The Holbrook news., 1919-06-13

In the case of the Union Oil
 Co. vs. Smith, before the Su.
 preme Court of the United States.
 opinion by Mir. Justice Pitney.
 March 31st. 1919, (reported May
 18th last), is presented for the first time the question of the meaning of an act of Congress. approved Feb. 12. 1903. defining what shall constitute and proYid- ing for assessments on oil mining claims and referring to the loca- tion of oil lands as placer mining claims. and the Court rules in part as follows:
 Aside from the suggested ef- feet of the act of 1908. it is clear that in order to create valid rights or initiate title as against the United States. a discovery of mineral is essential. Sec. 2320 Rev. Stat. Waskey vs. Hammer. 22S U. s. 85. 90. S2 Sup. Ct. 187, 56 L. Ed. 359. Nevertheless, section 2319 extends an express invitation to all qualified persons to explore the lands of the United States for valuable mineral de- posits, and this and the follow ing sections hold out to one who succeeds in making discovery the promise of a full reward. Those who, being qualified, proceed in good faith to make such explora- tions and enter peaceably upon vacant lands of the United States for that purpose are not treated as mere trsspassers, but as lie ensees OF tenants at will. For since, as a practical matter. ex- ploration must precede the dis coYery of minerals, and some oe- cupation of the land ordinarily is necessary for adequate and sys- tematic exploration, legal recog- milton of the pedis possessio of bona fide and qualified prOs- pector is universally regarded as a necessity. It is held that upon the public domain a miner may hold the place in which he may be working against all others having no better right, and while he remains in possession. dili- gently working toward discov- cry, is entitled-at least for a reasonable time-to be protected against forcibIe, fraudulent, and intrusions upon his possession"
 And it has come to be gen. erally recognized that while dis covery is the indispensable fact and the marking and recording of the claim dependent upon it, yet the order of time in which these acts occur is not essential to the acquisition from the United States of the exclusive right of possession of the dis covered minerals or the obtain ing of a patent therefor, but that discovery may follow after loea- tion and give validity to the claim as of the time of discovery. pro- vided no rights of third parties have interYened."
 Tn the California courts the right of a locator before discov- cry while in possession of his claim and prosecuting explora- tion work is recognized as a sub stantiaI interest, extending not only as far as the pedis posses sio but to the limits of the claim as located; so that if a duly qualified person peaeeably and in good faith enters upon vacant lands of the United States prior to discovery but for the purpose of discovering oil or other vaIu- able mineral deposits, there be- ing no valid mineral location upon it, such person has the right to maintain possession as against violent, fraudulent, and surrep- tirious intrusions so long as he continues to occupy the land to the exclusion of others and diIi- gently and in good faith prose eutes the work of endeavoring to discover mineral thereon.
 Actual and continuous occu- patton of a valid mining location based upon discovery is not es-