In conclusion, I must hold that all of the land claimed for mining purposes, as to which testimony was taken at the hearing, is shown to be valuable for minerals. These claims are designated as follows: Mineral lots (as designated by the surveyor-general) Nos. 38, 76, 72, 45, 53, 71, 78, 97, 109, 86, 83, 75, and 107; placer claims 13, 14, and 15, above discovery, and 16, 13, and 24, below discovery, Lost Mining District; claims 16, 17, 18, and 19, above discovery, Whitewood Mining District; and claims Nos. 8, 9, and 10, on Whitewood creek in the northeastern portion of the town site of Deadwood. Concerning the three claims last named, I am unable to determine, from the testimony and map submitted, whether the same are situated in Lost or Whitewood Mining Districts. As to the land lying outside of the placer claims, there is not sufficient testimony to enable me to form an intelligent opinion as to its character. The adjacent land having been shown to be valuable for minerals strengthens the presumption which heretofore obtained as to the whole tract, and this outside land will still be regarded as mineral until the contrary be proven. The only testimony offered at the hearing relating to this portion of the town site was that of Mr. L. C. Miller, an insurance and mining broker, who claims to be an experienced placer miner. He says that there are no mining claims located outside of the gulches, and, from the character of the ground, it is well known that there is no pay in it. This, I must hold, is insufficient to rebut the presumed mineral character of the land, supported as that presumption is by the testimony which shows the adjoining ground to be valuable mineral land. A motion for a new hearing as to this doubtful portion will be entertained when the present town-site entry shall have been finally disposed of. The town site of Ingleside is included within the limits of Deadwood, and both entries must be held for cancellation. Give due notice hereof to all parties in interest, allow sixty days for appeal, and thereafter report promptly to this office. Very respectfully, J. M. ARMSTRONG, Acting Commissioner. No. 1. No. 2. No. 3. No. 4. CHAPTER VIII. TUNNEL LOCATIONS. a. How held and worked. b. Lodes discovered in tunnel to be staked off and located. a. Line of tunnel is the width thereof. b. Lodes discovered in tunnel, how located. Locators of tunnel rights expected to use reasonable diligence. b. Survey of a lode discovered in a tunnel not to be made until No. 5. Tunnel locations not patented. No. 1. 1. Tunnels, how held and worked. 2. Each lode discovered in the tunnel should be staked off and located as though discovered from the surface. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., October 12, 1878. DAVID HUNTER, Esq., Deadwood, Dakota. SIR: In reply to your letter of the thirtieth ultimo, asking my construction of the words "which were not previously known to exist," found in section 2323, Revised Statutes of the United States, and whether the owners of a tunnel are required to stake off and survey each and every lode, etc. I have to advise you that section 2323 contemplates the running of a tunnel "for the development of a vein or lode, or for the discovery of mines:" and the right of possession of all veins or lodes within three thousand feet from the face (or opening) of such tunnel, "on the line thereof not previously known to exist, discovered in such tunnel to the same extent as if discovered from the surface," is granted to the owner of such tunnel. The line of such tunnel is held to be the width thereof, and no more, and upon this line only is prospecting for blind lodes prohibited while the tunnel is in progress. The words "not previously known to exist," refer to undiscovered veins or lodes. How held. The proprietors of the tunnel are required to give proper notice of their tunnel location at the time they enter cover, by erecting a substantial post, board, or monument at the face or point of commencement thereof, upon which should be posted a good and sufficient notice, giving names of the tunnel proprietors; the actual or proposed course of the tunnel; the height and width thereof; the course and distance from such point of commencement to permanent, well-known objects in the vicinity by which to fix its locus. And at the time of posting said notice, the owners must establish the boundary lines of the tunnel by stakes or monuments placed along such lines at proper intervals to the terminus of the three thousand feet from the point of commencement within the lines so marked. Prospecting for lodes not previously known to exist is prohibited while work on the tunnel is being prosecuted with reasonable diligence. When a lode is struck, the surface ground which overlies the apex of the mine must be ascertained, and the claim then duly located as if discovered from the surface. Stake each lode. Manifestly the discoverer should ascertain what surface ground covers his lode, and for his own protection stake off his claim; and this is necessary on each lode discovered. The tunnel is a means of discovery. When the lode is discovered, the tunnel proprietor must proceed in locating his surface ground, staking off the same, posting notice, recording, etc., as if the mine were discovered from the surface. * * * Very respectfully, J. A. WILLIAMSON, Commissioner. No. 2. 