White Pine news. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1920-1923, 1922-03-05

| Widespread criticism throughout
the mining industry directed against
provisions of legislation before con-
gress proposing revision of the min
ing laws will preclude any chances
OF the pending bill surviving commit
tee action in its present form, accor
ing to the Mining Congress Journs
Should provisions of the bill be foul
which are generally favored by I
industry they will be incorporat
either in an entirely new substitr
measure or radical revision of
bill now awaiting consideration
the house committee on mines
mining.
1t is to be regretted that so
have expressed their attitude, |
when the committee turns Its att
tion to the revision bill it will fl
placed at its disposal complete tai
lations Of these expressions of op
ion, indicating that over 20 per ce
of those who have expressed thu
views believe that no necessity exis
for material changes in the prese
federal mining laws. Certain indi-
vidual revision proposals show them
selves as objects of such overwhelm-
ing opposition that no possibility ex-
Reflections of the opinion held by
the mining industry concerning the
proposed revisions have been secured
In Washington through the use of
questionnaires and interrogating cor
respondence generally, both by Rep
| resentative Samuel S. Arentz, mem
Der OF the house committee on mines
and mining and a mining engineer of
long experience, and by the American
Mining Congress.
Mr.. Arentz has received large num-
bers of memorials, resolutions and
letters from associations and indi-
viduals interested in the bill, and the
bureau of mines also possesses scores
of similar manifestations. All of
these communications were consid-
cred In detail at a recent meeting at
tended by Mr.. ArentZ and representa-
tives of the bureau of mines, the geo.
logical survey and the general land
Office The results obtained by this
conference were then supplemented
by returns secured from the ques-
tionnaire circulated broadcast over
the country by the American Mining
Congress, the whole to form the pre-
sentation to be placed before the
house committee on mines and min
ing when 1t turns to consideration of
the bill.
1t Is certain that publicity given
the measure has achieved the de-
sired result, namely. to secure a re-
Election of popular opinion concerning
the merits of the proposed revisions
before they were started on their ad-
vance through legislative channels.
A majority opinion is registered
against the abolition of extralateraI
rights proposed by the new measure,
which would permit all previous To-
cations to retain their extralateraI
rights, giving them in addition all
the minerals included within their
vertical planes that are not covered
by any extralateral rights. A two-to-
one majority is shown over advocates
of the change in answers from Cali
fornia and Colorado, which states
report the largest number of protests.
New Mexico and Utah showed a
slightly larger element of favor for
the revision. All ether states carry
out the general trend of opposition.
Heavy fire is drawn by the bills
proposal to make necessary the lay
ing out of mining claims along lines
which must coincide with the lines of
the public survey. 1t is pointed out
that the length of time which has
elapsed since the surveys were made,
giving rise to illegibility of survey
markings and a number of other neg
ative factors, makes 1t impossible, in
many cases, to lay out the claims In
conformance with the public surveys.
To cap the situation, say the critics,
the old surveyors are incorrect in
many instances 1t is also asserted In
many of the letters that necessity of
making an accurate survey in order
to meet the term of the proposed re-
vision would involve expense which
individual prospectors. working on
grubstakes in many instances, would
not be able to bear.
Provisions of the proposed law re-
lating to requirement of discovery
were objected to In 65 per cent of
the answers. California, Colorado,
New Mexico and Utah led in the OPP
position to this change. The pending
legislation would provide that
claim may be held for five years
without discovery. and that 1t might
be held for a further period. not ex-
ceedipg FIVE years, by payment of $50
per acre annually In advance. This
coupled with the substitution of cash
payment for the annual assessment
work, some critics say, would enable
large companies with extensive I'm
ances to acquire claims and hold them
indefinitely without development
work This condition, It is said
would operate to discourage activities
of individual prospectors who depend
upon development work for discov-
cries.
Commenting in this connection Mr.
Arentz declares that in his long ex-
perience in the mining industry he
never has seen a mine, or any mining
property, that is deserving of a valu-
alton being placed upon 1t that can
not be traced In its discovery to the
earnestly prosecuted efforts OF pros
pector on actual development work
This view is also shared by one au
thority who. in answer to the ques
tionnaire, says that ito enact into
law the provisions governing devel-
nnx.Ant onH acoaccsaauf uNrk wnu1S