tion 16 in each township, the tract reserved for the village of Galena, such other tracts as have been granted to individuals and the State of Illinois, and such reservations as the President shall deem necessary to retain for military posts, any law of Congress heretofore existing to the contrary notwithstanding. A. CONSTRUCTION-PRESIDENT'S POWER TO SELL LEAD MINES. B. LEAD MINES-SALE UNAUTHORIZED. A. CONSTRUCTION-PRESIDENT'S POWER TO SELL LEAD MINES. The reservations in the fourth section of this act of June 26, 1834, are limitations upon the President's authority to sell lands, and are not enlargements of his authority to sell lands, which by law, he was never authorized to sell, but which he has always been prohibited by law from selling, and which never have been sold except under the authority of a special statute, such as the act of March 3, 1829, which expressly authorizes the President to cause the reserve lead mines in the State of Missouri to be sold. United States v. Gear, 44 U. S. (3 How.) 120, p. 130. Under this section the President is authorized to offer for sale according to law, and in connection with other lands, any mineral lands situated within the several land districts created by the first section of the act, except where such mineral lands are expressly embraced by any of the exceptions in this section. Mineral lands in Wisconsin, In re, 3 Op. Atty. Genl. 277, p. 278. Section 4 of this act does not repeal section 5 of the act of March 3, 1807; and these acts do not present a case of conflict in the sense in which statutes do, when, from some expression in a later act it would appear that something was intended to be excepted from the force of the former statute, or to operate as a partial repeal of the older law. On this theory the statute of 1834 authorizing the sale of all lands within the district is held to mean lands in which there are, and in which there are not, minerals or lead mines; but the power given in the statute of 1834 to sell all lands can not be said to be a power to sell the lands expressly reserved by the act of 1807, neither can it be said to repeal such reservation. United States v. Gear, 44 U. S. (3 How.) 120, p. 131. This section includes all mineral tracts and necessary timberlands leased to smelters and others, and the President not only has power, but it is his duty, to reserve from sale the lands described in unexpired leases executed by him. Mineral lands in Wisconsin, In re, 3 Op. Atty. Genl. 277, p. 278. B. LEAD MINES-SALE UNAUTHORIZED. This section does not authorize the President to cause to be sold the public lands containing lead mines situated in the new land districts created by the act. United States v. Gear, 44 U. S. (3 How.) 120, p. 129. 9 STAT. 37, JULY 11, 1846. SALE OF LEAD MINES-ARKANSAS, ILLINOIS, IOWA, AND WISCONSIN. AN ACT To authorize the President to sell the reserved mineral lands in Illinois, Arkansas, Wisconsin, and Iowa supposed to contain lead ore. Be it enacted, etc., That the President be, and hereby is, authorized, as soon as practicable, to cause the reserve lead mines and contiguous lands in the State of Illinois and Arkansas, and Territories of Wiscon sin and Iowa, belonging to the United States, to be exposed to sale, in the same manner that other public lands are authorized by law to be sold, except as hereinafter provided. SEC. 2. That six months' notice of the times and places of said sales shall be given in such newspapers of general circulation, in such of the States as the President may think expedient, with a brief description of the mineral regions of the States of Illinois and Arkansas, and Territories of Wisconsin and Iowa, and of the lands to be offered for sale; showing the number and localities of the different mines now known, the probability of discovering others, the quality of the ore, the facilities of working it, the further facilities (if any) for manufactories of shot, sheet lead, and paints, and the means and expense of transporting the whole to the principal markets in the United States: Provided, That the said lands shall not be subject to the rights of preemption until after the same have been offered at public sale and subject to private entry. SEC. 3. That upon satisfactory proof, made to the register and receiver of the proper land office, that any tract or tracts of said lands contain a mine or mines of lead ore, actually discovered and