Company, for the W. Lot 7 of Section 3, in T. 15, N. R. 10 E., Mt. Do. Mer., said tract having been returned as mineral land by the Surveyor-general, and said return never, having been disproved in the manner prescribed by law, and the instructions of this office. On the tenth of July, 1871, George P. Beal filed with you an application for patent for certain placer mining ground embracing, among other tracts, the W. of Lot 7, of said section 3. Said applicant submitted several affidavits, in which it is alleged that the applicant for patent, and his grantors, have held and worked the premises described in said application for patent for the last nineteen years. That the value of labor and improvements upon said tract, that have been made since 1861, is thirty-five thousand dollars in gold coin; and that said tract has been continuously worked as a placer claim since 1861. It appears from the certificate of the Recorder and exofficio Auditor of Placer County, Cal., that the grantors of the applicant for patent have paid taxes upon their mining claim situate upon said tract for the years 1868, 1869 and 1870. In view of the circumstances of the case as herein before recited, you will call upon said Central Pacific railroad company to relinquish to the United States the said W. Lot 7, Sec. 3., T. 15, N. R. 10, E. Mt. Do. Mer. Very respectfully, WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner. Cancellation of Entry made while Suit was Pending in Court. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D.C., Oct. 23, 1873. Register and Receiver, Central City, Colorado: GENTLEMEN: It appears from your letter of the twentythird of July last, that on the sixth of November, 1872, Ď. E. Dulaney filed with you an application for patent for 675 feet of the Hidden Treasure lode, Griffith mining district, Clear Creek County, Colorado. On the thirteenth of December, 1872, L. D. C. Gaskill et al., filed with you an application for patent for 900 linear feet of the Saco lode, situate in the same district. On the fourth of January, 1873, L. D. C. Gaskill et al., the applicants for patent for the Saco lode, filed with you an adverse claim against the application of Mr. Dulaney for patent for the Hidden Treasure lode, alleging a conflict between the said applications for patent. The applicants for patent for the Saco lode commenced suit against the applicant for patent for the Hidden Treasure lode within the prescribed time after said adverse claim was filed, and said suit is still pending and undetermined. The premises described in said applications for patent being in litigation, a suit having been instituted upon an adverse claim filed by one applicant against the other, no entry should have been permitted by either party until a final decree of the court had been rendered in the matter. The entry of the Saco lode, made March 3, 1873, has this day been cancelled. You will inform all parties in interest, and acknowledge the receipt hereof. Very respectfully, Your obedient servant, WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner. Placer Claims Embracing Five-Acre Lots must be Surveyed. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., Oct. 23, 1873. Register and Receiver, Sacramento, California: GENTLEMEN: This office has examined the papers in case of the application of Joseph Immer, for patent for certain placer mining land in Section 12, T. 11, N. R. 9 E., Mt. Do. Mer., Mineral Entry No. 140. It is observed that said entry embraces two five-acre lots. The smallest legal subdivisions of the public lands is a ten acre tract, and it will therefore be necessary for Mr. Immer to have a survey made of the premises for which he has made application for patent. Very respectfully, Your obedient servant, WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner. After a Hearing and Entry by Agricultural Claimant, a Case cannot be Reopened on Account of Minerals in the Land. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., Oct. 25, 1873. Messrs. PIKE and JOHNSON, Washington, D. C.: GENTLEMEN: On the eighteenth instant, you filed the affidavits of Wm. Delaney, Michael Lont and James Kan, alleging the mineral character of the S. W. of N. E. 4, the N. W. of S. E. 1, the N. E. of S. W. and the S. E. of N. W., Sec. 18, T. 19, N. R., 4 E., Mt. Do. Mer., the same being embraced by cash entry No. 4668, made by Andrew Gardella on the fourteenth of March, 1871. It appears that on the fifteenth of November, 1869, a decision was rendered by this office, upon testimony submitted at a hearing held after due notice, that the tracts embraced by Mr. Gardella's entry were agricultural and not mineral in character. One of the parties who files his affidavit alleging the mineral character of said tracts, was cited to appear and did appear at the hearing held in 1869. The land having been adjudged agricultural, and Mr. Gardella having made entry thereof in accordance with said decision, the case cannot now be reopened. Mr. Gardella's case will be passed for patenting upon the receipt of his non-mineral affidavit. Very respectfully, Your obedient servant, WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner. The First Applicant receives Patent for Conflicting Ground when Second Application is made after Expiration of Publication of Notice. