Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1917-02-08
IDAHO Miners VOTE
ON REVISION Of
FEDERAL LAWS
IDAHO ASSOCIATION CANvASSES
BALLOT ON PROPOSED CHANGES
IN FEDERAL REGULATIONS.
REPORTS TO WASHINGTON
Money Substitute for Assessment Work
Opposed; Not Keen Against
Seventeen Limit.

The canvass of the ballot by tn,
Idaho Mining association of the ques
tions relating to the revision of tn,
mining laws of the United States pro
pounded to the members of the asso
citation by the Mining & Metallurgi
cal Society of America has been made
and the result mailed to the Mining
Metallurgical society, the Idaho con
gressional delegation and the chairman
OF the mines and mining committees OF
house and senate.
Twelve ballots were cast favoring nc
change in our present law, and the re
plies to question Is, which asks the
number of claims which a prospectol
could locate, ran from one to 20 claims,
and the number the locator could hold
by work.
A surprise to mining men was the
vote on being compelled to patent with
in seven years-42 "yes' and SO
"no.u
Would Require Assessment Work.
| The vote was practically unanimous
against paying 800 into the United
States land Once in lieu of the perfor.
nance of assessment work, being
eyes, s, and "no', 1874.
Ballots were mailed to 800 mining
men. About 80 per cent replied, which
low ratio is accounted for by the fact
that, owing to some delay in the mail,
large number of the mining men fail
ed to receive the ballots until after the
date upon which they were to be count
ed. Interest, however, was reported to
be general among the mining men of
the state.
The following were the results of the
vote:
Would Keep Law Phrases.
l. Shall it be aimed to preserve to
the maximum possible extent the
phraseology of our present mining law
and its principles of administration,
thus retaining the benefit of some of
the wealth of legal definitions that
have been rendered at great costs Yes,
1876; no, Is.
| 2. Shall the new mining law be made
to cover all classes of valuable mineral
deposits other than coal, and shall that
intention be defined so clearly that
there will be no misunderstanding of
it2 Yes, 1879; no, IL.
| 3. Shall actual discovery of q val.
liable mineral deposit be necessary to
a valid location of claim9 Yes, 81
no, 1875.
4. Or shall the new law authorize
mineral locations without discovery in
any part of the public lands officially
classed as mineral; and mineral ioca.
tions upon discovery in any part of the
public lands whether officially classed
as mineral or non mine rala Yes, 1859;
10, 6S.
Would Protect Prospector.
5. Shall there further be provi
sion permitting bona fide prospecting
on land classified as non mineral and
protecting the prospector in the mean
while? Yes, 200; No. u.
6. Shall article 4, if adopted, be
further limited so that patent may not
be secured until discovery has beer
made2 Yes, 1856; no, 27.
Z. Or shall discovery or nondiscov
cry be immaterial in patenting9 Yes
II; no, liz.
8. Or shall there be required a con
siderably larger payment for lanc
patented without discovery than with
it? Yes, 73; no, 157.
|
be the proviso that only one discovery
need be made for a group of contiguou,
claims of one ownership Yes, 159; no
SO.
10. Shall mineral claims hereafter
located be $50 feet square; i. e., II
acres in size and square in form7 Yes
16; no, 184.
IL. Or shall they be 1920 feet
square; i. e., 40 acres9 Yes, 81; No
1873.
H. Or shall the claim unit be 60(
feet square, with the proviso that wher
four units be located in square of 132(
feet sides only the exterior corners (oI
lines) need be monumented7 Yes, 27
no, 172.
13. When the proposed square claims
are located on surveyed land shall they
be required to be subdivisions of tn,
surveyed sections' Yes, AZ; no, 10.
Rebel Against Compass.
IA. If not located on surveyed land
shall it be required that the boundaries
run north and south and east and west
Yes, Is; no, 191
Is. Shall the number of claims 10
Gated by one person or association b,
limited or unlimited' Yes, 76; no, AZ
16. If limited, what shall be th'
limit?
II. Shall existing regulations con
cerning the marketing, notice and rec
ord of location be continued Yes, 1876
no, 15.
IS. Shall there be the requirement