on unsurveyed lands, the connection should be made with such corner in preference to a connection with a United States mineral monument. The connecting line must be surveyed by the deputy mineral surveyor at the time of his making the particular survey, and be made a part thereof.

46. Upon the approval of the survey of a mining claim made upon surveyed lands, the surveyor-general will prepare and transmit to the local land office and to this office a diagram tracing showing the portions of legal 40-acre subdivisions made fractional by reason of the mineral survey, designating each of such portions by the proper lot number, beginning with No. 1 in each section and giving the area of each lot.

47. The survey and plat of mineral claims, required by section 2325, Revised Statutes of the United States, to be filed in the proper land office, with application for patent, must be made subsequent to the recording of the location of the mine; and when the original location is made by survey of a United States deputy surveyor such location survey can not be substituted for that required by the statute, as above indicated.

48. The surveyor-general should derive his information upon which to base his certificate as to the value of labor expended or improvements made from his deputy who makes the actual survey and examination upon the premises, and such deputy should specify with particularity and full detail the character and extent of such improvements.

49. The following particulars should be observed in the survey of every mining claim: (1) The exterior boundaries of the claim should be represented on the plat of survey and in the field notes.

(2) The intersection of the lines of the survey with the lines of conflicting prior surveys should be noted in the field-notes and represented upon the plat.

(3) Conflicts with unsurveyed claims, where the applicant for survey does not claim the area in conflict, should be shown by actual survey.

(4) The total area of the claim embraced by

the exterior boundaries should be stated, and also the area in conflict with each intersecting survey, substantially as follows:

Total area of claim....

Area in conflict with survey No. 302.
Area in conflict with survey No. 918..
Area in conflict with Mountain Maid lode mining
claim, unsurveyed....

Acres.

1 56 2.33

flict with survey No. 302 and with the Mountain Maid lode claim might be excluded and that with survey No. 948 included.

(As amended Nov. 7, 1895.)

50. The rights granted to locators under section 2322, Revised Statutes, are restricted to such locations on veins, lodes, or ledges as may be "situated on the public domain." In applications for lode claims where the survey conflicts with a prior valid lode claim and the ground in conflict is excluded, the applicant not only has no right to the excluded ground, but he has no right to that portion of any vein or lode the top or apex of which lies within such excluded ground, unless his location was prior to May 10, 1872. His right to the lode claimed terminates where the lode, in its onward course or strike, intersects the exterior boundary of such excluded ground and passes within it. The end line of his survey should not, therefore, be estab lished beyond such intersection.

51. Where, however, the lode claim for which survey is being made was located prior to the conflicting claim, and such conflict is to be excluded, in order to include all ground not so excluded the end line of the survey may be established within the conflicting lode claim, but the line must be so run as not to extend any farther into such conflicting claim than may be necessary to make such end line parallel to the other end line and at the same time embrace the ground so held and claimed. The useless practice in such cases of extending both the side lines of a survey into the conflicting claim, and establishing an end line wholly within it, beyond a point necessary under the rule just stated, will be discontinued.

III. DECISIONS.

1. General.

1.48

It does not follow that because mining surveys are required to exhibit all conflicts with prior surveys the areas of conflict are to be excluded. The field-notes and plat are made a part of the application for patent, and care should be taken that the description does not inadvertently exclude portions intended to be retained. It is better that the application for patent should state the portions to be excluded in express terms. A survey executed as in the example given will enable the applicant for patent to exclude such conflicts as may seem desirable. For instance, the con

2. The Land Department has exclusive jurisdiction in the matter of the survey of public lands, and its decisions are unassailable in the courts except in a direct proceeding. Haydel v. Dufresne, 17 How. 23; Cragin v. Powell, 128 U. S. 691; Knight v. U. S. Land Ass'n, 142 U. S. 161.

4. The official survey of a Mexican grant after confirmation by Congress is conclusive when collaterally attacked. Colorado Fuel Co. v. Maxwell Land Grant Co., 43 Pac. Rep. 916 (Colo.).

5. The matter of making and correcting surveys of public land is under the charge of the General Land Office, but it may not so use its power as to deprive claimants of their rights. Cragin v. Powell, 128 U. S. 691.

6. Money deposited to cover cost of work in the United States Surveyor General's office on a mineral survey may not be repaid though unexpended, but may be applied on another survey if desired. Elijah M. Dunphy, 8 L. D.

102.

7. Certificates of deposit of money to pay office expenses of a Surveyor General in the matter of a mineral survey are not assignable, but if the survey for which the deposit is made is not executed, the depositor may apply the deposit on another survey. Com'r to G. W. Park, July 13, 1896.

