Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

Mr. ATKISSON. My question to you is this. Were you aware of that statute when you filed this affidavit?

Mr. SCHAUSS. I was not aware of that particular statute.

Mr. ATKISSON. How long have you been in the mining business? Mr. SCHAUSS. Some 20 years.

Mr. ATKISSON. Some 20 years and you are not aware of the assessment requirement of Federal law?

Mr. SCHAUSS. I am aware of the fact that if you want to hold a claim and not have it so-called "jumped" and if you want absolute proof, then you have to do $100 worth of work. You have to make a mineral discovery among other things on that.

If you are going to go to 100-percent requirement on law, then there are not 50 claims in the State of Wyoming which are valid.

Mr. ATKISSON. That is one of the stories.

Mr. Moss. That is precisely what we want to find out. That is exactly what we want to find out. That is, how many are valid and whether there is an adherence to law or whether there is a tendency to make a mockery of the law.

Mr. ATKISSON. I will ask the staff to show you another proof of labor document.

Mr. Moss. Without objection, that will be inserted in the record at this point.

[The document referred to follows:]

[blocks in formation]

Before me, the subscriber, personally appeared RALPH SCHAUSS who, being duly sworn, ・・ says that assessment work for the current year on the hereinafter named unpatented lode mining claims has been done or has been started by Crazy Women Creek Mining Company or is now in the process of being done by said company and projected to continue until such time as may be required to complete the work. This assessment work may consist of drilling operations on the said claims; or coring; or photographic operations on drill cuttings or outcrops; or geophysical or geological operations; or expenditure of money by various means; or replacing or repairing posts or other markers on the property and all other related work. The claims to which the foregoing partains are located in Sweetwater County, Wyoming, and are described as follows:

BILL Claims, beginning with No. 2 and numbered rore or less consecutively through
No. 1100, and located in Sections Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, 20, 29, 30, 31 and
32, Ternship 24 North, Range 98 West; in Sections Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 17 and lô,
Toship 23 North, Range 98West; in Sections Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14 and 15, Township 23 North, Range 99kest; in Sections Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10,
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 33, 34 and 35, Township 24
North, Range 99 West X

[ocr errors]

JOE Claims, beginning with No. 1 and numbered more or less consecutively through
No. 430, and located in Sections Nos. 19, 20, 29, 30, 31 and 32, Township 25 North,
Rage 96West; in Sections Nos. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30,
Township 25 North, Range 97West; in Sections!llos. 6 and 7, Township 24 North,
Range 96 West and in Sections Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, Township 24 North,
Range 97 West.

[ocr errors]

Such assessment work is with the authorization of Ralph Schauss and Eugene Stevens,

owners of said claims, for the purpose of holding legal title to said claims.

Dated and signed this 24th day of August, 1974.
74 st a

9-5.

NY

48

557 453860

PROOF OF LABOR

PAGE.

[ocr errors][merged small]

GREEN RIVER, WYO.

ALCERT B. VESCO, COUNTY CLäix

20.25

in ry presence and sworn to before me this day of August, 1974. ·

Regstekens

Ralph Schauss

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

Mr. ATKISSON. I will ask you to look at the signature at the bottom and ask you if you recognize it.

[Witness examines document and counsel examines document.] Mr. ATKISSON. It is very much like the other. Do you recognize it?

[No response.]

Mr. ATKISSON. This time, Mr. Schauss, you tell the people in Wyoming who may be looking for lands to prospect that you have engaged an outfit by the name of "Crazy Woman Creek Mining Co.'

It is now in the process of doing certain work or will start and that work may consist of various activities.

Of what does Crazy Woman Creek Mining Co. consist?

Mr. SCHAUSS. It is a privately held corporation. It was set up for a specific purpose.

Mr. ATKISSON. It is privately held by you; is that not correct? Mr. SCHAUSS. Yes.

Mr. ATKISSON. What were its assets? Another drilling rig?

Mr. SCHAUSS. Yes, the equipment.

Mr. ATKISSON. It was not, by any chance, the same drilling rig that was owned by Whiskey Gap; was it?

Mr. SCHAUSS. It had another type, actually, of drilling stuff. Mr. ATKISSON. In this affidavit, Mr. Schauss, you say that:

Work has been done or has been started by Crazy Woman Creek Mining Company or it is now in the process of being done by said company and projected to continue until such time as may be required to complete this work.

This affidavit was recorded on the same day, September 5, 1974. Has this work referred to in this affidavit been completed?

