Mohave County miner and our mineral wealth., 1920-05-08
PAGE FOURTEEN
RIGHTS OF PROsl,ECTORs # DISCUSSED r,
(Continued from Page 6)

- llOAii rI cSS' "
 be of vein or lode, of rock in place
 bearing valuable mineral, and to sus-
 tain a placer location it must be of
 some other form of valuable mineral
 deposit, one such being scattered par ticles of gold found in the softer cover ing of the earth. A placer dis covery will not sustain lode location, nor lode discoveryla placer location. Justice Van De Vanter says location is the act or series of acts whereby the boundaries of the claim are mark
 ed, etc., but it confers no right in the absence of discovery, both being essential to a valid claim. Nor does assessment work take the place. of discovery for the requirement. relat- ing to such work is in the nature ;of a condition subsequent to "a perfected and valid claim, and has nothing to do with locating or holding claim before discovery" He Says that in practice discovery usually precedes io- cation, and the statute treats it as the initial act. But in the absence of an intervening right it is no objec- tion that the usual and statutory Or der is reversed. In such ease the To- cation becomes effective from the date of discovery, but in the presence of an intervening right 1t must remain of no effect. Ht' D." N'.,..I. .'
 The principal controversy in this case was over the presence or absence of essential discoveries within the lode locations,it being denied on the one hand and affirmed on the other that a vein or lode of rock in place bear ing valuable mineral was discovered in each location before the placer loca- tions were made. In all particulars other than discovery the regularity and perfection of lode locations were conceded. The only questions respect ing their validity were whether at the time the placer locations were made the lode locations had become valid and effective claims, and if the lode locations had not then become valid and effective, whether the placer lo- cations were initiated and made through wrongful intrusions Or tres! passes upon any actual possession of the lode claimant. The evidence bear ing upon the presence or absence of lode discoveries was conflicting.9S"%
 Continuing, the decision says the To- cators entered openly, made placer discoveries, performed the requisite acts of location, excavated several shafts, ran drifts and mined a consid1 erable amount of placer gold, cover ing a period of two or three months. The locators did not meet with any, se- sistance or resorted to any hostile, fraudulent or deceptive acts. But there was evidence of such ownership of buildings, comparatively recent prospecting and maintenance of 3 watchman on the part of the lode claimant as made it a fair question whether he was in actual possession when the placer locators entered. The buildings were all on the same claim and covered only part of It, They had been used in connection with min ing operations upon other claims. The buildings were not disturbed by the placer locators, nor was there any at tempt to appropriate them. The watchman made no objection to. what was done. '' ..- -r, The court says that ownership of the buildings did not in itself give the lode claimant any right in the land or prevent others from entering peace ably and in good faith to avail them! selves of privileges accorded by the mineral laws, but the presence of the buildings and his relation to them eiid have a bearing upon the question of actual possession. Even if the lode claimant was in actual possession of all, it still was a disputable question under the evidence whether there had not been such acquiescence in the acts of the placer locators in going upon the ground, making placer discoveries and marking their locations as gave them the status of lawful discoveries and locators rather than wrongful intruders or trespassers:' that is tc say, the status of explorers entering by permission and then making dis coveries. ". t}~ t9s". -,s
 The court speaks of the effect of Section 2332 R. S., which provide: that where persons or associations have held and worked their claims foi a period equal to the timk prescribed by the statute of limitations for min. ing claims, evidence of such posses, sion and working of such period shal be sufficient to establish a right to g patent thereto under this chapter ir the absence of any adverse claim. Int court says this is a remedial pro vision designed to make proof of hold ing and working for the prescribed period, the equal equivalent of proo1 of acts of location, recording anc transfer, and thereby to relieve again st possible loss or destruction of tht