being worked, then, and in that case, the same shall be sold in such legal subdivision or subdivisions as will include such mine or mines; and no bid shall be received therefor at a less rate than the sum of $2.50 per acre; and if such tract or tracts shall not be sold at such public sale, at such price, nor shall be entered at private sale within 12 months thereafter, then the same shall be subject to sale as other lands: Provided, That no legal subdivision of any of said lands upon which there may be an outstanding lease or leases from the Government of the United States, or their authorized agent, unexpired and undetermined, shall be sold until after the determination of such lease or leases by effluxion of time, voluntary surrender, or other legal extinguishment thereof. OIL AND PHOSPHATE LANDS. 29 STAT. 526, 2 SUPP. R. S. 549, FEBRUARY 11, 1897. OIL LANDS-LOCATION AS PLACER CLAIMS. AN ACT To authorize the entry and patenting of lands containing petroleum and other mineral oils under the placer mining laws of the United States. Be it enacted, etc., That any person authorized to enter lands under the mining laws of the United States may enter and obtain patent to lands containing petroleum or other mineral oils, and chiefly valuable therefor, under the provisions of the laws relating to placer mineral claims: Provided, That lands containing such petroleum or other mineral oils which have heretofore been filed upon, claimed, or improved as mineral, but not yet patented, may be held and patented under the provisions of this act the same as if such filing, claim, or improvement were subsequent to the date of the passage hereof. See section 2329 R. S., p. 507. A. OIL LANDS. 1. OIL LANDS LOCATED AS PLACER CLAIMS. 2. LOCATION OF OIL CLAIMS. a. LANDS CHIEFLY VALUABLE FOR OIL. c. DISCOVERY-INSUFFICIENCY. d. ASPHALTUM LOCATED AS OIL CLAIMS. NECESSARY. h. ACREAGE-ONE DISCOVERY. DISCOVERER -KNOWLEDGE 3. CONTEST WITH HOMESTEAD CLAIMANT. 4. HEARING TO DETERMINE CHARACTER OF LAND. 1. OIL LANDS LOCATED AS PLACER CLAIMS. See Stone lands, 27 Stat. 348, p. 1239. By this statute lands containing oil and chiefly valuable therefor may be entered and patented under the laws relating to placer mining claims. Chrisman v. Miller, 197 U. S. 313, p. 320. Cates v. Producers & Consumers Oil Co., 96 Fed. 7, p. 8. Butte Oil Co., In re, 40 L. D. 602. Dewey, In re, 9 C. L. O. 51. Weed v. Snook, 144 Cal. 439, p. 440. McLeMore v. Express Oil Co., 158 Cal. 559, p. 562. Bay v. Oklahoma Southern Gas etc. Min. Co., 13 Okla. 425, p. 429. The language of this act clearly indicates and the history of its enactment shows that lands containing petroleum or other mineral oils may be held and patented as placer mining claims. Union Oil Co., In re (on review), 25 L. D. 351, p. 354. Lands containing petroleum or other mineral oils or a deposit of natural gas may be located as placer claims under this statute. New England & Coalinga Oil Co. v. Congdon, 152 Cal. 211 p. 213. The location and sale of oil land is governed by the mineral laws of the United States applicable to the location and sale of placer mining claims; and a location made under the law is a mining claim before patent in every sense of the word, and for the purpose of a lien law it does not cease to be a mining claim because a patent transfers the fee to the locator. Berentz v. Belmont Oil Mining Co., 148 Cal. 577, p. 582. 2. LOCATION OF OIL CLAIMS. a. LANDS CHIEFLY VALUABLE FOR OIL. All lands containing petroleum are not subject to entry under the mineral laws, but only such as are "chiefly valuable therefor," and this is a subject of proof, and if oil is found in such limited quantities that it can not be worked at a profit, then such land can not be said to be chiefly valuable for oil. Bay v. Oklahoma Southern Gas, etc., Min. Co., 13 Okla. 425, p. 434. Persons claiming the right to enter or locate lands within the Indian reservations under this act must show that the land claimed contains petroleum or other mineral oils and is chiefly valuable therefor. Bay v. Oklahoma Southern Gas, etc., Min. Co., 13 Okla. 425, p. 433. b. DISCOVERY-WHAT CONSTITUTES. If a competent locator actually finds upon unappropriated public land petroleum in or upon the ground, situated so as to form a part of it, it is a sufficient discovery to justify the location under the statute without waiting to ascertain by exploration whether the ground contains such petroleum in sufficient quantities to pay; but mere indications of the existence of oil does not constitute such a discovery. Nevada Sierra Oil Co. v. Home Oil Co., 98 Fed. 673, p. 676. Lange v. Robinson, 148 Fed. 799, p. 803. Butte Oil Co., In re, 40 L. D. 602. See Smith v. Union Oil Co. (Cal.), 135 Pac. 966. While the statute requiring as a condition to a valid location a discovery of mineral within the limits of a claim, yet as between conflicting claimants to mineral lands it should receive a broad and liberal construction so as to protect bona fide locators who have really made a discovery of mineral, but the fact remains that mere indications of the existence of mineral or of oil is not the thing itself within the meaning of this statute. Nevada Sierra Oil Co. v. Home Oil Co., 98 Fed. 673, p. 676. This statute authorizes any person believing that public lands contain oil to lawfully enter thereon and make locations of 20-acre tracts and commence searching for such oil; but the discovery of mineral is essential for a valid location, and the locator while searching for oil or mineral is not a trespasser upon the public lands of the United States. Cosmos Exploration Co. v. Gray Eagle Oil Co., 112 Fed. 4, p. 14. In order to ascertain the oil or nonoil character of the land in a forest reserve or lieu selection, attention may be directed to fixing the exact location of oil wells upon adjacent lands, their depth, the characteristic strata encountered therein, as well as the quantity of oil produced, so that the geological conditions and relation of the rock in place to the known oil field may be intelligently considered. Hirshfeld v. Chrisman, 40 L. D. 112, p. 116. To constitute a discovery of oil or petroleum under this act the law requires something more than conjecture, hope, or even indications, and the geological formation with practical experience taken with surface indications, such as seepage of oil, may be sufficient to justify further expectations and hope that upon drilling a well oil may be discovered, but taken alone they do not amount to a discovery. Butte Oil Co., In re, 40 L. D. 602, p. 605. See Nevada Sierra Oil Co. v. Home Oil Co., 98 Fed. 673. Miller v. Chrisman, 140 Cal. 440. New England & Coalinga Oil Co. v. Congdon, 152 Cal. 211. Until some body or vein of oil, by drilling into the earth, has been discovered, from which oil can be brought to the surface, it is not sufficient to warrant a location under this statute. Bay v. Oklahoma Southern Gas, etc., Min. Co., 13 Okla. 425, p. 437. A locator who has entered upon public lands and discovered petroleum or other mineral oils thereon, and has shown the lands to be mineral in character is entitled to hold such location as against a nonmineral applicant who failed to show by proper averments that the lands were open to settlement. Riverside Oil Co. v. Hitchcock, 21 App. Cases, D. C. 252, p. 264; affirmed in 190 U.S. 316. A discovery of mineral under this act, as well as in placer mining claims, must be sufficient to justify a prudent mind in the expenditure of money and labor in exploitation for petroleum. Cook v. Johnson, 3 Alaska 506, p. 534. See Chrisman v. Miller, 197 U. S. 313. Lands containing petroleum can not be entered under this statute where oil was discovered after the lands became a part of the Glacier National Park. Butte Oil Co., In re, 40 L. D. 602, p. 606. C. DISCOVERY-INSUFFICIENCY. Mere indications of the presence of oil on a claim are not sufficient to answer the requirements of the statute, as an actual discovery of oil within the limits of the claim is an essential condition to the making of a valid location of any unappropriated lands of the United States. Nevada Sierra Oil Co. v. Home Oil Co., 98 Fed. 673, pp. 675, 679. See Colorado Coal, etc., Co. v. United States 123 U. S. 307. Waterloo Min. Co. v. Doe, 56 Fed. 685. Olive Land & Dev. Co. v. Olmstead, 103 Fed. 568, p. 572. Bay v. Oklahoma Southern Gas, etc., Min. Co., 13 Okla. 425, p. 437. New England & Coalinga Oil Co. v. Congdon, 152 Cal. 211, p. 213. A valid location can not be made upon oil lands merely from surface indications, though it would lead any petroleum expert to pronounce the same oil or petroleum territory and chiefly valuable therefor. Olive Land & Dev. Co. v. Olmstead, 103 Fed. 568, p. 572. Butte Oil Co., In re, 40 L. D. 602. New England & Coalinga Oil Co. v. Congdon, 152 Cal. 211, p. 213. |