The Fallon standard. (Fallon, Nev.) 1920-1958, 1921-10-19
Mine interests Do
Not Favor Change
Proposed Codiiication of National
Mining Law Meets With
Decided Opposition

A few weeks ago Congressman
Arentz gave out draft of bill he
had introduced In the House where
IN drastic changes were made In the
present mining law. The changes
are SO revolutionary in character
that hardly a shred OF the present
law Is retained. Mr.. Arentz asked
for criticisms OF the proposed law
and he has been receiving them
aplenty, AS one critic put IL the
law was sired by Arentz and damned
BY every prospeetor miner In Me-
sada. Reno paper thus. chron-
icles meeting held in the Chamber
OF Commerce To consider the proyis-
ions of the bill:
The mining interests of Nevada
are unalteraDly opposed to the pro-
posed codihcatlon of the mining
laws of the United States and the
repeal of the apex law.
Ihat fact was made manifest last
night, wnen 90 OF the best known
mining men OF this section OF the
state met at the Chamber OF COM
meree rooms and almost unanimous
~ voted a resolution denouneIng the
proposed legislation in Its entirety
and demanding of congress tnat the
Oil snail not pass.
The meeting was called to order
Dy PRESIDENT Y. A. hnight, Dr. LIN
coin Oh the Unlyersily OF Nevada
.etins as seci eIary.
Ine mining committee OF the
ShamDeI nad prepared report on
.ne plil, which mad rejected pracLi-
caIy every feature OIL the proposed
legislation except tnat 1t favored the
repeal Oh the apex law and the SUP
stllutlon OF tue provisions recon-
Inended Al the oil.
anu Sentiment Strong
Professor Jones aud Dr. Lincoln,
as members Oh tue mining commaI-
tee, undertook to defend the atll-
Luae Oh the committee, out the sentI-
menI against the legislation was SO
strong tnaL only one clause OF the
report Was read or considered Dy the
meeting.
Professor Jones held tnat the
apex law mad Deen the cause or a
vast amount OF litigation, at great
expense to the mining interests OIL
the state; but others held that re-
peal OF the law would bring a worse
condition.
Il. L. Richie held that the main
thing for the meeting to consider
was the effect the legislation would
have on the mining industry. He
said the DILL had been drafted by
mining engineers who represented
foreign corporations, and he thought
it would be disastrous to mining and
would not be supported by practical
mining men.
Carl Brady declared his belief
that the bill is crooked and in the
interests of big corporations which
are, in large part, engaged in cop
per mining in other states and
which do not want the great copper
outcroppings of Nevada developed in
competition with their mines. He
declared that the idea of paying fees
instead of developing the mines was
wholly against the interest of min
ing.
II. S. Anderson upheld the apex
law, declaring that its repeal would
bar mining from all railroad lands
in the state, a strip of country 40
miles wide crossing the state. He
said if the bill passed there would
not be an acre of land in Nevada
to be prospected in seven years.
Sam Belford said the passage of
the bill would put everything up in
the air and there would be new
era of litigation. He said the min
ing men of the country now know
the mining law, and any tampering
with legislation would bring eonfus-
ION and disaster.
AT this point John H. Dunn NOV
ed that the meeting reject the bill
in its entirety and petition congress
not TO pass it. 1t was instantly sec
onded by a half dozen men.
Professor Jones moved as an
amendment to the motion that the
bill be rejected, except for the re-
peal of the apex law. This brought
numerous protests to the effect that
to take such action would be to rep
resent to congress that some amend
ment of the mining law is desirable,
and the only way to prevent con-
gress getting that impression was to
the proposed law.
The amendment was defeated by