1. The line of tunnel is construed to be the width thereof. 2. The fifteen hundred feet of a lode discovered by running a tunnel, may be located on one side of the point of discovery or intersection, or partly on one side and partly on the other. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., November 3, 1876. Register and Receiver, Central City, Col. GENTLEMEN: On the twenty-fourth of November, 1875, W. G. Bell, Samuel Cockran, and John W. Nicholson filed in your office an application for patent for fifteen hundred linear feet of the Slide Lode, Gold Hill Mining District, Boulder county, Colorado. The notice was published in the Weekly Sunshine Courier for the period of sixty days, to wit, from the fourth of December, 1875, to the twelfth of February, 1876, inclusive. The plat and notice were duly posted on the premises and in the Register's office. By an abstract of title on file from the office of the County Clerk of Boulder county, Col., it is shown that said lode was discovered on the twenty-sixth of July, 1875, located July thirtieth, and recorded the thirty-first of July, 1875. It is also shown that said applicants have record title to the whole of said location. The applicants have shown compliance with the law. On the twentieth of January, 1876, the Corning Tunnel, Mining, and Reduction Company, by its president, Frederick A. Squires, filed an adverse claim against said application. In his sworn statement, Mr. Squires alleges that he is the president of said company; that said Slide lode is within the location of a tunnel site claimed by said company; that said Slide lode is a blind lode, and was discovered subsequent to the location of said tunnel site; that said tunnel site was located in accordance with the mining act of May 10, 1872, and upon which said company has expended a large amount of money; that the rights of said company were acquired long prior to those of said applicants. By a copy of the location notice it appears that George. C. Corning and three others, on the eighteenth of September, 1872, located and recorded said tunnel site, and on the fourteenth of July, 1873, made record of a second location of said premises dated July 9, 1873. In this second location the tunnel is described as seven feet high, six feet wide, and one hundred and thirty feet in length. It is also shown that said company has the record title to said tunnel site and location. The applicants for patent have filed the sworn statement of John J. Scholes, Thomas Cryder, Daniel Drummond, Jehiel Franklin, Smith E. Stevens, and Burrel McPherson. In his sworn statement Mr. Scholes alleges that he was the discoverer of said Slide lode; that he "was led to dig for and to discover said lode by the indications and out-croppings of the said lode on the surface; that they were very distinct and marked; that it was no blind lode in any sense of the word; that it showed very plainly. * * * That at the time of the application for the patent there was a tunnel run in on the lode fifty feet, and a shaft sunk on said lode at least fifty feet, and other outside work done * * of a total value of at least two thousand dollars." * In his sworn statement, Cryder alleges that he is well acquainted with the Slide lode; that he saw the Slide lode about a month after its discovery, and very frequently since; that it is no blind lode, but was discovered from the surface; "that the outcroppings on said lode are quite distinct and marked, and that good ore was obtained at the immediate surface." Drummond, in his sworn statement, states that he is well acquainted with the Slide Lode; that the croppings on said lode "are visible on the surface-situated in line; that there are several prospect holes on the said lode, and the aforesaid croppings are on a line between these prospect holes on the said lode; should say emphatically that the said Slide Lode was not a blind lode, and that it was discovered from the surface." Franklin, in his sworn statement, alleges that he is a practical miner and has been engaged in the business many years; that he was at the said Slide Lode within a week. after its discovery, and a great many times since. "That the outcroppings on said lode are so evident as to justify any one in digging for said lode; that it is not a blind lode, and that it was discovered from the surface." McPherson, in his sworn statement, alleges that he is well acqauinted with said Slide Lode; that "he knows that the said Slide Lode is not what is called a blind lode, because of the croppings of said lode plainly appearing on the surface, and of its also being discovered from the surface." Stevens, in his sworn statement, corroborates the statements above referred to, to the effect that the surface indications and outcroppings conclusively demonstrate the fact that said lode is not a blind lode. The fourth section of the mining act of May 10, 1872— |