VI Mining Claims
The process of acquiring title to mining property may be viewed from a number of points. Such property is real estate and, as such, it may be bought and sold or otherwise transferred exactly the same as farms or city lots.
The United States has constructed an elaborate system for the disposal of its public lands to individuals, under various classifications, such as homestead, desert land, timber and stone, timber culture, coal, placer, and lode claims. Different rules apply to the filing upon, improvement and patenting (acquiring deed from the Government) of these various kinds of claims. The character of the lands in the public domain is decided by the surveyors who execute contracts from the General Land Office for subdividing or staking the country off into townships and sections, according to our American system. In the return of each surveyor’s notes, he recommends the sale of the land according to his judgment as to its highest value. There has naturally been a good deal of erroneous conception upon these points, with the result that, often, land has been later shown to be entirely different in its character from the classification given to it by the contracting surveyor; for the qualifications of such a person are not always of a high grade, when it comes to geological questions. And yet, on the whole, the scheme has worked out well and much fraud against the Government has been prevented by the rigid practice.
The Government prices for some of the various classes of land have been as follows: agricultural, $1.25 per acre; coal, $10 per acre when the land was not closer to a railroad than 15 miles, and $20 per acre when it lay within this limit; placer, $2.50 per acre; lode, $5 per acre. These have been the prices demanded for the land only; the payment of these amounts, in many cases, has constituted a small fraction of the expense of securing the original deeds from the Federal Government.
Coal lands may be located very much the same as a homestead, with the exception that residence upon the ground is not required, nor are improvements essential. In cases of dispute as to priority of location, the land office will recognize those claimants who have expended the greater amounts in improvements. One citizen may locate but one claim of 160 acres.
Since April 10, 1909, the Government has been disposing of its public coal lands under a classification that takes note of many details. The kind, grade, thickness, and purity of coal; the number of workable seams; the depth; the features of local supply; transportation facilities; and the average prices at which similar private tracts are held, are among the items recognized in the classification. Probably no two tracts will be sold at the same rate. In general, the new prices are higher than the flat prices that formerly prevailed and some pieces of land are now estimated as high as $175 per acre. In every case of application to purchase coal land, hereafter, the area in question will undergo inspection by Government experts and a price will then be assessed. This law is being severely opposed as being unreasonably severe, and its amendment may be looked for.
Placer lands were formerly permitted to be taken up in any shape, the boundary stakes being placed upon the ground in such a manner as to include only the desirable area, which is usually of an alluvial nature along some valley or gulch. This practice has been forbidden, however, and a locator is now obliged to take up his land in quadrilateral tracts conforming to the subdivisions of the so-called Public Survey. By this rule, it is permissible to file upon land which is laid off into lots of not less than 1/16 of a quarter section—or ten acres—and a claim may be composed of such lots as lie contiguously and which may thus be considered as one complete workable area. The claims are often of zigzag or L shapes, but the locator is enabled, at the extra expense of subdivision surveying, to avoid filing upon, and paying for, much ground that he feels is not desirable in a placer claim. The Government does not survey public domain into smaller tracts than quarter sections of 160 acres each, so that in the taking up of placers it often involves a great deal of expense to carry the subdivisions upon the ground into sufficient detail to ascertain the location of boundary corners.
One person is entitled to as many placer claims as he desires. Each claim of a single individual may contain not to exceed 20 acres and, as said, it must be of one continuous area. Associations of citizens to the number of eight may unite in the location of 160 acres, which will then be held in equal and common interest by the several locators. The restraint placed upon greed in the matter of locations, either placer or lode, lies in certain expenses entailed in work or improvements upon the land before patent may be issued and the legal requirement of the performance of labor upon each claim amounting to $100 per annum. Also, it is required that bona fide values be disclosed upon the ground. For each 20 acres located under the placer laws of the United States, not less than $500 worth of improvements must be made before the issuance of a patent.
The legal (not the technical) definition of lode land covers all grounds containing deposits of ore in its natural and original place of deposit. Under the laws, therefore, a citizen may file upon a tract of land to include a vein, lode, mass, chimney or any other form of ore body. The laws were framed at a time when miners were familiar only with the steep, tabular forms, synonymously termed veins or lodes in their nomenclature, and there were introduced features which time and progress in geological investigations have proved to be entirely unsuited to the needs of locators in many districts.
Our statutes provide that a lode claim may not exceed an area of 20,662 acres, this being the area of a parallelogram 1,500 feet long by 600 feet wide. The intention is to permit a discoverer to lay off a “lode line” along the outcrop of his vein for a distance of 1,500 feet and, at each end, to measure off, at right angles, a distance of 300 feet each way, merely as assurance that he covers the entire thickness of his lode. Since the surface contours of rugged country will crook the outcrop of a dipping plane (such as we may imagine a vein to be) the laws were constructed to permit a claim being laid off with angles or bends in the boundaries so that the outcrop might be kept closely along the middle of the claim.
The above dimensions and area are the maximum permissible under the Federal laws. The Government does not say that claims may not be less in extent, anywhere, nor does it prevent states, counties or even mining districts from making further limitations. In most of the western mining states and territories that have applied the mining law, the full maximum is allowed; but in Colorado no claim is legal if it exceeds a width of 300 feet, while in four counties of the same state claims have been restricted in width to 150 feet. By legislative enactment, since September 1, 1911, claims in all counties of Colorado are permitted to be taken up 300 feet in width. The citizens or miners of any new district, in any state or territory, may elect to limit claims to any size less than the maximum granted by the statutes and such a decision will be recognized by courts as binding upon all comers. This is an example of the rights of custom in establishing common law. In all shapes and widths of lode claims, there is now the rigid restriction that the two end-lines must be laid off exactly parallel.
