Mohave County miner and our mineral wealth., 1921-12-02


 on the Sandy, allowing them to re- linquish odd numbered sections and to receive in exchange patents on others, unoccupied lands in the Coun- ty of Mohave. The original bill, No. 1949, was general but the new bill says that the exchanges must be with in Mohave County. Carl Hayden submitted this bill, the number of which is H. R. 9257, at the recom- mendation of the Interior Depart ment. The new bill was introduced with the idea of expediting thel egis- lation. The Interior Department has interposed no objection to the legisla- tion as shown by the following let ter on H. R. 9249, written by F. C.. Finney, First Assistant Secretary of the Interior:
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 Washington, DC.
 No V. 21, 1921 Hon. Reed Smoot, Chairman,
 Committee on Pub. Lands and Sury
 United States Senate.
 My dear Senator:
 Inresp onse to your request there for, report is made on Senate Bill No. 1949, as follows:
 Said bill, entitled "A bill to permit the adjustment of conflicting claims to certain lands in Mohave County, Arizona, proposes to authorize and empower the Secretary of the Interior to accept relinquishment from the "owners" of the odd numbered sec tions of land falling within Ts. 16, 161s and IT N., R. 13 w., Arizona and permit said owners to select and receive patent in exchange therefor, of an equal area of vacant, surveyed, non-mineral, non-timbered, public lands of the United States, in the State of Arizona.
 am informed by the Commissioner of the General Land Office that the tracts described and referred to are odd numbered sections and parts of odd numbered sections within the forty-mile or primary limits of the grant to the Atlantic and Pacific Railroad Company, by the Act of July 27, 1866 GA Stat. 292), of which the Santa Fe Pacific Railroad Com pany is the successor in interest un- der the provisions of the act of March 3, 1897 (29 Stat. 622). The tracts were free from conflict at the date of the definite location of the line of the road, March 12, 1872, and inured to the company under the grant, un- less mineral in character. They were listed by the railroad company Octo- Der 29, 1919, together with other lands amounting in the aggregate to up- wards of 500,000 acres, and action thereon is pending in the General Land Office, awaiting a determination of the mineral or non-mineral char acter of the lands, among other things. There were brought to the attention of this office, the claims of certain settlers along what is known as the Big Sandy River, in Arizona, in which the conflict exists as to the railroad grant, in two of which claims the company relinquished under the Act of June 22, 1874 (18 Stat. 194), as extended by the Act of August 29, 1890 (26 Stat. 369). In another claim it was held that the land was except ed from the operation of the railroad grant, and the tract involved was pa tented to the homestead settler. In the remaining claims the company has been requested to relinquish the lands under the provisions of the acts above mentioned, but up to this time it has not complied with the request of this office.
 The provisions of the acts men, toned, which authorize the company to relinquish lands inuring to it un- der its grant for the benefit of set tiers, are not mandatory, but simply provide a mode of adjusting conflict ing claims depending upon the volun- tary action of the company. Coop eration between the officials of the railroad company, and the settlers or their representative, would produce results under tha statute which con- fers authority to adjust the conflict ing claims above mentioned.
 I am advised, however, that the company feels that it should not be required to surrender the specific claims occupied by settlers and retain the intervening lands, probably of a poorer character, but that if an ex- change is made it should be of na- ture which would permit the company to give up all of it's claims within the designated townships and select other lands, presumably in solid block, elsewhere. I am also advised that there are about thirty families which have settled upon railroad sections within this area. If Congress deems the proposed adjustment equitable and proper, I suggest that the bill be amended by making line 10 read as fellows. "land of the limited States