8. The applicant for a mineral survey should be required to deposit only the sum necessary to defray expenses of work in the office of the United States Surveyor General, not for the work of the Deputy Surveyor, by whom the survey is to be made. G. B. Foote,

2 L. D. 773.

9. A deposit of $320 for the office work in connection with an application covering ten mineral locations and two mill sites is not an

unreasonable sum. Montana M. & Red. Co.,

16 C. L. O. 269.

10. Where an amendment of a mineral survey is of such character as will not require an entirely new plat and field notes, the charge for office work should not be as much as in case of an original survey. Com'r to Surveyor General of California, Jan. 2, 1892.

11. In making surveys, references should be made to known mines within or near the boundaries of the claims. Thor Mine, 5 C. L O. 51.

12. The fact that a mining survey conflicts with a prior survey does not prevent the applicant from including the conflicting area in

13. The survey of a mining claim must show the area of the conflict with every intersecting survey. Circular of Nov. 16, 1882, 1 L. D. 693.

14. In conflicting surveys of mining claims the subsequent plat of survey should show the conflict with prior surveys. Thor Mine, 5 C. L. O. 51.

15. A mineral survey should show conflicts with prior surveys. A certified copy of location notice should accompany the field notes. The Surveyor General should be satisfied that five hundred dollars' worth of improvements have been made. Com'r to Surveyor General of Montana. March 27,1880.

16. The plat of a lode mining claim must show all conflicts, and unless such conflicts are shown the plat should not be approved. Grand Dipper Lode, 10 C. L. O. 240.

17. Where surveys conflict, the plats and field notes should show the extent of such conflicts, etc. J. H. Russell Lode, 5 C. L

O. 18.

18. The fact that the survey of a mining claim fails to show conflict with another claim, the survey of which was actually later, but which was first approved, is not a ground for rejection of an application for patent for the claim. Big Flat Gravel M. Co. v. Big Flat Gold M. Co., 1 L. D. 562.

19. Applicants for mining patent are not bound to note conflicts with unofficial surveys on plat and field notes. Wisconsin M. Co. v. Cooper, 10 C. L. O. 69.

20. Where by error of the United States Deputy Mineral Surveyor the line connecting the survey of a mining claim with a corner of the public surveys or United States mineral monument is incorrectly given, an amended survey should be ordered and the entry referred to the Board of Equitable Adjudication. Walter C. Childs, 10 L. D. 173.

confirmation to the Board of Equitable Adju21. A mineral entry may be referred for

dication where the locus of the claim was not shown in the published notice by a line connecting the claim with the public surveys. Silver King Quartz Mine, 11 L. D. 234.

22. The published notice of application for a mineral patent is sufficiently definite as to showing the locus of the claim if it connects the same with the corner of a patented town

connected with a corner of a section of an unsubdivided township, if such corner is an exterior one, i. e., upon a township line, as in running the exterior line of a township the surveyor is required to set mile posts, thus fixing exterior section corners. John C. Hauck, 10 L. D. 391.

24. While paragraph 45 of the Mining Regulations directs that no line connecting the survey of the claim with a corner of the public surveys or United States mineral monument shall exceed two miles in length, a new connection will not be required if such line exceeds that length where the survey is connected with the official surveys of other mining claims. (In this case the connecting line was 13,414.7 feet in length.) Departmental decision of June 13, 1896, In re S. H. Standart. 25. If a mining claim is situated within the land of which a township survey has been approved, but no corner of the public survey can be found within two miles of the claim after diligent search, the claimant is not required to secure the restoration of the obliterated corners, but connection may be made with a United States mineral monument. Com'r to Surveyor General of Nevada, May 26, 1892, In re Sentinel Lode.

26. A connection of a mineral survey with a patented mining claim is not a connection with a public survey. Com'r to J. A. Robin son, April 23, 1891, In re Lake Mine.

27. Where a mining claim is not within two miles of a public survey corner or a United States mineral monument, such a monument should be established in the vicinity by the Deputy Surveyor at the expense of the claimant. Com'r to Surveryor General of South Dakota, March 10, 1893.

28. The line connecting a mineral survey with a public corner or a United States mineral monument must be actually run in the survey of the claim, not calculated through the connection of other surveys. Com'r to Surveyor General of Montana, Oct. 27, 1891, In re Ivanhoe Lode; To Surveyor General of

29. The official survey of a mining claim must be in accordance with the recorded notice of location made the basis of the Surveyor General's order authorizing the survey of the claim. Philip Dephanger, 1 L. D. 581; Rose

30. The survey of a mining claim must be made in accordance with the location made the basis of the order for the survey. If the location is amended after the issuance of such order, and the survey is made in accordance therewith, a resurvey will be required. Lincoln Placer, 7 L. D. 81; Sulphur Mine, 5 C. L. O. 100.

