282 THE USE BOOK. 



* * * If the land contains gold or other valuable de- 

 posits in loose earth, sand, or gravel, which can be secured 

 with profit, that fact will satisfy the demand of the Gov- 

 ernment as to the character of the land as placer ground." 

 (Same.) 



An actual discovery of mineral is a prerequisite to the location 

 of a mining claim. (Etling et al. v. Potter, 17 L. D., 424. 

 Syllabus.) 



A certificate of the location of a mining claim can not be ac- 

 cepted as establishing the mineral character of a tract in 

 the absence of other 'evidence showing an actual discovery 

 of mineral. (Same.) 



The existence of gold in nonpaying quantities will not preclude 

 agricultural entry of the land. (Same.) 



Under the established rule that, when public land is sought to 

 be taken out of the category of agricultural lands, the evi- 

 dence of its mineral character should be reasonably clear, 

 the finding of colors of gold, even though fairly good pros- 

 pects of gold, in placer prospecting, is not sufficient to es- 

 tablish the mineral character of the ground and to sustain 

 a mineral location thereof as against a prior entry under 

 the homestead laws. (Steele v. Tanana Mines R. Co., 148 

 Fed. Rep., 678. Syllabus.) 



Some few pieces of asphaltum were found, but the principal re- 

 sult of what little prospecting and developing have been 

 done is the finding of " indications " of mineral, and it can 

 not be said that the indications found on these lands in 

 section 21 of oil and asphaltum demonstrate that there is 

 a permanent deposit of these minerals which will pay to 

 work. (Tulare Oil & Mining Co. v. Southern Pacific R. R. 

 Co., 29 L. D., 272.) 



Where mineral is found, and it appears that a person of ordi- 

 nary prudence would be justified in further expenditures 

 with a reasonable prospect of success in developing a mine, 

 the land may be properly regarded as mineral in character. 

 (Walker v. Southern Pacific R. R. Co., 24 L. D., 172. Syl- 

 labus.) 



Land must be held nonmineral where no discoveries of appreci- 

 able value have been made, and it does not appear that a 

 further expenditure would develop the presence of min- 

 erals in paying quantities. (Reed et al. v. Lavallee et al., 

 26 L. D., 100. Syllabus.) 



A single discovery is sufficient to authorize the location of a 

 placer claim, and may, in the absence of any claim or evi- 

 dence to the contrary, be accepted as establishing the min- 

 eral character of the entire claim sufficiently to justify the 

 patenting thereof, but such single discovery does not con- 



