Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1919 Page: 56
This report is part of the collection entitled: Technical Report Archive and Image Library and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
MINING DECISIONS, MAY-AUGUST, 1919.
FORFEITURE.
PROOF ON RELOCATION-BURDEN.
Where a mining location was nade upon ground alleged to be
forfeited for failure to perform the annual assessment work or to
make the required improvements, the burden of proving such for-
feiture was upon the relocator.
Copper State Min. Co. v. Kidder, Ariz. -, 179 Pacific 641, p. 646.
ABANDONMENT.
PROOF ON RELOCATION.
A relocator attempting a relocation upon ground previously
located has the burden of proving that the original location had been
abandoned.
Copper State Min. Co. v. Kidder, Ariz. -, 179 Pacific 641, p. 646.
RELOCATION.
EXISTING VALID LOCATION--GROUND WITHDRAWN.
An attempted relocation of a mining claim upon a valid existing
location is wholly void for the purpose of founding any right or
claim to the ground. Ground withdrawn from the public domain
by prior valid and subsisting location is not subject to relocation.
Hagan v. Dutton, A---riz. --, 181 Pacific 578, Ip. 582.
ADOPTION OF MONUMENTS.
A person intending to relocate certain mining ground erected
discovery monuments on an existing mining claim with the consent
or without objection of the then owner. Such monuments could be
legally adopted on a subsequent relocation of the claim, although
the monuments were built at a time when the ground was not open
to location. The rule is that discovery monuments existing on the
ground at the time of the location may be adopted by a relocator,
either by rebuilding partially existing monuments or availing him-
self of existing monuments by using them, and this is a compliance
with the law, and the use of such monuments for the purpose of
marking the boundaries of a claim is a sufficient compliance with the
statute and creates a valid relocation on the performance of other
requirements.
Hagan v. Dutton, Ariz. -, 181 Pacific 578, p. 582.
ABANDONMENT OR FORFEITURE---BURDEN OF PROOF.
Where a mining location is made upon ground as abandoned, or
forfeited, for failure to do the annual work or make the requiredim-
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Thompson, J. W. Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1919, report, 1920; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc12376/m1/78/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.