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D.C., Oct. 27, 1873. Register and Receiver, Central City, Colorado: GENTLEMEN: The papers transmitted with your letter of the twenty-ninth August last, have been examined. The following appear to be the facts in the case. On the first August, 1871, John F. Hardesty filed an application for patent for 400 linear feet of the Jones and Matteson, Kansas, or Nevada lode, Colorado. Against this application for patent an adverse claim was filed by Spanner, Romer, and Clauson. The adverse claimants subsequently conveyed the property claimed by them, to Nathaniel Young, who commenced suit against Mr. Hardesty, and re-conveyed the premises which he had purchased from the original adverse claimants, to them. Clauson, one of the original adverse claimants, subsequently conveyed his interest to Theodore Nelson, who, with the other two original adverse claimants, filed in your office a written withdrawal of the adverse claim filed against said application. On the twenty-fourth January last, you were instructed to allow Mr. Hardesty to proceed with his said application, upon his filing with you a copy of the deed from N. Young to Spanner, Romer, and Clauson, a copy of the deed from Clauson to Nelson, and a certificate of the clerk of the court, that no suit was pending bringing into question the title to the premises applied for.. On the fifth February last, you informed this office that all the papers required had been filed with you. At the time, Mr. Hardesty was in condition to proceed with his application for patent. On the tenth February, 1873, John Powell filed with you an application for patent for 300 linear feet of the Philadelphia lode. Accompanying said application were filed a copy of the field notes of survey and a plat, which had been a proved by the Surveyor-general of Colorado, on the thirtieth January. Mr. Hardesty procured a survey of his said claim, and the plat and field notes of such survey were approved on the tenth April, 1873. The survey of Mr. Hardesty's claim, showed a conflict between the two applications, and Mr. Hardesty, on the twelfth April, 1873, filed an adverse claim against Mr. Powell's application for patent, and commenced suit within the time prescribed by the mining act of May 10, 1872. In view of all these facts in the case, you inquire whether Mr. Hardesty can be permitted to make entry of the entire premises described in his application. Mr. Powell having failed to file an adverse claim against Mr. Hardesty's application for patent, within the ninety days prescribed by the act of July 26, 1866, and no conflict having been alleged between the Philadelphia and the Jones and Matteson, Kansas, or Nevada lodes, within the ninety days notice of publication, the application of Mr. Hardesty cannot be delayed by reason of an alleged conflict between said lodes, which, for the first time, is asserted more than eighteen months after Hardesty had made application for patent. You will therefore permit Mr. Hardesty to make entry of the premises, as described in his application for patent, upon full compliance with the law and instructions. You will inform all parties in interest, and acknowledge the receipt hereof. Very respectfully, WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner. Proceedings when Suit has been decided in favor of Applicant for Patent. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., Oct. 30, 1873. H. B. MORSE, Esq., Central City, Colorado: SIR: In reply to your letter of the eighteenth instant, I have to state that the records of the local land office at Central City, Colorado, will show the present status of the application of Jacob Tascher for patent for the Alger lode. On the fourth March, 1872, the Register and Receiver were directed to suspend proceedings in the case, awaiting the final determination of a suit commenced by Mr. Mellon, upon an adverse claim, asserted by him against said application for patent. If, as you state, the suit commenced against the applicant for patent, has been decided in favor of the applicant, a copy of the decree of the court in the case should be filed with the Register and Receiver, and a certificate of the clerk of the court that no suit is pending against said applicant brought by the adverse claimant, bringing into question the title to said property. Upon the filing of these papers with the Register and Receiver, they will allow the entry to be made. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Copies of Deeds, or an Abstract of Title and Copy of Location, to be Filed with an Adverse Claim. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, D. C., Oct. 31, 1873. Messrs. HEMPSTEAD & KIRKPATRICK, Salt Lake City, Utah: GENTLEMEN: In reply to your communication of the twenty-third instant, I have to state that an adverse claimant to an application for patent for a mining claim, should file with the other papers which go to make up his adverse claim, either an abstract of title to the premises claimed by him, together with a copy of the original notice of location, or certified copies of the original notice of location, and the deeds of conveyance tracing the right of possession from the original locators to such adverse claimant. Where an abstract of title is furnished, instead of copies of the original deeds, such abstract should be full and complete, and properly attested by the seal of the Recorder. Very respectfully, Your obedient servant, WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner. |