A Gilpin County, Colorado, Scene,
Showing the Prize, Gunnell, Concrete, Gold Collar, and Eureka Mines.
The laws of our country contemplate the right of any locator of a vein to follow such vein down upon its dip, even if it extends beyond vertical planes passed through the side boundaries. The vertical planes through the end-lines, however, may not lawfully be penetrated in the extraction of ore bodies. The application of this doctrine of “extra-lateral rights” has led to innumerable controversies that have crippled many worthy mining enterprises. The inevitable habit of different veins to intersect, branch, unite, and in many other ways to cause complications, has served no purpose but to delay operations, cause legal warfare and embitter neighbors. So unjust have been courts’ decisions in interpreting the lax laws that various mining districts have taken unto themselves the prerogative of deciding for themselves what is justice to all concerned; and we therefore find that many “camps” have unwritten laws under which claimants are restrained in their underground operations, to the ground contained between vertical planes through all boundaries, whether end or side. This is obviously the only fair plan, and it is hoped that, whenever the legislators at Washington get time to give to the matter the attention it deserves, our nation will be favored with a revision of this and a number of other objectionable mining laws which have retarded the industry. Ours is the only country having laws permitting extra-lateral rights and, upon this score, we are criticized by all foreigners.
The Canadian government appears to leave the framing of mining laws to the several provincial governments. Ontario and Quebec have very good and simple laws relative to mining claims. In some respects the laws of the two provinces are similar. For example, in each province a claim must be laid out as a subdivision of the usual public survey and is normally 40 acres in extent. Again, no prospecting or locating may be done except by persons holding so-called miners’ licenses or miners’ certificates, which cost $5 to $10 per year. No extra-lateral rights are recognized.
In Ontario, a patent may be applied for any time within 3-1/2 years of the date of certificate of record, and the land is purchased outright by the payment of $3 per acre. The patent thus obtained conveys no rights to timber or water on the property. In Quebec, patents are never issued and mining claims are held by a sort of lease, as it were. A license to hold a mining claim costs a flat fee of $10, plus an extra fee of one dollar per acre. At times, arrangements are made for holding and working mining property upon a 3 per cent royalty basis.
The Mexican laws permit the location of any number of claims by individuals. A locator is required to employ an expert (perito) to make a careful survey of his claims (pertinencias), which are taken up in rectangular form. Measurements are according to the metric system, and the unit of area is the hectara, which is the area of a square with 100-meter (328-feet) sides, and is equivalent to 2.471 acres. The government’s sale price for mineral ground is 5 pesos (about $2.50) per hectare, or approximately one dollar, United States money, per acre. The unit size of a claim is a hectare, and it thus comes about that the words pertinencia and hectara are used somewhat synonymously.
Under United States laws, the owner of agricultural land, if he has not committed perjury in perfecting his title, will hold all minerals which may be disclosed subsequently to the granting of his deed. The proof of false representations will rescind any such patent and the ground will revert to the Government and be again open to location.
In the surveying and laying off of mineral claims for patent purposes, the United States laws require the claimant to put the work into the hands of a mineral surveyor. Such a surveyor may usually be engaged in any mining district and he will hold a commission from the Department of the Interior authorizing him to do this sort of work. He will have passed certain examinations as to his capabilities and he will have filed bonds in the sum of $5,000 for the faithful performance of his duties to both the Government and his client. He receives no compensation from the Government, and each claimant may make such terms with him as are equitable. He must hold no interest, directly or otherwise, in the property he surveys, nor is he permitted to file upon any mineral land. If he undertakes a case for a client his duties require him to survey the boundaries of every other mineral claim which may be contiguous to, or conflicting with, the one in question, and his maps must accurately show all such claims. His notes will contain sufficient data to accurately convey the exact location, the chief topographical features, the conflicts with all other locations, the position, and description of all mining improvements, and many other details which will be required in the final purchase of the land from the Government. The surveyor’s fee will vary from $50 to possibly $200 for a single claim, much depending upon the nature of the survey, whether simple or difficult, and upon local financial conditions and competition.
After the filing of the mineral surveyor’s notes and plats with the Surveyor-General, critical examination of the documents is made, and if they are found to conform with all requirements, the case is “approved” and it may then pass to the local land office of the district. Next begins a publication period of sixty days, during which opportunity is offered the public to enter objections to the issuance of a patent, either for reasons of conflict or because of fraud. If no such adverse proceedings are instituted, the patent will follow, in due time.
The ultimate expense of securing a patent to a claim of, say, the maximum area will not be less than $225, and it may run as high as $300 if in a region difficult to survey or if there are a good many conflicting surveys.
A mineral surveyor is prohibited from acting as attorney for the claimant in presenting his claims before the Land Office, so an attorney’s fee must be added to the above rough estimates. As a matter of fact, although the surveyor does not nominally appear as the attorney, in many a case it is he who makes out all of the documents to be then signed by an attorney in fact. The laws are faulty in this respect. The lawyer recognizes this fact and he asks the surveyor to make out the many legal forms; for who is so fully cognizant of the property and the desires of the claimant as the surveyor who has become intimately acquainted with the premises, its workings, its desirable features and everything concerned with the adjustment of conflicts? It is to be expected that he could best protect the claimant’s interests, and it is wrong to retire him at this very critical time prescribed by a foolish law. The fee of an additional man in the case is an unjust burden upon the client. Land Office officials have recognized this fact. They know that the best documents reaching their offices are those prepared by mineral surveyors.