White Pine news weekly mining review. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1910-1920, 1911-01-22
LAND CASE IS DECIDED
IN FAVOR OF A. ". KELLY
AFTER AN EXHAUSTIVE REVIEW
OF THE TESTIMONY SUBMITTED
REGISTER AND RECEIVER
AWARD TITLE TO DEFENDANT.

The officials of the federal land
Office at Carson City have handed
down a decision in the land case of
Dr. R. H. Richardson against Albert
w. Kelly, involving title to forty
acres of land adjoining the Ely town
site on the north The plaintiff
claimed title under the mining laws
as placer claim while the defendant
based his rights under homestead
entry filed in 1907. The property
was awarded Mr.. Kelly. AS the
case in question is of considerable
interest in the district and of general
interest in the state we herewith
publish the decision of the register
and receiver in full:
The evidence submitted in this
case is very voluminous, both on the
part of the contestant and contestee,
and the same is largely problemati-
cal No direct evidence showing the
value of this land for mining pur-
poses, and no corroborated evidence
showing the value of this land as a
homestead, has been submitted by
either party, and in a review of the
have been obliged to make an exhaus-
tive study of land decisions touch
ing the intent and purpose of the
homestead law, and the latitude Civ
en- homesteader in that respect, and
also the rights of claimant under
mineral discovery.
"Tne testimony of the contestant
shows that these claims were located
as placer mineral in 1905, but no
copy of the location notice has been
filed as exhibits, and beyond the testi-
mony of the interested parties, there
Is nothing of record to show their
ownership.
"The testimony shows that the sur
face ground in this case is composed
of gravel and clay, naturally cement
ed together, and an exhaustive study
of the decisions fails to show any de-
fined or rule whereby a deposit OF
this kind can properly be classed as
mineral, but 1t is clearly defined in
all decisions relative to the classifica-
tion of mineral lands, that deposit
of this nature is not recognized by
standard authorities as such that in
the absence of any specific legislation
by congress, that the development re-
quired absolute proof as to Its value
as mineral land, and where no such
value is clearly proven, and the land
has been entered by an applicant
under the homestead laws, that his
right to select land for homestead
purposes must be respected where no
fraud is shown.
"The contestant shows by process
of reasoning, based upon experiment,
that this ground has a possible value
as a base of crude material, for the
manufacture of commercial cement,
but the evidence submitted is entire
ly problematical.
"On the part of the contestee, 1t
is clearly shown that this land has
but little value as homestead SO far
as the growing of crops are concern
ed; that 1t is located on hillside,
the surface of which is cut by deep
gullies; that there is no water sup
ply other than that necessary to be
purchased, and that the character of
soil Is such that crops could not be
grown under ordinary conditions, but
contestee does show that he establish
ed a home upon the place shortly
after his entry. and erected house
and maintained peaceable possession
thereon. The fact that the soil Is
such a nature that 1t requires ex-
traordinary efforts to produce crops,
and that it requires an expense be-
yond that governing the action of an
ordinary homesteader are matters of
fact which rest with the contestee.
and in the absence of any testimony
showing that he has not complied
with the homestead laws, we can find
no testimony or facts which does not
give him valid right to the same.