Mr. wlLLlAMS. I do not intend to pro tract this discussion, and I concur in what has just been said by the Senfrom Indiana. I acknowledge that it is necessary that the agricultural lands should be segregated from the mineral lands of the country; but that does not necessarily involve the survey and sale of those lands that are acknowledged to be mineral lands gold and silver bearing lands. I admit, too, that it would be desirable if titles could be obtained to these mining claims, as titles can be obtained to the agricultural portion of the country; but I insist that it is impracticable at the present time to obtain such titles, because complicated interests have arisen in the mineral regions which will prevent the acquisition of such titles without great injustice to some portions of the community. The writer of the letter which I read was misunderstood by the Senfrom California. He said that Arizona. Nevada, and NewMexico Would substantially be of little value if it were not for the mining interests of those countries: and I suppose upon that point there can be little or no question. I thin that the point. made by the writer of that letter against this bill is well taken, and it is impossible for me to see how this bill does provide for tunnel companies in the mineral region or how the interests of such companies are protected by its provisions. The bill provides in section 4 "that no location hereafter made shall exceed 300 feet in length along the vein for each location. with an additional claim for discovery to the discoverer, with the right to follow such vein to any depth, with all its dips, variations, and angles. together mth a, reasonable quantity of surface for the convenient working of the same, as fixed by local rules.” Ifa tunnel is started on the side of a mountain with a vein of mineral running into it or for the purpose of striking blind lodes, under this bill the person who commences that tunnel must take a claim of300 feet in extent at the mouth of this tunnel; and now I should like to know whether he can go be and the boundary of the surface claim which he takes in prosecuting work upon that tunnel. Suppose he takes a claim of 300 feet in extent and another man takes an adjoining claim of 300 feet in extent in the direction in which the tunnel runs, car. the 1st man by means of that tunnel not only go through his own claim of 300 feet, but on through the adjoining claim of 300 feet and go into that mountain as far as it may be profitable for him to follow a lode or make a tunnel? If that is the provision of the bill, this section does not mean anything when it says “that no location hereafter made shall exceed 300 feet in length along the vein for each locator.”