In your communication you do not state the points of exception to the decision of this office of June 9, 1873, in the matter of the applications for patents for the Rockwell, Zella and Mountain Tiger mines, but state that "you will please direct my appearance to be registered and cause an appeal from said decision to be entered in due form, the points and argument thereupon to be submitted hereafter.'

As you were personally informed this day, this communication cannot be considered an appeal, and will not be recognized as such. Very respectfully,

WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner.

Adverse Claims must be Filed within the Prescribed

Time.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., Aug. 19, 1873. Register and Receiver, Central City, Colorado:

GENTLEMEN: On the fourth May, 1872, John F. Hardesty filed in your office an application for patent for three hundred linear feet of the Jones and Matteson lode, situate in Nevada Mining District, Colorado.

* * * Mr. Tascher also alleges that he started to go to the local land office "within fifteen days after said Hardesty made his said application for patent, as above stated, for the purpose of making and filing an adverse claim thereto, and was told by said Arnold (the Receiver) not to do so, as it would delay and stop proceedings in my application for a patent to this Alger lode, then pending before said land office.'

Mr. Tascher asks that he be permitted, in view of these facts, to "file his adverse claim as of the date at which he offered or applied to file it."

* * When an application for patent is filed in the local office, it is optional with parties who claim that their rights will be prejudiced by the issuance of the patent as applied for, to file an adverse claim, or not.

In the case under consideration, it appears, by the affidavit of Mr. Tascher, that he did not file an adverse claim to Hardesty's application for patent within the prescribed time, for the reason that it might cause delay to an application for patent for the Alger lode, which he had previously filed.

* * * Mr. Tascher having failed to file an adverse claim within the time prescribed, to wit: ninety days, his objections to the issuance of patent to Mr. Hardesty cannot be considered.

* *

*

Very respectfully,

WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner.

Comstock Lode. - Bullion Mining Company v. 420 Mining Company.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., Aug. 19, 1873. Register and Receiver, Carson City, Nevada :

GENTLEMEN: On the sixth November, 1867, the Bullion mining company filed in your office an application for patent for twelve hundred linear feet of the Comstock lode, Nevada. Also, a diagram of the premises claimed by them.

The notice of intention to apply for a patent was published in the Gold Hill Daily News on the fourteenth November, 1867, and for a period of ninety days thereafter. On the third February, 1868, the Croesus mining company filed an adverse claim to said application. On the same day, Louis Feusier filed an adverse claim. On the fourth February, 1868, the 420 mining company filed an adverse claim to said application.

On the eleventh February, O. W. Easton; on the twenty-fifth March, the Alpha Gold Hill mining company; and on the twenty-eighth March, 1868, the Chollar Potosi mining company, filed adverse claims to the application of the Bullion mining company.

By the certificate of the clerk of the county of Storey, Nevada, it appears that the Croesus mining company and and Louis Feusier commenced suit against the Bullion company, on the thirtieth May, 1868, "both of which were on the thirteenth day of February, A. D. 1869, by mutual consent dismissed; " that on the twenty-ninth May, 1868, the Alpha company, commenced suit against the Bullion company, "in which suit, by consent of both parties, judgment was rendered by said court, quieting the title of said Alpha Gold Hill mining company to the same;" that on thirtieth May, 1868, the Chollar Potosi mining company commenced suit against the Bullion company, "which suit was also dismissed by mutual consent, on the eighteenth day of October, A. D. 1872."

It appears from said certificate of the county clerk, that O. W. Easton never brought suit against said Bullion mining company.

The adverse claim of the 420 mining company was filed in due time, to wit, within the ninety days notice, by publication of the intention of the Bullion company to apply for a patent, and was sworn to by C. J. Lansing.

Mr. Lansing alleges under oath, that the 420 mining company is "a corporation duly organized and now existing under the laws of the State of California; that the 420 mining company is the owner of and has for more than nine

(9) years last past been in the possession of four hundred and twenty feet of the lode known and called the Comstock lode ;"* * * "that four hundred and twenty feet of the north end of the mining ground claimed by the said Bullion mining company is the mining ground of the said 420 mining company ;' that "on or about the sixteenth day of November, A. D. 1865, the said Bullion mining company, as plaintiff, commenced an action against the 420 mining company, as defendant, in the district court of the first judicial district, Nevada, in and for Storey County, to recover from the said defendant the possession of the northern four hundred and twenty feet of the said mining ground described by said notice; * * * * and that said suit is still pending in said court and undetermined," etc.

The papers herein before referred to are the only papers filed in this case until twenty-second October, 1872, a period of nearly five years, except the affidavit of the publisher of the Gold Hill Daily News, to the effect that the notice of intention to apply for a patent was duly published for the period of ninety days.

