| Show PLACER CLAIMS IN DANGER A H ricketts Bicket tB the minli g attorney of this thia city says aay the san francisco chronicle calls calla attention to we be recent ruling of the of the he land la in the case ot aldritt Alii ritt va v tho northern pacific railway COMP company in which it was waa hold held that the term orni mineral land la in thorand laws law of the united states refers only to tho lands landa containing ores orea and does doe not refer to deposits of inch as ae rock chalk kaolin petroleum tr fire clay aud other similar mineral this thia decision Is very far reach log in effect and it affirmed by tho the secretary of the interior will prove a fruitful source of litigation to all placer cl claim I 1 owners owneta of land contain ii g the man orals na named med ua tie wen well as ae those thone containing borax carbonates carbonate a or nitrated nitra tee tm lime 1 tone oil mica di diamonds monde or iron where not found in rook in place in the course of the opinion the corn com missioner says although as aa a mat op ter er of convenience the department from time to time allowed entries to be made of mineral substances such as roes rock chalk kaolin gypsum petroleum petr leum and other similar minerals mineral under section 2829 revised statutes an ae placer claims they were allowed upon a trained strained construction of the st statutes but whatever views might be entertained in disposing of those these lands landa as placer claims claim where they did not conflict t with the rights of etbert ot bert I 1 know of no decision of the department that holds to this ot of the statute when it impairs impair or defeats defeat the rights of others under the beneral land jand jaws provi providing dimig lor for the disposal ol of the he public domain 10 if this construction of the mining law is to stand it meaos that possessory rights to uon lands jana must fall beffie a homestead entry CD covering vering such and that sven even if already they are covered by a mineral patent that such patent may be annulled or declared to be of no DO effect RS as evidence of the placer claimant claiman vs rights to his land ionia as the issuance of such patent was without the jurisdiction of the land de apartment part ment but this decision may be reversed upon appeal and the anomalous proceeding ot of acquiring title to recognized as am agricultural land my may be avoided I 1 the doci alon affect vast areas of land lo in this his state and has carded canted consternation onster nation into the abe hearts of the placer claimants however many miners who are already informed of this ruling are engaged in preventing future possible complications by home bome etea ding their mining jiuing claims auder the general land law of the united states |
