| OCR Text |
Show LEGAL ASPECTS OF MINERAL RESOURCES EXPLOITATION 721 fixes the surface lines, although, of course, he may go beyond the side lines. If the claim is erroneously laid out crosswise on the vein, the locator is not entitled to the 200 feet along the vein even though that distance may be designated in the patent. Thus, surface boundary lines were apparently adjustable up to the time of patenting. So far as extralateral rights were concerned, difficulties were encountered in some cases where the end lines were not parallel, and it became necessary to determine the territorial ambit of the extra-lateral right. It appears that such rights are clearly restricted where they converge on the dip,153 but it remained undecided whether they were enlarged where they diverged in the direction of the dip. It should be noted that there was no requirement that the vein have an apex within the claim in order to assert extralateral rights. The Placer Act of 1870 Congressional interest in the mineral lands did not end with the enactment of the 1866 Act. From that time until 1870 there were a number of curious proposals in Congress. It was strange that an appropriation to set up the necessary land offices contemplated by the 1866 Act passed by only a narrow margin.154 There was much talk about the need for more scientific research on the gold and silver potential of the western mines. In December 1866, the Secretary of the Treasury had reported to Congress on gold production between 1848 and July 1, 1866.155 J. Ross Browne made a significant study of the mines for the Secretary of the Treasury. He was later succeeded by Rossiter W. Raymond whose popular report was ordered reprinted sev- 1M/d. 104 Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 2d Sess., 1742, 1983-84 (1867). 186 7d. App. 7. eral times by Congress.156 Senator Stewart of Nevada championed the establishment of a great mining university to be patterned after the mining colleges in Europe and to be located somewhere west of the Rockies on the Pacific railroad line.157 Stewart undoubtedly had Nevada in mind. Representative George Julian continued to rant about the way the 1866 Act was passed.158 An attempt to give the Secretary of the Treasury control over the gold, silver, and quicksilver mines was quickly rejected.159 There was even a proposal to establish a Federal corporation (to be known as the National Gold and Silver Mining Company of Washington, D.C.) to mine the Montana Territory.160 Sutro's special legislation came in for heated discussion,161 and the personal feud between Sutro and Stewart over Comstock Lode matters was aired in rather undignified fashion.162 When, in 1869, Julian pressed for repeal of the mining act,163 Sargent of California immediately countered with an amendment to it authorizing patenting of placer claims which had been omitted from the 1866 Act.164 The basic premise seemed to be JM Raymond, Mines of the West: Report to the Secretary of the Treasury (1869). "'Cong. Globe, 40th Cong., 2d Sess., 556 (1868). 188 7d. at 1712. 168 Id. at 2386. 1W)Conc. Globe, 40th Cong., 3d Sess., 320, 835 (1869). 181 See note 127, supra. 162 Cong. Globe, 41st Cong., 2d Sess., 3051-54 (1870) . With characteristic bluntness, Senator Stewart recited: "I have told the Senate what the Sutro tunnel is, and I give notice that it is going to take, with rapid progress, fifteen years; with ordinary progress thirty years; and with Sutro's progress, one hundred and fifty years ... I have given notice to those who own stock in New York, Boston, or elsewhere in these great mines, that they need not apprehend any danger from Sutro; that his boring is in Congress, and not in the rock. He bores Congress, and there is where he tunnels ... He has bored me for the last five years." 183 Cong. Globe, 41st Cong., 2d Sess., 102 (1869). 1MSee text following note 148, supra. |
