In Washington 1 it is provided that within sixty days from the date of discovery, the discoverer shall perform labor upon the location or claim in developing the same to an amount equivalent in the aggregate to at least ten dollars' worth of such labor for each twenty acres or fractional part thereof contained in such location or claim. To which is added this language: "Provided, "however, that nothing in this subdivision shall be held "to apply to lands located under the laws of the United "States as placer claims for the purpose of the develop"ment of petroleum and natural gas and other natural "oil products." The remaining states and territories have either passed no laws upon the subject or have repealed such as heretofore existed. It must be remembered that these requirements are not necessarily connected with the annual labor prescribed by the acts of congress. While this preliminary development work might possibly under certain circumstances be considered in estimating the value of the annual labor for the first year next succeeding the date of location, its requirement is one of the acts of location, and we think such legislation is clearly within the power of the states.2 ARTICLE V. THE SURFACE COVERED BY THE LOCATION— ITS FORM AND EXTENT. locations. § 447. Form and extent of placer § 448b. Surface conflicts with prior locations prior to Revised Statutes. 448. Form and extent under Revised Statutes. district 448a. Limitation as to size of § 449. Placer locations by corpora tions. 450. Locations by several persons in the interest of oneNumber of locations by an individual. 'Laws of 1899, p. 71, § 10, as amended-Laws of 1901, p. 292. Ante, § 344. 447. Form and extent of placer locations prior to Revised Statutes.-Previous to the act of July 9, 1870, commonly known as the "placer law," congress imposed no limitation to the area which might be included in the location of a placer claim. This, as well as every other thing relating to the acquisition and continued possession of mining claims, was determined by rules and regulations established by miners themselves.1 The size and shape varied according to the nature of the deposit, for in those days this class of claims embraced hydraulic "diggings," gulch or ravine claims, creek claims, and claims on bars and flats.2 Locations of these claims were made without regard to the lines of public surveys, as there were none. The placer law of 1870s provided for the patenting of placer claims under like circumstances and conditions as were provided by the lode law of 1866 for vein or lode claims. It was required, however, that where locations were made upon surveyed lands, the entry in its exterior limits was required to conform to the legal subdivisions of the public lands. For this purpose, it was provided that forty-acre tracts might be subdivided into areas of ten acres, but no location thereafter to be made was permitted to exceed one hundred and sixty acres for any one person or association of persons. Locations made prior to this act might, if located in conformity with local rules, be patented, whatever their form or area,1 and any number of contiguous claims, of any size, might be purchased, consolidated, and applied for as one entry.5 Under this act, any one person might, unless inhibited St. Louis Smelting Co. v. Kemp, 104 U. S. 636, 649. *Copp's Min. Dec. 40. St. Louis Smelting Co. v. Kemp, 104 U. S. 636, 651. by local rules, locate one hundred and sixty acres. An association of persons was limited to a like area. The general mining act of May 10, 1872,1 modified the original placer law by fixing the limit of twenty acres for each individual claimant. The limit which might be taken by an association of persons remained the same, as in this respect the act of 1870 was unrepealed.2 As to the form of the location, the later act provided that it should conform as near as practicable with the United States system of public land surveys and the rectangular subdivisions of such surveys; where it could not be conformed to legal subdivisions, it might be made the same as on unsurveyed lands. This was the state of the law when the federal statutes were revised. 448. Form and extent under Revised Statutes.The Revised Statutes, which embrace the laws of the United States general and permanent in their nature, in force on December 1, 1873, contain the following provisions as to form and extent of surface area: "2329. Claims usually called 'placers,' including "all forms of deposit, excepting veins of quartz, or "other rock in place, shall be subject to entry and patent, under like circumstances and conditions, and upon similar proceedings, as are provided for vein or "lode claims; but where the lands have been previously surveyed by the United States, the entry in its exte"rior limits shall conform to the legal subdivisions of "the public lands. "2330. Legal subdivisions of forty acres may be "subdivided into ten-acre tracts; and two or more per sons, or associations of persons, having contiguous "claims of any size, although such claims may be less "than ten acres each, may make joint entry thereof; "but no location of a placer claim, made after the 117 Stats. at Large, p. 91, § 10. Ante, § 72; St. Louis Smelting Co. v. Kemp, Fed. Cas. No. 12,239a, 21 Fed. Cas. 205. "ninth day of July, eighteen hundred and seventy, "shall exceed one hundred and sixty acres for any one person, or association of persons, which location "shall conform to the United States surveys. 66 66 "§ 2331. Where placer claims are upon surveyed lands, and conform to legal subdivisions, no further survey or plat shall be required, and all placer mining "claims located after the tenth day of May, eighteen "hundred and seventy-two, shall conform as near as "practicable with the United States system of public"land surveys, and the rectangular subdivisions of "such surveys, and no such location shall include more "than twenty acres for each individual claimant; but "where placer claims cannot be conformed to legal "subdivisions, survey and plat shall be made as on "unsurveyed lands; and where by the segregation of "mineral lands in any legal subdivision a quantity of "agricultural land less than forty acres remains, such "fractional portions of agricultural land may be "entered by any party qualified by law, for homestead "or pre-emption purposes." It will thus be observed: (1) That the unit or individual location is twenty acres; (2) That not more than one hundred and sixty acres may be embraced within one location by an association of persons, of which there must be at least eight; 1 (3) That the location, if upon surveyed lands, must conform as near as practicable to the lines of the public surveys. The land department was called upon to consider an entry of a location described as the "W. of lot 1." It was held: "In this case it is clear that as to the designated por"tions of lot 1 claimed under said entry, the same do "not conform to the rectangular or legal subdivisions "of the public land survey of the section or township in "which said lot is situated. While said lot 1 is in itself Kirk v. Meldrum, 28 Colo. 453, 65 Pac. 633. 66 a legal subdivision of said survey the department is "not aware of any rule or provision of law whereby "the subdivision of said lot into smaller legal subdi"visions under the system of public land surveys may "be recognized. It is therefore not only necessary that "an official survey of the land located and claimed. "should be made as required for the purpose of proper description and identification in the patent, but such survey appears to be plainly demanded by the statute "itself."1 As to whether it is practicable to make a location or survey conform to legal subdivisions is a matter which rests entirely with the land department. Commissioner McFarland held that the only construction of the language of the act, "as near as practicable,' which is consistent with the context of the act and the general intention of congress is, that placer locations upon surveyed lands must conform to the public surveys in all cases, except where this is rendered impossible by the previous appropriation or reservation of a portion of the legal subdivision of ten acres upon which the claim is situated. The location in this case was made in 1880, and covered the bed of Bear river, in California, for twelve thousand feet, following the meanderings of the river, and embraced a small quantity of surface ground along its banks. The entry was held for cancellation.2 This ruling of the commissioner, however, was reversed by Secretary Teller, who held that the placer law of 1870, which expressly required placer locations to conform to the lines of the public surveys, was unreasonable, a hardship, and in contravention of the established custom of the mining regions; therefore, it was modified by the act of May 10, 1872, so as to pro'Holmes Placer, 29 L. D. 368. See, also, Miller Placer, 30 L. D. 225; In re Knight, 30 L. D. 227; Mary Darling Placer, 31 L. D. 64. 10 Copp's L. O. 3. See, also, Copp's Min. Lands, 115. 'Rablin's Placer, 2 L. D. 764; Esperance M. Co., 10 Copp's L. O. 338. |