Hermocilla v. Hubbell

Citations

• 89 Cal. 5
• 26 P. 611
• 1891 Cal. LEXIS 756

Syllabus

<p>State School Lands—Congressional Grant — Mineral Lands. —The grant of the sixteenth and thirty-sixth sections of public land to the state, by the act of Congress of March 3, 1853, did not include lands known to be mineral at the date of the grant.</p> <p>Id. — Grant in Presentí—Mines Subsequently Abandoned — Title of State. — The grant of the sixteenth and thirty-sixth sections being a grant in prcesenti, if the land was known to be mineral in character at the time the grant was made, no title passed to the state, and the fact that the mines upon the lands were worked out and abandoned as unprofitable, after the grant was made, gives the state no title to them.</p> <p>Id. — Ejectment — State Patent — Collateral Attack — Rights of Mining Claimants — Privity with United States.—Defendants in possession of a sixteenth or thirty-sixth section, which was known to be mineral land prior to 1853, and who are holding it as mining claims under locations recently made in accordance with the law of Congress, and with the local rules and customs of miners, are in privity with the United States, and may attack a patent of the land from the state to the plaintiff, in an action of ejectment.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence — Value of Mining Claims.—Evidence is admissible in favor of such defendants as to the work done by them on their mining claims since the date of their location, for the purpose of showing that the land, which was known to be mineral at the date of the grants, is still valuable for its minerals, and to overcome the theory of the plaintifls,. that they were of no value.</p>