THE possessory right obtained by location is, as has been explained, only an equitable title to the claim, the legal title remaining in the United States. This legal title may be purchased by the owner of the possessory right. The method of obtaining it is provided by Rev. Stats. 2325, as follows: 2.

"A patent for any land claimed and located for valuable deposits, may be obtained in the following manner: Any person, association, or corporation authorized to locate a claim under this chapter, having claimed and located a piece of land for such purposes, who has or have complied with the terms of this chapter, may file in the proper land office an application for a patent, under oath, showing such compliance, together with a plat and field-notes of the claim or claims in common, made by or under the direction of the United States surveyor-general, showing accurately the boundaries of the claim or claims, which shall be distinctly marked by monuments on the ground, and shall post a copy of such plat, together with a notice of such application for a patent, in a conspicuous place on the land embraced in such plat previous to the filing of the application for a patent, and shall file an affidavit of at least two persons that such notice has been duly

1 This chapter only treats the subject in its general aspect; the reader should also consult the different sub-titles of the next chapter.

2 This is applicable to placer patents as well as to lodes. N. Pac. Ry. Co. v. Cannon, 54 Fed. 252.

posted, and shall file a copy of the notice in such land office, and shall thereupon be entitled to a patent for the land, in the manner following: The register of the land office, upon the filing of such application, plat, field-notes, notices, and affidavits, shall publish a notice that such application has been made, for the period of sixty days, in a newspaper to be by him designated as published nearest to such claim; and he shall also post such notice in his office for the same period. The claimant at the time of filing this application, or at any time thereafter, within the sixty days of publication, shall file with the register a certificate of the United States surveyor-general that five hundred dollars' worth of labor has been expended or improvements made upon the claim by himself or grantors; that the plat is correct, with such further description by such reference to natural objects or permanent monuments as shall identify the claim, and furnish an accurate description, to be incorporated in the patent. At the expiration of the sixty days of publication the claimant shall file his affidadavit, showing that the plat and notice have been posted in a conspicuous place on the claim during such period of publication. If no adverse claim shall have been filed with the register and the receiver of the proper land office at the expiration of the sixty days of publication, it shall be assumed that the applicant is entitled to a patent, upon the payment to the proper officer of five dollars per acre, and that no adverse claim exists; and thereafter no objection from third parties to the issuance of a patent shall be heard, except it be shown that the applicant has failed to comply with the terms of this chapter."

It is thus seen that the qualifications of the applicant are that he must be a person, association, or corporation authorized by the act of Congress to locate a claim; the claim must have been regularly and lawfully located, the possessory title kept alive in the manner required by the Revised Statutes, and the applicant or those in his chain of title must have put upon the claim, work or improvements of the value of $500. These requirements have, with the exception of the last, been sufficiently treated in the foregoing pages.

A. Expenditure.

Rev. Stats. 2325 provides that "the claimant, at the time of filing this application, or at any time thereafter within the sixty

days of publication, shall file with the register a certificate of the United States surveyor-general, that five hundred dollars' worth of labor has been expended or improvements made upon the claim by himself or grantors." This provision is not in lieu of the requirement of Rev. Stats. 2324 as to the performance of annual work, although that may be estimated in this expenditure. Proof of that performance must be made as a part of the "compliance with the terms of this chapter." But in addition the surveyorgeneral's certificate must be obtained.'

The expenditure of $500 must be made upon or for the claim for which application is made. If the claim consist of several locations, it is not necessary that $500 worth of improvement be put on each location. The improvements are of the same general nature as the annual work. They must be used in connection with, and must be essential to, the development of the claim. They may be outside of the claim, if used in connection with or made for the purpose of developing it. When the expenditure has been made on several claims, it cannot be counted for the benefit of one only, and the surveyor-general's certificate should show what part is exclusively credited to the claim for which patent is asked. When a series of contiguous claims are being developed by one general system, work done on one claim may be credited to all, if sufficient in amount.

The expenditure must be made by the applicant or his grantors, and consequently work done upon an original location cannot be counted in an application based on a relocation. Where, however, there is an amended location by which new ground is added, there need be no work done upon this, for the claim is an entirety, and if done on any part of the claim the expenditure is good.

Expenditure is unnecessary on a mill site connected with a lode, expenditure on the lode being sufficient to hold both. Work done in exploring for lodes may be included in the expenditure on an application for the ground as placer.

Where the applicant bases his right on the provisions of Rev. Stats. 2332, expenditure is unnecessary. It is only necessary to show that he worked the claim in accordance with the requirements of the local law.

1 See circular Dec. 14, 1885, 4 L. D. 374.

2 4 L. D. 374.

United States.

