v0755-579

Document Title Page

/^

United States Circuit Court ot Appeals

For tlie Ninth Circuit

United States of America,

Appellant.

vs REPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANT

    1. Fickett,

Appellee.

ARGUMENT

It is, of course, conceded that a mining claim is not a

private land claim within the meaning of that expression

as used in Section 2412 Revised Statutes of the United

States, under which the prosecution in thi? case was initiated.

The appellee in his brief states that the language of the

indictment is somewhat anomalous, in that it is charged that

Fickett interrupted the survey of the public lands, which said

lands were, then and there, mining claims and were

claimed and oiined by a private corporation. The ques-

tipn is then asked: "Can it be that property that has been

granted by the United States and is owned in private is

public land?" It is perfectly apparent from the language

of this indictment, wherein it charges that the lands in

question were unpatented mining claims, that the govern-


archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs0755

Volume: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0755

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0755#page/n578/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

mining, land, lands, unpatented, title, public, patent, government, claims, survey, office, locator, fee, section, claimant

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

unpatented mining, public lands, mining claims, land office, section 2412, patented mining, paramount title, valid mining, un patented, revised statutes, mineral laws, public land, public domain, paramount proprietor, para mount

Document Status: UGLY