Gird v. California Oil Co.

• Citation: 60 F. 531
• Decision Date: 26 February 1894
• Docket Number: 302.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
• Parties: GIRD et al. v. CALIFORNIA OIL CO.

60 F. 531

GIRD et al. v. CALIFORNIA OIL CO.

No. 302.

United States Circuit Court, S.D. California.

February 26, 1894

Minor &amp Woodward and Edward Lynch, for plaintiffs.

John D Pope, for defendant.

ROSS District Judge.

The record in this case is a very voluminous one, and has been carefully examined and considered. The premises in controversy are oil-bearing lands, the government title to which, under existing laws, can alone be acquired pursuant to the provisions of the mining laws relating to placer claims. The defendant, California Oil Company, claiming to be the owner of a placer mining location called the 'Razzle Dazzle,' made application to the register and receiver of the United States land office at Los Angeles, in which district the land is situated, for a patent, against the issuance of which the plaintiffs, Richard Gird and J. C Udall, filed a protest in writing, claiming that 17 5-10 acres of the Razzle Dazzle location are embraced by two previous mining locations, called, respectively, the 'Whale Oil' and 'Intervenor No. 3,' of which they are the owners; and thereupon, within the time prescribed by section 2326 of the Revised Statutes, and pursuant to its provisions, the contestants commenced the present action in the superior court of Ventura county, of this state, to determine the conflicting claims of the respective parties to the disputed premises, from which court the action was, on motion of the defendants, transferred to this court. The proceedings here are purely statutory, and but a continuation of the contest that arose in the land office (Wolverton v. Nichols, 119 U.S. 488, 7 S.Ct. 289; Doe v. Mining Co., 43 F. 219); and the object of the action being the determination of the question which, if either, of the applicants is entitled to receive the government title to the disputed premises, each of the parties is necessarily an actor, and must establish his claim by proof.

The ground in controversy is situate in the county of Ventura, and within the Little Sespe petroleum mining district. That district was not organized until after the passage of the act of congress of May 10, 1872, which provides, among other things, as follows:

'The miners of each mining district may make regulations not in conflict with the laws of the United States, or with the laws of the state or territory in which the district is situated, governing the location, manner of recording, amount of work necessary to hold possession of a mining claim, subject to the following requirements: The location must be distinctly marked on the ground so that its boundaries can be readily traced. All records of mining claims hereafter made shall contain the name or names of the locators, the date of the location, and such a description of the claim or claims located by reference to some natural object or permanent monument as will identify the claim. On each claim located after the tenth of May, eighteen hundred and seventy-two, and until a patent has been issued therefor, not less than one hundred dollars worth of labor shall be performed or improvements made during each year. * * * But where such claims are held in common, such expenditure may be made upon any one claim; and upon a failure to comply with these conditions, the claim or mine upon which such failure occurred shall be open to relocation in the same manner as if no location of the same had ever been made, provided that the original locators, their heirs, assigns, or legal representatives, have not resumed work upon the claim after failure and before such location * * *.' Rev. St. § 2324.

Upon the organization of the Little Sespe petroleum mining district, which occurred April 27, 1878, J. C. Udall was elected recorder, and W. Roberts, J. F. Dye, and E. G. Sobey a road committee for the district. On May 4th following, by-laws were adopted, including, among others, the following:

'Section 1. Any one locating a claim or association of claims must show the notice duly posted on the claim, also the corners of the claim, to a witness, who must be a claim owner in the district, who will sign said notice, also a copy of the same to be given the recorder for recording. Sec. 2. No claim shall be recorded until at least three corners are set. When a corner of a claim is designated by a stake, it must be at least three feet high. Mounds of rock for the same purpose shall be two feet high. When a corner cannot be set, a witness post or mound must be set as near to it as possible on the line of the claim, and marked in same fashion as referred to in the location notice. Sec. 3. All claims must be recorded in the district within thirty days from the date of location. * * * Sec. 8. The necessary annual work to be done or expenses made on any claim in this district may, at the option of the claim owner or owners, be done on any road in the district designated by the road committee, the course of which shall be laid out by said committee. Sec. 9. A claim owner shall be entitled to work on any part of such road nearest to his own claim for which he is doing work. Sec. 10. Two members of the road committee at least must locate the course of roads. Their decision shall be final. Sec. 11. The time employed by the road committee laying out course of roads, or in showing claim owners where to work on the road, shall account for work done on any claim or claims of theirs they may designate to the recorder. * * * Sec. 13. The recorder shall file for record all claims duly certified to, and shall keep the same on file for the period of nineteen days, which shall be considered duly recorded unless set aside by satisfactory proof being shown of a prior location in accordance with these laws. At the expiration of nineteen days, he shall proceed to record the same on the presentation of the proper fee. Sec. 14. The recorder shall issue a certificate for the assessment or necessary annual work done on any claim or association of claims, on being presented, before the end of the year, with a certificate, signed by the president or two members of the road committee, that such work has been done by or for any claim owner on his or their claims, provided said claim is entered on the books of the district; otherwise, the claim shall be open to location. Sec. 15. The road on which the annual work for claims is to be done in the district commences at the mouth of the Little Sespe creek; thence by way of the Los Angeles claim, taking the most practical route to Tar creek. * * * Sec. 20. The recorder shall keep a book of record of claims, also a book of record of assessment work, which shall be open at all reasonable times for inspection, and at no time to be taken out of the district.'

At the fourth annual meeting of the claim owners of the district, held April 27, 1882, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:

'That all claims situated in this district that have been, or at any time hereafter shall have been, duly represented in accordance with the by-laws of this district for the period of four years from the date of their location, shall not be liable to relocation, or required to pay any further assessment under the laws of the district, subject only to the mineral law of the United States, passed May 10, 1872, and its amendments; this amendment to the laws of the district to take effect thirty days after its publication or posting in the local land office in which this district is situated.'

At the sixth annual meeting of the claim owners of the district, held April 28, 1884, it was----

'Voted, that the by-law requiring annual meetings be changed and amended to holding meetings once in four years, dating from the 1st of January next, requiring the next meeting to be held on the 1st day of January, 1889. (2) Voted, that a road overseer be appointed for the district, whose duty shall be to oversee and direct the making and repairing the roads in the district, as laid out and approved by the road committee. (3) Voted, that J. C. Udall be the recorder of the district for the above term of four years, and until his successor is duly qualified. (4) Voted, that J. F. Dye, H. Haines, and J. C. Udall be the road committee for the district for the above term of four years. (5) Voted, that J. C. Udall be the road overseer for the district for the term of four years. * * * (8) Voted, that for the next four years from date all of the claims situated above and between the Los Angeles claim and Squaw flat be held responsible to the overseer for their equal proportion of the expenses of making and maintaining the roads in that part of the district. (9) Voted, that J. C. Udall, the overseer, have power, and is hereby delegated the power, to sell any claim, or sufficient portion thereof, to the highest bidder, for cash, to pay said proportional expenses, 'the owner of which, after being duly notified by publication or otherwise, refusing to pay his or their proportions or shares of said road expenses.'

The rules so adopted by the miners of the district, except where in conflict with some law of the United States or of the state of California, being authorized and sanctioned by express statutory enactment, are, where in force, as valid and binding as if they were a part of the statute itself. It will be seen that by the first local rule respecting the location of claims the locator is required to post a notice on the claim, and to show it, together with the corners of the claim, to a witness, who is required to be a claim owner within the district, who must sign the notice as a witness, a copy of which is required to be given to the recorder for recordation. There is nothing in these requirements in conflict with any of the provisions of the statutes of the United States or of the state of...