OCR Text |
Show MINERALS ON SOHOOL LANDS. Joint memorial No. 0. introduced iuto the Utah House of Representatives on Monday by Mr. Sanderson, is well enough so far as it calls for information. informa-tion. This memorial undertakes to deal with tho location of mineral claims upon school lands, nnd asks, first, that such locations bo officially reported by (he Federal Government, and. second, sec-ond, that they be stopped. The firsl part of thn proposition is all right; the locations should be reported; they should bo known, and there should be no secret at all about them. The second pail, however, is a different matter altogether. The freedom of entry of prospectors upon all tho public, lands has boon fullv protected by law. There is no reason at. tin's timo why '.'in' exception should be made, nor why prospectors should be kept, off from the school lands. On tho coutrury, tho development of mines on the school lands ought lo be encouraged, because nothing could possibly bo more advantageous advan-tageous to a school section than the development de-velopment thereon of a good pnj-ing mine. That would add a value to the whole section otherwise quite out of the question. One of the grcntest points of objection to the Pinchot policies poli-cies has been the unfriendliness of tho forest rangers to the location of mineral min-eral claims upon the forest reserves.' And yot, the rights of prospectors to go upon those reserves and locate mineral claims is not questioned. The lav; expressly ex-pressly gives tha,t right. And it gives it. bocaliso of the value which springs from the finding of a mine and the development de-velopment of the mineral resources that ensue thereupon. The proposal to forbid such entries on school lands is a reversal re-versal of the policj' which the Government Govern-ment has always pursued with regard to mineral locations. That policy is un questionably a beneficial one, - not so much to the general Government, but lo the- local communities wherein the mineral finds arc made. We should regret to sec the passage of a memorial by the Utah Legislature Legisla-ture designed lo shut off mineral entries en-tries upon any of the public lands of the State; nor do we believe that the passage of such a resolution would change the policy of tho Government, nor that it ought to change the public, policy of the Stale iu this respect. The idea at the bottom of ihut restriction is one to arrest development and prevent pre-vent the exploitation of the natural re sources and riches of the region affected. af-fected. As such, it is objectionable, not only because it overturns the policies poli-cies heretofore favored, both by the general Government and by the State, hut becaucs it. would tend lo arrest the development of our natural resources and hamper the discovery and utilization utiliza-tion of valuable miucrals that it would be advantageous to the public to have found and used. Let us have no laws restricting the development of the resources re-sources of the State; .but, on the contrary, con-trary, let us by every possible means encourage such development, and throw oncn to enterprising prospectors every facility for the pursuit of their calling, and for tho finding . and opening of mines wherever mineral deposits exist. |