute.
 In a recapitulation of his opinion the receiver said he could not decide with the evidence before him as to the agricultural possibilities Of the ground, but that this matte c2rld be taken up and disposed O. w&1r ap- plication was made by the hC.l-4s-2i-
 CT.
 It has been held repeatedly by the department that the proof of the min eral character of the land must be specific and show actual production of mineral therefrom. It is not enough to say that the lands are i mineral in character or that the | lands in question may hereafter be i found to be mineral. The procf
 must show satisfactorily the mineral ! character and not be based upon a i theory. The decision is that Finnerty l holds the land under squatter's right
 and the matter of it's agricultural character would form the basis for another decision when he makes ap- 1 plication for a homestead entry and | at the time the land becomes survey ed, concludes the receiver.
 The company has thirty days from
 the rendering of the opinion to file
 notice of appeal to the commissioue,
 of the general land office at PhoeniT Whether this course will be taken
 could not be ascertained yesterday.
 w. H. Brophy, who is connected witl
 the company, was out of town and communication with him could not be established.