This affidavit was filed on the second March, 1868.

From the foregoing it will be seen that only the application for patent, and a diagram of the premises claimed, were filed by the Bullion company previous to October 22, 1872, except the proof of publication of notice.

The Bullion company's application was not under oath, and said company wholly failed to file with their said application any evidence, record, or otherwise, tending to show that they were in a condition to apply for a patent, or that they had any record or other title to the premises described in said application.

The second section of the mining act of July 26, 1866, declares "that whenever any person, or association of persons, claim a vein or lode of quartz, or other rock in place, bearing gold, silver, cinnabar, or copper, having previously occupied and improved the same, according to the local customs or rules of miners in the district where the same is situated, and having expended in actual labor and improvements thereon an amount of not less than one thousand dollars, and in regard to whose possession there is no controversy or opposing claim," they may file with the local land officers a diagram of their claim, etc.

The said Bullion company did not file with their application proof that they had previously occupied and improved the premises applied for, in accordance with the local customs or rules of miners; that they had expended on said premises, in actual labor and improvements, a sum of not less than $1,000; and, aside from this, it appears that the Bullion company recognized the fact that there was a con

66

troversy or opposing claim" in regard to part of the premises described in said application, they having commenced a suit against the 420 company, to recover possession of the ground claimed by it. In short, the Bullion company filed a very incomplete and unsatisfactory application for patent. The Bullion company, on the twenty-second October, 1872, filed a certificate of incorporation, an abstract of title, and several affidavits, in regard to possession, improvements, and the posting of the notice and diagram upon the claim.

On the fifteenth January, 1873, the Bullion company filed a copy of the Gold Hill and Virginia District Mining Laws, and the affidavits of Samuel Owens and E. A. Schultz, in regard to possession, by the said Bullion company, of the premises claimed, and their compliance with the local laws, and on the eighteenth January, 1873, were permitted to enter their claim.

It appears by the certificate of the County Clerk of Storey County, Nevada, that after the dismissal of the suit commenced by the Bullion company, the 420 mining company commenced suit against the Bullion company, to adjudicate the right of possession to the said premises in dispute, on the twenty-ninth November, 1872. This, I think, was a reasonable time after the dismissal of the suit commenced by the Bullion company. A copy of the complaint in said suit is on file in this case.

The attorney for the 420 mining company has filed a certified copy of the certificate of incorporation of said company, and the affidavit of C. J. Lansing, in regard to the adverse claim of said 420 company.

The question is presented, whether or not the 420 mining company has presented such an adverse claim as is contemplated by the mining act of July 26, 1866, and one which should be adjudicated in the local courts before patent issues.

This was among the first applications for patents under the mining act of 1866, and both the application for patent and the adverse claim of the 420 mining company were quite incomplete.

Having carefully considered the papers in the case, I am of the opinion that the respective rights of the Bullion mining company and the 420 mining company, should be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction before patent issues upon said application, and that although it may not have complied strictly with the letter of the law, a prima facie adverse showing has been made out by the 420 mining company, for the following reasons.

First. The adverse claim was filed in due time, and was under oath.

Second. It appears that the premises have been in litigation for many years, and that a suit in ejectment was pending in the local courts, at the time said application for patent was filed, between the Bullion mining company, plaintiff, and the 420 mining company, defendant, in regard to the premises now in dispute, and that when the Bullion company abandoned that suit, the 420 company took the necessary steps to secure a decision in the courts.

You will inform all parties in interest of this decision, allowing sixty days from the date of your notification, within which an appeal may be taken to the Honorable Secretary of the Interior.

Be pleased to acknowledge the receipt hereof as "N" by its date.

Very respectfully,

WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner.

The Non-mineral Affidavit may be Sworn to by an Agent, when the Principal is not acquainted with the Land.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., August 20, 1873. Register and Receiver, Ironton, Missouri:

GENTLEMEN: * * * When an entry is made by an agent who has examined the land, and his principal is not personally acquainted with the character thereof, the agent upon filing his authority to act in the premises, and proof of the fact that his principal is not personally acquainted with the character of the land, may be permitted to make and file the non-mineral affidavit (required in agricultural entries.)

Very respectfully,

WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner.

Applicants for Patent for Placer Land must Present Proof that no Known Veins Exist Therein.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., Aug. 27, 1873. Register and Receiver, Helena, Montana:

GENTLEMEN: * * * This application for patent was filed under the act of July 9, 1870, and purports to be for placer mining land. The twelfth section of said act provides " that claims usually called 'placers,' including all forms of deposits, excepting veins of quartz or other rock in place, shall be subject to entry and patent under this act," etc.