37 STAT. (PART 2) p. 1346, AUGUST 1, 1912. OPERATION OF COAL MINE-GEBO MINE-OWL CREEK COAL COMPANY. JOINT RESOLUTION Authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to permit the continuation of coal-mining operations on certain lands in Wyoming. Resolved, etc., That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized to allow the Owl Creek Coal Company to continue the operation of the mine or mines upon any of the lands embraced in Lander, Wyoming, coal entries numbered 18 to 49, inclusive, until otherwise provided by law, upon such conditions and under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe. IV. SECTIONS RELATING TO MISCELLANEOUS MINING SUBJECTS. SECTION 355, REVISED STATUTES. No public money shall be expended upon any site or land purchased by the United States for the purposes of erecting thereon any armory, arsenal, fort, fortification, navy yard, customhouse, lighthouse, or other public building, of any kind whatever, until the written opinion of the Attorney General shall be had in favor of the validity of the title, nor until the consent of the legislature of the State in which the land or site may be, to such purchase, has been given. * A. LEASE OF LANDS TITLE. Under this section the Bureau of Mines is not authorized to accept short-term leases for the purpose of erecting even temporary structures thereon for mine rescue work without the opinion of the Attorney General as to the validity of the title. Mine Rescue Work, In re, 28 Op. Atty. Gen. 463, p. 464. SECTION 441 REVISED STATUTES. The Secretary of the Interior is charged with the supervision of public business relating to the following subjects: First. * * * Second. The public lands, including mines. * A. AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. A. AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. See sec. 2325, p. 289; 9 Stat. 395, p. 1038; 10 Stat. 308, p. 309, sec. 9, p. 1206. The Secretary of the Interior is charged with the supervision of the public business of the United States relating to public lands, including mines. Old Dominion Copper Min. etc., Co. v. Haverly, 11 Ariz. 241, p. 246. The powers of the Secretary of the Interior and the discretion vested in him are not to be exercised by favor or at will, but it is a legal discretion, and he must see that the law is complied with, and it is his duty to dispose of a case in accordance with law and justice and to see that none of the public domain is wasted or is disposed of to a party not entitled to it. United States v. Lavenson, 206 Fed. 755, p. 761. See Knight v. United States Land Association, 142 U. S. 161. United States v. Ballinger, 33 App. Cas. (D. C.) 211. B. RULES AND REGULATIONS REASONABLENESS. The rules adopted under this section with reference to the public lands, including mining lands, must be reasonable. Cosmos Exploration Co. v. Gray Eagle Oil Co., 104 Fed. 20, p. 43. See Cosmos Exploration Co. v. Gray Eagle Oil Co., 190 U. S. 301, p. 309. SECTION 452, REVISED STATUTES. The officers, clerks, and employees in the General Land Office are prohibited from directly or indirectly purchasing or becoming interested in the purchase of any of the public lands; and any person who violates this section shall forthwith be removed from his office. A. DEPUTY MINERAL SURVEYOR-INTEREST IN MINING CLAIM. A deputy mineral surveyor is an employee of the General Land Office within the meaning of the statute prohibiting officers, clerks, and employes in such office from directly or indirectly becoming interested in any of the public lands. Waskey v. Hammer, 223 U. S. 85, p. 93. Waskey v. Hammer, 170 Fed. 31, p. 36. Gowdy v. Kismet Gold Min. Co., 24 L. D. 191, p. 193. Neill, In re, 24 L. D. 393. Floyd v. Montgomery, 26 L. D. 122, p. 136. Maxwell, In re, 29 L. D. 76. Baltzell, In re, 29 L. D. 333. Powell, In re, 39 L. D. 177, p. 179. Saunders, In re, 40 L. D. 217. Bradford, In re, 36 L. D. 61, p. 63. Lavagnino v. Uhlig, 26 Utah 1. Contra: Hand v. Cook, 29 Nev. 518. Lock Lode, In re, 6 L. D. 105 (overruled). This section includes mineral surveyors and prohibits them from entering any of the public lands while they are such deputies and from directly or indirectly acquiring any interest in the purchase from the Government, including mining claims. Lavagnino v. Uhlig, 26 Utah 1, p. 16. A deputy mineral surveyor is by this section prohibited and is disqualified from becoming a purchaser of any public land though sale is made in a State different from the location or residence of such surveyor. United States v. Havenor, 209 Fed. 988, p. 990. A deputy surveyor general who has no interest, real or contingent, in a mining claim at the date of survey made by him or at the date of application for patent for the same is not within the spirit of this section of the statute. Floyd v. Montgomery, 26 L. D. 122. A mineral surveyor, while holding an appointment as such and whose duties as such are at least quasi official in character, has no right to become the owner of capital stock in a corporation which is the record claimant of unpatented placer claims, where he has actively participated in their subdivision into town lots and has also acted as agent of the company in negotiating the sale, as such a position is inconsistent with his duty generally under his appointment. Saunders, In re, 40 L. D. 217, p. 218. The supreme court of Nevada holds that a deputy mineral surveyor appointed by the surveyor general is not, like officers, clerks, and employees of the General Land Office, under this section, disqualified from purchasing or otherwise becoming interested in mining claims; but the land department and the United States Supreme Court have since held that a deputy mineral surveyor can not be interested in a mining claim. Hand v. Cook, 29 Nev. 518, p. 531. See