United States v. Iron Silver Min. Co., 128, 673 (1888), affirming 24 Fed. 568 (1885). An applicant for a placer patent proved that he had done $500 worth of work. Previous to his entering the land as a placer claim he had dug several prospect holes for the purpose of discovering veins or lodes, but without success. The expense of this work was included in the amount alleged to have been done on the placer grounds; and it was contended that no work done in an exploration for veins or lodes ought to count as work done on a placer claim. But the court held otherwise, saying that work done for the purpose of discovering mineral, whatever the particular form or character of the deposit which is the object of search, is within the spirit of the statute.

LAND OFFICE DECISIONS.

The law does not require an expenditure of $500 upon each location embraced in an application for a patent for a placer claim composed of several contiguous locations. But where there are several distinct and separate tracts embraced in one application, there must be an expenditure of $500 on each tract. Copp, 145 (1874). Good Return M.

Co., 4 L. D. 221 (1885).

Where a part of the ground embraced in the entry is entered by virtue of an assignment to the applicant by an adverse claimant, who has been successful in the courts, the applicant as to that portion of his claim stands in the place of his assignor, and must show $500 expenditure thereon. Jackson M. Co., 3 L. D. 149 (1884).

Several owners of divided or undivided interests in placer mining ground may unite as an unincorporated association in an application for a patent. It will be sufficient if they have jointly expended $500 thereon. Copp, 180 (1875).

An expenditure of more than $1,500 by the owners of an adjoining mine on the portion of a tunnel running through the premises embraced in an application for patent, under an agreement that the applicants were to have an interest in such tunnel, is considered an expenditure upon the claim applied for. Union Co.'s Mine, Copp, 218 (1877).

The construction of a tunnel by the owners of a claim through the ground of an adjoining claim, without any agreement with the owners of the latter, cannot be treated as expenditure on the latter. Headlight Lode, Copp, 259 (1879).

Any building, machinery, roadway, or other improvements, used in connection with and essential to the practical development of the surveyed claim will enter into and form a part of the expenditures for improvements, to which you are required to certify. Necessarily, however, improvements of the character indicated must be associated with actual excavations, such as cuts, tunnels, shafts, etc., so as to clearly show that they are intended for use in connection with the claims under consideration." Copp, 298 (1880).

Labor performed or improvements made by an original locator cannot be claimed as part of the expenditures necessary to entitle a relocator to patent. Copp, 300 (1881); id. 161 (1875).

The expenditure of $500 is not required where an applicant bases his

right to patent for a placer on the provisions of Rev. Stats. 2332, relating to the Statute of Limitations. Under that section it is only necessary that claimant should have worked his claim in accordance with the requirements of local laws. J. P. Sears, Copp, 312 (1881).

Where a special agent reports non-compliance with the mining law in the matter of expenditures, notice should be given the mining claimants that a hearing will be had, and the special agent should be directed to produce witnesses to sustain his report. F. L. Bush, 2 L. D. 788 (1884).

The allowance of an entry is erroneous where the applicants did not at the time of application, or within the period of publication, file the certificate of the surveyor-general showing the expenditure of $500 upon the claim. Little Pet Lode, 4 L. D. 17 (1885).

Expenditure required by law may be made outside the claim if upon roadways, tunnels, ditches, or other improvements, used or to be used for or in connection with the development of the mine. The certificate of the surveyor-general conforms substantially to the requirements of the law when it includes an open cut, a trail, and a wagon road, not entirely on the claim, and states that the cut was made in the rock to facilitate the extraction of ore, and that the trail and road were built to carry the ores to the applicant's smelter, and that they were not included in any improvements on any other claim. Emily Lode, 6 L. D, 220 (1887).

Where expenditure is made upon an improvement for the development of a group of claims, the full amount cannot be credited to one of the claims. Alice Edith Lode, 6 L. D. 711 (1888).

Work done on a ditch outside of a placer claim, and prior to the location thereof, cannot be accepted in proof of the required expenditure where it is apparent that such ditch was not made for the purpose of developing the claim. To allow claims upon which, as in this case, no work whatever has been done, and which are, and for an indefinite time may continue to be wholly unused for mining purposes, to be tacked on from time to time to improvements made long before their location, would open the door and let in the evil which the law was designed to remedy. This claim embraces all the land between "Texas Placer" and Fall River, and extends 250 feet beyond said river; no work had been done upon it, and it does not appear that mineral has been discovered on it. These facts clearly indicate that the claim was not located for placer mining thereon, but with a view to the ownership and control of the banks of the river which runs through the entire length of the claim parallel with and about 250 feet from its southern boundary. Trickey Placer, 7 L. D. 52 (1888).

In order that a ditch built across a claim may be considered as an improvement for purposes of application for patent, it must be shown that it was built for the purpose of developing the particular claim applied for. John Downs, 7 L. D. 71 (1888).

Where the application is made upon an amended location, it is not necessary that any improvements be made upon the part added by the amended location. The claim as amended is an entirety, and it is not necessary that the improvements be upon any particular part thereof. Lincoln Placer, 7 L. D. 81 (1888).

The cost of a survey, preliminary to the location of a ditch for the