question as to the point from which this lateral measurement must begin.

Middle of vein.

When the discovery shaft develops the vein at some distance below the surface, and the locator does not determine by any further prospecting that the nearest actual surface point is elsewhere, and the fact does not otherwise appear, I am of the opinion that the point of the vein so discovered must be assumed to be the middle of the vein, and the lateral measurements be calculated therefrom.

The law is mandatory, and contemplates that but three hundred feet of surface ground shall be taken on either side of the vein; and a compliance with the law necessitates the fixing of the point from which these measurements shall begin. I think the rule above indicated is the only one practicable.

In this case the width of the claim on the northerly side is more than three hundred feet from the discovery opening; and the plat and field notes have this day been returned to the Surveyor-general for correction in said particular.

Referring to the second objection by protestant, I find that the location notice describes the claim as follows: "Beginning at M. C. stone No. 3 on the Hope Lode, and running north seventy-three degrees east along the north line of said Hope Lode, seven hundred and ninety-five feet to a stake; thence north sixty-eight degrees west nine hundred and fifty-three feet to a stake; thence south seventy-three degrees west eighty-nine and four tenths feet, to a stake; thence south sixty-six degrees thirty minutes west one thousand three hundred and forty-three feet to a stake; thence south sixty-eight degrees east eight hundred and forty-one feet to a stake; thence north sixty-six degrees twenty minutes east seven hundred and twenty feet to the point of beginning. Discovery stake is one hundred and forty feet north-east from corner-stone No. 3, of the Hope Lode, and one hundred and twenty-five feet north from north line of Hope Lode." This location was made February 12, 1876.

The field notes of the survey presented for patent show that the surveyor began at the same point as did the loca

tion; that he ran south sixty-six degrees thirty minutes. west (instead of east, as in the location), along the north boundary of the Hope Lode claim "to a post marked for south-west corner of Potosi Lode;" thence north sixty-eight degrees west (the same courses given for these two lines in the location), to a point from which north-west corner of this claim bears north sixty-eight degrees west two hundred and thirty-eight feet distant. Bearing in mind that the width of this claim as surveyed for patent, is much less than as located, and that the north-west corner here referred to is the north-west corner of the location; that the westerly line bears north sixty-eight degrees west in both location and survey for patent, and that said line continued, as above shown in said survey, in the same direction intersects at the north-west corner of the location, it is evident that the westerly line of location and the westerly line of survey for patent coincide, and are one and the same line, for, when extended two hundred and thirty-eight feet in the same direction beyond the north-west corner of said survey, they are both found at the same point. Hence I conclude that the stake found by the surveyor at the south-west corner, and described by him as "a post marked for southwest corner of Potosi Lode," was the location corner post. The measurement eastwardly does not give a greater linear distance than that given in the location, and I therefore conclude that the survey can not extend eastwardly beyond the location.

On the third point of objection, it is only necessary to say that it does not apply to this case. As shown above, the southerly and westerly boundary lines of survey are proven to have been the location boundary lines-the first being a line common to two surveys, and the second being proven, as aforesaid, to coincide with the westerly location. line. The northerly boundary line is within the location, and the easterly boundary is by measurement less than that given in the location. There is no adverse interest involved, and no averment is made that the boundary stakes are not those marking the location. I therefore decide that the applicant can proceed for patent after the Surveyor-general shall have corrected the survey and plat, as aforesaid, to comply with the law in respect to the lateral measurement on the northerly side of the discovery opening.

You will be hereafter governed in your official action by the rule herein stated with regard to the width of lode. claims. Give notice to all parties, and acknowledge receipt hereof. The papers are herewith returned.

Very respectfully,

J. A. WILLIAMSON, Commissioner.

No. 11. 1. A survey which shows a triangle which embraces the entire lode or vein claimed, can not be approved, unless the lode itself extends into and fills the point in the acute angle, and then only when adverse rights existing on the tenth day of May, 1872, render it necessary.

2. Where lode intersects another claim.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

WASHINGTON, D. C., Jan. 29, 1879.

FRED C. MORSE, Esq., Fairplay, Colorado.