Hastings, etc., R. Co. v. Whitney, 132 U. S. 357, p. 356. Grandy v. Bedell, 2 L. D. 314. Leffingwell, In re, 3 L. D. 139. A claim located by a deputy mineral surveyor is void, and such void claim can not be used as a basis of an adverse claim or to assert any right. Lockhart v. Farrell, 31 Utah 155, p. 160. Distinguishing Lavagnino v. Uhlig, 198 U. S. 443. SECTION 910, REVISED STATUTES. No possessory action between persons, in any court of the United States, for the recovery of any mining title, or for damages to any such title, shall be affected by the fact that the paramount title to the land in which such mines lie is in the United States; but each case shall be adjudged by the law of possession. (Act February 27, 1865, 13 Stat. 441.) A. CONSTRUCTION AND EFFECT OF SECTION. B. ACTIONS FOR POSSESSION QUESTIONS DETERMINED. A. CONSTRUCTION AND EFFECT OF SECTION. The effect of this section is to leave the United States entirely out of consideration in possessory actions for the recovery of mining claims, and neither party can take advantage of the paramount title of the United States either to sustain his own title or to defeat that of his adversary. Meydenbauer v. Stevens, 78 Fed. 787, p. 793. The possession contemplated by this section is that the prior location and occupation carry with them the prior and better right. Meydenbauer v. Stevens, 78 Fed. 787, p. 793. Under this statute no possessory action for the recovery of any mining title shall be affected by the fact that the paramount title to the land or to the claim in question is in the United States; but every case must be adjudged by the law of possession and this statute permits a person in possession of a mining claim in Alaska under a valid location to quiet the title against an adverse claimant. Fulkerson v. Chisna Min., etc., Co., 122 Fed. 782, p. 784. Boggs v. Merced Min. Co., 14 Cal. 279. Head v. Fordyce, 17 Cal. 149. Niagara Consol. Gold Min. Co. v. Bunker Hill Consol. Gold Min. Co., 59 Cal. 612. Wilson v. Triumph Consol. Min. Co., 19 Utah 66. Aurora Hill Min. Co. v. Eighty-Five Min. Co., 34 Fed. 515. The paramount title of the United States can not be affected by possessory actions between claimants for a mining claim under section 2326 R. S., for the reason that such actions are brought to establish the equitable title and are not affected by the act of March 3, 1881 (21 Stat. 505). Becharts v. Sizer, 12 C. L. O. 166, p. 167. Alice Placer v. Addie Stevens & Lazy Bill Lodes, 3 Brainard Leg. Prec. 242, p. 246. Actions between mineral claimants for the possession of a mining claim are not affected by the fact that the United States has the legal title to the land. South End Min. Co. v. Tinney, 22 Nev. 19, p. 69 (dissenting opinion). B. ACTIONS FOR POSSESSION QUESTIONS DETERMINED. In an action for possession only of a placer mining claim under this section, the parties can not have a judicial determination of the question as to which shall ultimately prevail in a contest for the title, and a court is only authorized to adjudicate the one question of the plaintiff's lawful right to the exclusive possession of the claim as described in his complaint. Bevis v. Markland, 130 Fed. 226, p. 227. Zerres v. Vanina, 134 Fed. 610, p. 613. Under the rule of this section a plaintiff in an action to recover possession of a placer mining claim can not prevail as against a defendant having prior possession under color of title, and who did not by actual force oust the complainant of his actual possession. Bevis v. Markland, 130 Fed. 226, p. 227. All controversies as to mining claims before patent must be determined by the law of possession under this section. O'Connell v. Pinnacle Gold Mines Co., 131 Fed. 106, p. 109. Ejectment will lie for a mining claim though the paramount title is in the United States. Davidson v. Calkins, 92 Fed. 230, p. 232. United States Min. Co. v. Lawson, 115 Fed. 1005, p. 1009. In a possessory action contemplated by this section no greater proof of a right to recover can be required in a State court than would be required in a court of the United States, unless made so by a statute of the State. Harris v. Kellogg, 117 Cal. 484, p. 499. See Haws v. Victoria Copper Min. Co., 160 U. S. 303, p. 317. SECTION 1889 REVISED STATUTES. The legislative assemblies of the several Territories shall not grant private charters or especial privileges, but they may, by general incorporation acts, permit persons to associate themselves together as bodies corporate for mining, manufacturing, and other industrial pursuits, or the construction or operation of railroads, wagon roads, irrigating ditches, and the colonization and improvement of lands in connection therewith, or for colleges, seminaries, churches, libraries, or any benevolent, charitable or scientific association. * SECTION 1889 R. S; AMENDED. AN ACT To prohibit to passage of local laws in the Territories. * That section 1889 R. S. be amended to read as follows: "SEC. 1889. The legislative assemblies of the several Territories shall not grant private charters or special privileges, but they may, by general incorporation acts, permit persons to associate themselves together as bodies corporate for mining, banking, manufacturing, or other industrial pursuits, or the construction and operation of railroads, wagon roads, canals, or irrigating ditches, and the colonization and improvement of lands in connection therewith, or for colleges, seminaries, churches, libraries, or any benevolent, charitable, or scientific association." (Act Mar. 3, 1885, 23 Stat. 348.) SEC. 5. That section 1889 R. S. be amended to read as follows: "SEC. 1889. The legislative assemblies of the several Territories shall not grant private charters or special privileges, but they may, by general incorporation acts, permit persons to associate |