The Alaska daily empire., 1922-08-30
PROPOSES CHANGE IN BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN ALASKA-CANADA:
 URGES LAYING OF NEW CABLE

yiously have improvements made on the ground which the mineral sur vcyor will certify to be worth $500 The proposed law means that q claim owrler must have the $500 improve nents made within four years after his location, and then have the money to employ a mineral surveyor and to, follow that up with his ap- Dlication for patent l am a public land lawyer and shah be glad to hurry up applications for patents, but l know this law would be bad for Alaska.
 "6. It will allow location without discovery. and the ground thus locat. ed may be held for five years with out doing anything except the usual annual assessment work Then after the five years it may be held an. other five years by paying $50 an acre. This provision was inserted at the request Of the eminent mining engineers for large mining corpora lions who say it is necessary for company to tie up the ground around ifs minc until they have plenty of time to explore it. They claim this is necessary if extra-latoral rights are abolis shed. and most all those mining engineers are opposed to ex- -ra-lateral rights which this bill pro poses to abolish. Personally I don't caise much about this. but I object seriously 'to these objectionable fen tures which the bu'enucra&s in Wash inot-on have inserted in this bill 10 spoil the only workable public land law we now have in Alaska.
 "7. The trouble is this law was written by the Bureau of Mines un- der the influence of the great mining engineers of the big companies who do not appreciate the difficulties Of .lpa proen2ct0r or tho necessities of the small operator. In fact. splen I'd mining engineers like Horace Win chell say that tho day of the pros rector is past, and he reed be given no further considarat tion, beceuoe all the mining development Of the future depends upon the large mining cor poradions and their goologists The bill was not drawn by Congressman ArcntZ, who introduced it at the re- quest of the Bureau of Mres. and new says he is opposed to it and pr1t he will fight 1t. The Bureau Of Mines really drafted tho bill in con ference with committee Of mining engineers. The bure1u inserted most of the objectionable provisions have here listed. We should oppose any wholesale mining law revision, at this time, when the Mines Commit tee of the House has only two new Csngressmen from the Western States, while the chairman and Il members are from the farms of South and Middle West and the other mem Der is a socialist from New York who wants all mines retained in govern ment ownership. Our mining law may ndt ba perfect, but no law is perfect, and I agree with Senator Walsh Of Montana. who says
 "'Tne record cf 40 years is the best eaconium that can be pro nounccd Hpon our mining law. It has admirably served the purpose with which it was designed, to pro- mote the rapid development of a wild, unexplored country and to meet pfoneer conditions
 Mr' Leohcy is interested in mining rFH3por.y in Alaska and has been con roctcd with mining development in he Dan Creek region for sometime. He arrived here recently to look after matters connected with mineral lands in the local U. s. Land Office and expects to return to Seattle on
 he steamer Queen.