31. The survey must be based upon a location of which notice was recorded prior to issuance of the order for the survey. Com'r to Surveyor General of Idaho, Nov. 24, 1891.

32. An entry allowed upon a survey that did not follow the amended location should not be canceled, but a new survey should be made in conformity with said location. Lincoln Placer, 7 L. D. 81.

33. The location notice, application for patent and survey should agree in describing the same premises. Wandering Boy Lode, 2 C. L. O. 2.

34. The return of the Deputy must show the survey of a claim to be within the location upon which the order for the survey was based. Philip Dephanger, 1 L. D. 581; Lincoln Placer, 7 L. D. 81.

35. Where the record shows the survey of a mining claim to have been based upon an amended location made by a stranger in his own name, the applicant for patent may show by affidavits that such stranger, in making the amended location, acted as the agent of the applicant. Gray Copper Lode, 18 L. D. 536.

36. As to the manner of establishing mineral (or locating) monuments, see Survey Manual, p. 152; Frank P. Cavanah, 8 C. L. O. 5; Com'r to Surveyor General of Idaho, March 27, 1880.

37. All surveys of mining claims must be connected either with a corner of the public surveys (if there be one within two miles) or a United States mineral monument. George S. Dodge, 6 C. L. O. 122; Departmental decision, June 18, 1896, in case of Sulphur Springs Quicksilver Mine; Senator Mill Site, 7 L. D. 475.

39. Notice of application for a mineral patent must give the course and length of the line connecting the claim with a corner of the public surveys or with a mineral monument. It is not sufficient to connect the claim with the corner of the survey of an unpatented mining claim. Emperor Wilhelm Lode, 5 L. D. 685.

40. Where the notices of application for patent were sufficiently definite in the matter of description of the claim to cause an adverse claim to be filed, republication of notice will not be required because of an error of ten degrees in the course and three chains in the length of the line connecting the survey of the claim with a corner of the public surveys, but the entry may be referred to the Board of Equitable Adjudication. Walter C. Childs, 10 L. D. 173.

41. Republication will be required if the locus of the claim applied for is not shown in the published notice by the connection given in the official survey. (The published notice gave the bearing from corner No. 2 of the

claim to a United States mineral monument as N. 62° E., 532 feet, while the true course was N. 6° E.) Hoffman v. Venard, 14 L. D. 45.

42. The published notice of application for a mineral patent must follow the survey in giving a connection between the claim and a United States mineral monument or corner of the public survey, and republication will be required if the locus of the claim is not so fixed in the published notice. Broad Ax Lode, 22 L. D. 244.

43. A notice of application for a mineral patent that fails to connect the claim with the public surveys or a United States mineral monument is insufficient, and an entry allowed on such notice may not be referred to the Board of Equitable Adjudication in the presence of a protest of persons alleging adverse claims, but republication of notice will be required. Nil Desperandum Placer, 10 L. D.

198.

45. Where by error in the survey of a mining claim the line connecting the claim was so erroneous as to place the claim about half a mile from its true position, it was held that the mineral entry should be referred to the Board of Equitable Adjudication without requiring republication of notice of application. Buena Vista Lode, 6 L. D. 646; Veta Grande Lode, 6 L. D. 718.

46. Any defect in the published notice of application for a mineral patent is chargeable to the Register, whose duty it is to prepare and publish the same, and an entry may be referred to the Board of Equitable Adjudication where such notice is defective in failing to connect the claim with a corner of the public surveys or a United States mineral monument. Mimbres M. Co., 8 L. D. 457.

47. A new patent will be issued in lieu of one issued upon an incorrect survey only after new notice by publication and posting, correctly describing the claim. United States v. Rumsey, 22 L. D. 101.

48. Where a lode claim and a mill site appurtenant thereto are embraced in one survey and in one application for patent, the survey of the mill site need not be connected with a corner of the public surveys or a United States mineral monument, if connected with the survey of the lode claim, and in such a case it is not incumbent upon the claimant to show an expenditure of $500 upon the mill site, its use or occupancy for mining or milling purposes in connection with the lode claim being sufficient to entitle claimant to ask for a patent therefor. Alta Mill Site, 8

L. D. 195.

49. Paragraphs 50 and 51 of the Mining Regulations were originally published in a circular dated December 4, 1884, 3 L. D. 540. (See page 138 of this book.) By circular of May 11, 1885, it was ordered that if the survey was made prior to the issuance of said circular of December 4, 1884, and was free from objections under the former practice, an amended survey to comply with the requirements of said circular need not be made. 12 C. L. O. 51. See to same effect, Range View