Page images
PDF
EPUB

No. 40. Proceedings for correction in description of patent by the issue of a new one.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., June 22, 1875.

Register and Receiver, Sacramento, Cal.

GENTLEMEN: Referring to my letter of the eighth ult., and your reply of the twelfth inst., returning to this office mineral patent No. 531, issued to Osmyn Harkness for his placer claim in T. 15 N., R. 10 E., M. D. M., I have to state that it appears, from a careful examination of the papers in the case, that Mr. Harkness' said placer claim is erroneously described in said patent. It also appears that the said patent has been recorded in the Recorder's office of Placer county, Cal.

I return said patent herewith, and you will inform Mr. Harkness that a new patent will issue to him for his said. claim upon the receipt at this office of the inclosure, with a relinquishment indorsed thereon to the United States of the premises therein described, together with a certificate of said recorder that said relinquishment has been duly recorded in the records of his office.

The relinquishment should state that the same is made for the reason that the premises are erroneously described in said patent. The recorder's certificate should also state as to whether or not his records show any conveyances of said premises.

If Mr. Harkness has conveyed said premises to any other person, it will be necessary for him to cause an abstract of such conveyances to be made, certified to by said recorder, and accompanied with a relinquishment from the parties named in said conveyances, and to forward the same with the inclosure (the patent) to this office.

Your early attention to this matter is requested.

Very respectfully,

S. S. BURDETT, Commissioner.

No. 41. Lands mineral in character can not be entered with Sioux Half

breed Scrip.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 23, 1875.

Hon. L. V. BOGG, U. S. Senate.

SIR: Referring to the letter from Nerce Valle, St. Louis, Mo., referred by you to this office, I have to state that the act of July 17, 1854, authorizing the issuance of Sioux Halfbreed Scrip, provides that said scrip may be located upon certain lands within their reservation, "or upon any other unoccupied lands subject to pre-emption or private sale, or upon any other unsurveyed lands not reserved by government upon which they have respectively made improvements."

Mineral lands are not subject to pre-emption or private entry, but on the contrary are reserved for sale to parties showing compliance with the mining acts of Congress.

Lands which are mineral in character can not, therefore, be entered with Sioux Half-breed Scrip. I return herewith Mr. Valle's letter.

Very respectfully,

L. K. LIPPINCOTT, Acting Commissioner.

No. 42. Agricultural College Scrip should not be received in payment for mineral land.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 30, 1873. Register and Receiver, Fairplay, Colorado Territory.

GENTLEMEN: * * * In this connection I would state, that Agricultural College Scrip can not be used in payment for mineral land; and in all cases where you have received the same in payment for mining claims, you will call upon the applicants to pay the amount required in cash, and return the scrip to the parties from whom you received it.

[blocks in formation]

No. 43. Mineral lands are not subject to location with Porterfield Scrip. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

WASHINGTON, D. C., August 25, 1876.

Hon. Z. CHANDLER, Secretary of the Interior.

SIR: By act of Congress, approved April 11, 1800, 12 Stat. 836, the Secretary of the Interior was authorized to issue to William Kinney and Thomas J. Michie, executors of the last will and testament of Robert Porterfield, deceased, a number of warrants equal to six thousand one hundred and thirty-three acres of land, in quantities not less than forty acres, "to be by them located on any of the public lands which have been or may be surveyed, and which have not been otherwise appropriated at the time of such location, within any of the States or Territories of the United States where the minimum price for the same shall not exceed the sum of one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre."

Two forty-acre warrants issued under said act, numbered respectively 93 and 94 were located by Henry Carrigan, and on the second of April, 1873, upon the N. W. 4 of S. W. 1, and the S. W. 4 of S. W. of Section 20, T. 25 S., R. 6 W., Utah, and on the thirteenth of June, 1873, patents issued to said Carrigan for said tracts.

By the records and files of this office it is shown that on the tenth of August, 1872, J. M. Moore, Ira N. Hinckley, and Thomas Mather made a location under the mining act of the Excelsior Sulphur mine, upon the two forty-acre tracts in question.

