Show REGARDING MINERAL PATENTS in a recent issue the mining review published an editorial relative to the new ruling of the TJ S land office in regard to patents on mining claims A careless interpretation of a certain paragraph in this ruling by several newspapers caused much uneasiness among claim owners and we therefore quoted the said paragraph to show that the fears expressed were groundless in this connection the following letter from the general land office at washington may inay be of interest the attention of the department has been called to the last clause of paragraph 41 of the mining regulations approved march 1909 which provides as follows the lode or vein must be fully described the description to include a statement as to the kind and character of the mineral the extent thereof whether ore has been extracted and of what amount and value and such other facts as will support the applicants allegation that the claim contains a valuable mineral deposit it seems that the expression the extent thereof is being construed as that the applicant must affirmatively show by proof of exploration that the vein exists in fact throughout the length of the claim this construction of the paragraph t is erroneous rone ous by the words quoted it was intended to require the claimant to show the existence of a vein in such workings as he relied upon to establish a mineral discovery by the extent of the vein was meant its size and quality as disclosed that being done the presumption exists that the vein extends on its strike throughout 0 hout the whole length of the claim as located the sole purpose of that part of paragraph 41 quoted was to enable the land department part ment to know so far as the applicant can reasonably show the definite facts upon which the right to patent is predicated so as to determine whether a valuable mineral deposit exists in the land claimed |