Skip to main content
Supreme Court· 4/19/1920

Cameron v. United States

Citations

  • 252 U.S. 450
  • 40 S. Ct. 410
  • 64 L. Ed. 659
  • 1920 U.S. LEXIS 1523

Syllabus

<p>The inclusion of part of a national forest within a monument reserve' under the Act of June 8, 1906, c. 3060, 34 Stat. 225, by a proclamation of the President providing that both reservations shall stand as to the common area but that the'monument reserve shall be dominant, and saving valid claims theretofore acquired, withdraws ' such area, except as to such claims, from the operation of-the mineral land law. P. 454.</p> <p>The Grand Canyon of the Colorado, in Arizona, is an “object of scientifie interest,” within the meaning of the Act óf June 8,1906, supra, empowering the President to reserve such objects as “National Monuments.” • P. 455.</p> <p>Mineral character and an adequate discovery of mineral within the location are.essential'to the validity of a mining claim, and without these the locator has not the right of possession. P. 456.</p> <p>To bring a mining claim within an exception of “valid claims” in a proclamation establishing a monument reserve, the claim must be founded upon' an adequate discovery of mineral made before the reservation; á discovery made later can confer no rights upon the claimant. Id. ■</p> <p>To support a mining location the discovery must be such as to justify a person of ordinary prudence in the further expenditure of his time and means in an effort to develop a paying mine. P. 459.</p> <p>A decision of the Secretary of the Interior, made upon an application to patent a mining claim within a monument reserve, finding the land claimed not mineral in character and the location not supported by any discovery antedating the reservation, and therefore rejecting the' application and • adjudging the location invalid, is conclusive as to the invalidity of the claim in a suit subsequently brought by the Government to enjoin the claimant from occupying and using the land for his private purposes and thus obstructing its use by the public as a part of the reserve. Pp. 459, 464.</p> <p>A mining location which has not gone to patent is of no

Judges: Van Devanter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

152 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Cameron v. United States

32 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.