192 THE USE BOOK APPENDIX.. 



The exclusive right to occupy and work a mineral claim, given to 

 the locator by the mining laws during his occupancy, does 

 not segregate "such claim from the public domain so as to ex- 

 clude such land from the operation of Rev. Stat., 2461, 20 

 Stat., 89, and 27 Stat., 348, making it a misdemeanor for any 

 person to cut timber on the public lands. (Teller v. United 

 States, 113 Fed. Rep., p. 273. Syllabus.) 



MINERAL LANDS WITHIN FOREST RESERVES. 



COAL LANDS. 



The words "the existing mining laws of the United States" 

 are to be construed, in legislative enactments, as embrac- 

 ing sections 2347 to 2352, inclusive, of the Revised Stat- 

 utes, commonly known as the "coal-land law," unless an 

 intention to the contrary is expressed. ('T. P. Crowder, 

 30 L. D., 92.) 



Coal lands are mineral lands within the meaning of the act of 

 June 4, 1897, and as such are subject to entry, when found 

 in forest reservations, the same as other mineral lands 

 within such reservations. (T. P. Crowder, 30 L. D., 92. ) 

 While the statute does not prescribe what is necessary to consti- 

 tute a discovery under the mining laws of the United States, 

 it is essential that it gives reasonable evidence of the fact either 

 that there is a vein or lode carrying precious minerals, or if it 

 be claimed as placer ground that it is valuable for such miri"- 

 in'g; and where there is not enough in what a locator claims 

 to have seen to justify a prudent person in the expenditure of 

 money and labor in exploitation, this court will not over- 

 throw a finding of the lower court that there was no discov- 

 ery. (Chrisman r. Miller, 197 U. S., p. 313. Syllabus.) 

 Should the question of the character of the land be properly pre- 

 sented at any time before patent, it would manifestly be the 

 duty of the [Interior] Department to ascertain whether or not 

 the land contain "valuable deposits," in an ex parte case or a 

 contest. The fact that a claim is contested would not change 

 the character ef the land to be taken under this law. In any 

 event it must contain " valuable deposits." 



The supreme court has not determined what amount of gold will 

 constitute "valuable deposits," and yet it has indicated in 

 U. S. v. Iron Silver Mining Company (128 U. S., 673) that the 

 deposit must be of substantial value. 

 The court says: 



"It is the policy of the Government to favor the develop- 

 ment of mines of gold and silver and other metals, and every 

 facility is afforded for that purpose; but it exacts a faithful 

 compliance with the conditions required. There must be a 

 discovery of mineral and a sufficient exploration of the ground 