Mr. SCHAUSS. Has the work been fully completed?

Mr. ATKISSON. It refers specifically to the required assessment work. That means that under Federal law you are referring to the annual assessment work.

Was the annual assessment work required by Federal law performed for the year ending September 1974?

Mr. SCHAUSS. I spent many days on these claims doing the work. Mr. ATKISSON. Was $100 per claim done in that year?

Mr. SCHAUSS. What would you value my time as?

Mr. Moss. The questions are going to be asked by counsel. They can be asked without the Chair having to be too insistent. But they will be asked.

You will not undertake the role of interrogator in this inquiry. You had better settle that right now.

Mr. SCHAUSS. I do not want to make misleading statements. Mr. Moss. You are going to respond to these questions. If I wanted him on the witness stand, then I would put him where you are and I would swear him in. I have not elected to do that. Mr. ATKISSON. Perhaps we can settle this by my asking you, Mr. Schauss, how do you value your time? How much would you assign yourself?

Mr. Moss. Let us not get into that field.

The question unanswered on this hearing record is very simple. On the date that this proof of labor was filed, had the assessment work been done?

This is correct; is it not?

Mr. ATKISSON. The affidavit, Mr. Chairman, does not say that it has been done. It says "it has been done or has been started or will be done."

I did ask you, Mr. Schauss, if it had been done on this date. Mr. Moss. That is the question that has yet to be answered. Had it been done on this date? That would be the fifth day of September 1974.

Mr. SCHAUSS. Of $100 per claim?

Mr. Moss. The assessment work that is represented under this proof of labor; is that correct?

Mr. ATKISSON. Yes.

Mr. Moss. Under the proof of labor, a copy of which has been supplied to you there at the witness table.

Had it been done on the date of this affidavit? All you have to give us is a yes or no answer. It had or it had not.

Mr. SCHAUSS. Generally work is done before this is filed.

Mr. ATKISSON. Had it been done in this case?

Mr. SCHAUSS. Of $100 per claim?

Mr. ATKISSON. However you define it.

Mr. Moss. I will get your attention somehow. You are going to answer it yes or no. That is all you have to answer. That is all we require. On this date, had it been done?

Mr. SCHAUSS. $100 per claim---

Mr. Moss. Had the work represented here been done?
Mr. SCHAUSS. The work I said was done here was done.
Mr. Moss. Completed?

Mr. SCHAUSS. $100 per claim in your mind had not been done. Mr. ATKISSON. However you define the required assessment work-forget $100. Had it been done on this date?

Mr. SCHAUSs. I had done a certain amount of this work that was said in this affidavit; yes.

Mr. Moss. I want to know-counsel, you might advise him rather carefully. I am being rather patient with him.

[Conversation between witness and counsel.]

Mr. SCHAUSS. The answer is no.

Mr. Moss. The answer is no?

Mr. SCHAUSS. Yes; the answer is no.

Mr. ATKISSON. Since it all was not done in that year and since your affidavit refers to its having been started, and having been carried to conclusion in the future, was it ever done?

Mr. SCHAUSs. Yes.

Mr. ATKISSON. How long ago was it completed?

Mr. SCHAUSS. A couple of years before that.

Mr. ATKISSON. A couple of years before that? This affidavit was filed in September 1974. The first question was: Had you done the assessment work as of that date? The answer was no.

[ocr errors]

I am now asking when it was done.

Mr. SCHAUSS. A year or two before that. I cannot remember the exact date.

Mr. ATKISSON. Before when? You have just said that it was not done-

Mr. Moss. I think there is confusion here.

The question is: In view of the fact that it was not done by the fifth day of September of 1974-and you have already testified to

that by what date was it done? You answered: "A year or so before." That would mean before 1974.

I do not think you intended that; did you? Are you talking about a year or so before now or before then or what? We have to have the record clear.

Mr. SCHAUSS. Before then, they had been leased to Kerr-McGee. There had been a considerable amount of work.

Mr. ATKISSON. Who filed the assessment affidavit for the work Kerr-McGee did?

Mr. SCHAUSS. Kerr-McGee told me of the work and the drilling. They returned the claims and I filed the assessment.

Mr. ATKISSON. Mr. Schauss, I will have the staff show you a third proof of labor.

Mr. Moss. Without objection, that will be placed in the record at this point.

[The document referred to follows:]

99-374 O-78-5

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »