TIMBER UPON MINERAL LANDS 273 



excepted railroad corporations from its benefits, and the 

 third section declared that a violation of the provisions of 

 the act, or of any regulations prescribed by the Secretary 

 of the Interior in pursuance thereof, would be deemed a 

 misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding $500, to 

 which penalty might be added imprisonment for not over 

 six months. It was held that the rules and regulations 

 which were promulgated by the Department of the Interior 

 under authority of this act had the full force of law, and vio- 

 lations of the same subjected the offender to the penalties 

 prescribed in the act. l However, these regulations must 

 conform to the intent and purposes of the act authorizing 

 them, and they will not be enforced in such manner as to 

 either enlarge or restrict the use which was contemplated by 

 Congress. 2 One who attempts to justify the cutting of 

 timber from public lands under authority of this act must 

 show a reasonable compliance with all requirements of the 

 regulations, 3 but a failure to comply with details, through 

 inadvertance or misunderstanding, will not make liim liable 

 to exemplary damages as a wilful trespasser. 4 



Federal courts have held that the Secretary of the In- 

 terior had no authority under the act to prohibit the cutting 

 of timber from public mineral lands anywhere within a 

 state or territory for purposes of sale either as firewood in 

 households, mines, smelters, or as manufactured lumber, 

 provided the timber was not cut for exportation from the 

 state or territory. 5 However, there has never been a de- 



1. U. S. v. United Verde Copper Co., S Ariz. ISO, 71 Par. 954 (Alf'd in 190 U. S. 



207, 25 S. Ct. 222, 49 L. Ed. 449) ; U. S. v. Rossi, 133 Fed. 380, GO C. C. A. 442; 

 U. S. v. Miillan Fuel Co., 118 Fed. GO.'!; U. S. v. Price Trading Co., 109 Fed. 

 239, 48 C. C A. 331; U. S. v. Reder, 09 Fod. 905; I'. S. v. Lynde. 47 Fed. 297; 

 U. M. v. Williams et al., Mont. 1579. .Sc G. L. (). Circulars .Ian. IS. 1900, 29 

 L. D. 571 ; Mar. 10, 1909, 37 L. D. 492; Mar. 25, 1913, 42 L. 1). .'50. 



2. U. S. v. Vnited Vorclo Copper Co., 8 Ariz. ISO, 71 Par. 954 (Alf'd in 190 I". S. 207. 



25 S. Ct. 222, 49 L. Ed. 449); U. S. v Rossi, 133 Fed. :iSO, 00 C. C. A. 142. 

 Mullan Fuel Co., 118 Fed. 003; U. S. v. Copper Queen Consol. Min. Co. (Ariz. 

 1900) 00 Pac. SS5; U. S. v. Murphy, 32 Fed. 376; 



3. I". S. v. (iuinm 9 N. M. Oil, 58 Pac. 398; I*. S. v. Edgar, 1 10 Fed. 055; V. S. v. 



Basic Co., 121 Fed. 504, 57 C. C. A. 024; U. S. v. ('.entry, 1 19 Fed. 70, 55 C. C. A. 

 058; U. S. v. Mullan Fuel Co., 118 Fed. GG3; Stuhhs v. I". S. 1 1 1 Fed. 300, 104 

 Fed. 988, 44 C. C. A. 292; U. S. v. Price Trading Co.. 109 Fed. 239. IS C. C. A. 

 331: U. S. v. Reder (50 Fed. 905. 



4. Powers v. U. S., 119 Fed. 502, 50 C. C. A. 128. ,^,-c I". S. v. Rossi, 133 Fed. 380, 



(36 C. C. A. 442 (Timber cut for lawful purpose, afterwards used for different 

 purpose. ) 



5. U. S. v. Edgar, 140 Fed. 655; U. S. v. Thayer, 133 Fed. 1022; I'. S. v. Rossi. 133 



Fed. 380, 66 C. C. A. 442; U. S. v. Basic Co., 121 Fed. 504, 57 C. C. A. 024; 

 U. S. v. Price Trading Co., 109 Fed. 239, 48 C. C. A. 331: U. S. v. Lyndo, 47 

 Fed. 297; U. S. v. Richmond Min. Co., 40 Fed. 415; U. S. v. Edwards, 38 

 Fed. 812 U. S. v. Saucier, 5 N. M. 569, 25 Pac. 791. 