This location embraced fifteen hundred feet in length and six hundred feet in width, and was made in accordance with the local laws and Congressional enactments.

By the records of this office it is shown that said mine has been held and worked by said locators and their successors in interest from the date of said location in accordance with the local laws and Congressional enactments. It is also shown that Adolph V. Weise, Adolph A. Leech, and Hugo T. Reitze have received title in said mining claim by purchase from the grantee of the original locators, and they have made application for patent therefor.

By act of Congress approved May 10, 1872, all valuable mineral deposits in lands belonging to the United States,

both surveyed and unsurveyed, were declared free and open to exploration and purchase, and the lands in which they are found to occupation and purchase by citizens of the United States, and those who have declared their intention to become such, under regulations prescribed by law, and according to the local customs or rules of miners, in the several mining districts.

Mineral lands are, by said act, only subject to disposal to parties who show compliance with the terms of the act, and pay to the proper officer at the rate of five dollars per acre for such lands as contain mineral in rock in place, and two dollars and fifty cents per acre for placer mining ground.

From the foregoing it will be seen that the tracts upon which said Porterfield warrants were located were not of the class of lands which, under said act of April 11, 1850, were subject to location by said warrants, as the same were mineral lands and only subject to sale at the rate of five dollars per acre, and had been appropriated in accordance with law, nearly eight months prior to the date of said warrant locations.

It appears from several communications received at this office from A. V. Weise and his attorneys, that the applicants for patent for said mining claim are the owners by purchase of the premises described in the patents to Carrigan, and they ask that proceedings be commenced in the proper court to set aside the patents issued upon said warrant locations.

In view of the fact that said warrants were fraudulently located upon lands not subject to location under the act of April 11, 1860, and of the fact that patents erroneously issued upon said locations, I have to recommend that the Hon. Attorney-general be requested to cause proceedings to be instituted in the proper court, in the name of the United States, to secure a cancellation of said patents. A schedule of the papers transmitted herewith is hereto attached.*

I am sir, very respectfully,

Your obedient servant,

J. A. WILLIAMSON, Commissioner.

*By direction of the Department of Justice, the U. S. District Attorney for Utah instituted a suit for the purpose of setting aside the patents to Car

No. 44. Certificates of deposit can not be received in payment for mineral land.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

WASHINGTON, September 22, 1877. SIR: I have considered the case of Robert Strowl, coal land applicant, on appeal from your decision of January 26, 1877, refusing to allow him to make part payment for the south-east quarter section 4, township 18 north, range 6 east, Olympia, Washington Territory, with certificate of deposit for the survey of said township.

You held that the certificates of deposit authorized by section 2403 of the Revised Statutes to go in part payment for the lands authorized to be surveyed by section 2401, were receivable for agricultural lands, but not for coal lands, because the last named section says in express terms that mineral lands shall not be surveyed.

As coal lands have uniformly been treated by Congress, and by this Department, as mineral lands, I agree with your conclusion that section 2401 does not authorize them to be surveyed, and as a consequence section 2403 does not authorize the certificate of deposit to be received in payment.

Your decision is affirmed, and the papers transmitted with your letter of June 5, 1877, are herewith returned. Very respectfully,

C. SCHURZ, Secretary.

To the Commissioner of the General Land Office.

No. 45. Mineral lands in Indian Territory are not subject to location under the mining laws.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., June 26, 1873.

R. H. ANGWIN, Esq., Sherman, Texas.

SIR: In reply to the inquiry contained in your letter of June 5, 1873, referred to this office by the Secretary of the Interior, I have to state that the minerals in the Indian Territory are not reserved by the United States, and this office has no control whatever over the lands in said territory. Very respectfully,

WILLIS DRUMMOND, Commissioner.

rigan, and on the ninth of November, 1878, said District Attorney reported that on the eighth November, 1878, a decree was taken setting aside said patents and annulling all subsequent deeds.

« PreviousContinue »