SIR: I am in receipt of your letters of November 28 and December 8, 1878, asking in substance whether it will be in accordance with the instructions of this office, requiring the end lines of lode claims to be in all cases parallel to each other, to make a survey whereof one of the ends overlaps a previously approved survey; and you send a diagram illustrating your question which shows the end of one survey overlapping the end of another patented survey. You state that the portion covered by both surveys was excluded by a clause in the field notes.

You are informed that the proceeding detailed as above was erroneous. The end lines of the second survey were not parallel when patented. The law gives the owner of a lode a right thereto for a certain length, and should his lode dip under the adjoining side lines of his claim, he may, without entering upon the surface, prosecute the dip under such adjoining land, but is restricted in so doing to the ore lying within the extension of the parallel end lines. Now, by an examination of the diagram made by you, it will be at once perceived that to keep within the extension of the end lines would, on entering adjoining lands, gradually shorten the length of his lode on one side, and lengthen his lode on the other, and, probably, at least possibly, conflict with rights of other parties assured to them by patent, or under the law.

Triangle.

You also submit a diagram in the form of a triangle, and ask whether such surveys will be approved by this office. On this point, I would say that in no case can a triangle, which embraces the entire lode or vein claimed, be approved, unless the lode itself extends into and fills the point in the acute angle, and then only when adverse rights, existing on the tenth day of May, 1872, render it necessary. See section 2320, U. S. Revised Statutes, which precludes a restriction of the width to less than twenty-five feet on each side of the middle of the vein at the surface.

Neither can the surface ground extend beyond the end of the lode in any instance.

When lode intersects another claim.

Where a lode intersects another claim, and extends within a prior survey or location, it may be patented to the length allowed by law, and if the end of the lode is found within such prior location, the surface ground may close upon the prior survey; provided, the extension of the end line within such prior survey, parallel to the other end line, would not exclude any portion of such surface ground.

Where a survey of the kind last above mentioned results in a triangle formed against the prior survey, the shape of the same, subject to the restrictions, as to the surface ground extending beyond the lode before named, will not be objectionable; but this will not apply where the lode embraced by the subsequent survey is merely the extension or continuation of the same lode on which prior location is made, for in such case the lode itself can not extend within the prior location.

* * * *

Very respectfully,

J. A. WILLIAMSON, Commissioner.

No. 12. Effect of filing field notes of survey unaccompanied with deposit for office work.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., April 10, 1877.

NATHAN KIMBALL, Esq., U. S. Surveyor-general, Utah.

SIR: I have carefully examined and considered the papers which have been filed in this office in regard to the surveys

of the Bright Point, Thor, and Venus mines, Big Cottonwood Mining District, Utah.

A large number of papers have been filed in regard to said surveys, and much bitter feeling seems to exist between the respective claimants, and toward your office, arising out of these surveys.

The facts appear from the papers submitted as follows, viz.: On the eighteenth of September, 1876, F. Dickert, Deputy Mineral Surveyor, obtained from your office a number by which to designate a survey which he expected to make of the Bright Point mine. The number given him was sixty-one.

On the twenty-second of September, said deputy filed in your office the field notes of survey of said claim, but made no deposit for office work.

As the deposit for office work was not made, and as no further attention was paid to said survey by said deputy or the claimants of said mine, you were wholly justified on the eighteenth of November, 1876, in directing that the number sixty-one should be used to designate a survey which on that day you gave the order to Deputy Surveyor, E. B. Wilder, to make of the Venus mine in the same district, and for which survey C. F. Winslow made required deposit.

Deputy Surveyor Wilder made a return of the field notes of surveys of the Thor and Venus mines, and the same, after the necessary corrections had been made, were approved by you on the twenty-second of December, 1876. In the mean time, however, L. P. Borg, one of the claimants of the Bright Point mine, made the required deposit; but as a survey had been made for the Venus mine, which embraced a large portion of the premises described in the Bright Point mine, you properly required that the survey of the Bright Point mine should show the conflict with the Venus survey.

Parties who desire to have official surveys made of their mining claims must make the required deposit for office work with the surveyor-general, and until such deposit is made the surveyor-general should not treat such surveys as official.

Subsequent survey entitled to precedence.

Your action in requiring the Venus and Thor claimants to