Mr. McGowan. There is one question that I would like to ask Mr. Van Doren before I leave this point, and that is with reference to the mineral entries as shown by the tabulation which he submitted yesterday as being upon the total area classified as mineral. The tabulation shows that the total area classified as mineral was 3,742,267.56 acres, and that the mineral entries thereon amounted to 65,155.47 acres. The question I would like to direct to Mr. Van Doren is this: As to whether or not the 65,155.47 acres of mineral entries were on only the odd sections or were they on the even and odd sections?

Mr. VAN DOREN. So far as possible, we have confined that to the odd sections, and to that extent this acreage, which goes down to 0.47 acre, is not absolutely accurate. We had to estimate in some few instances. Practically it is the odd sections only, but with that exception there is a slight difference.

Mr. McGOWAN. As I understand it, in the location of lode claims they do not conform to the rectangular surveys?

Mr. VAN DOREN. They do not.

Mr. McGowan. And so in an odd section here a lode claim might go "kitty-wampus" across the lines?

Mr. VAN DOREN. It might go into the adjoining even sections. Mr. McGowan. So that is only approximate, that 65,000 odd sections?

Mr. VAN DOREN. It is within a few acres of being correct.
Mr. McGOWAN. I think that is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McGowan, is it your opinion that we have in the record proof that the mineral classifications were fraudulent, or largely so?

Mr. McGoWAN. Well, I would say that there is proof in the record that the mineral classification, in part at least, was fraudulent, although I do not believe that proof is complete.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean evidence?

Mr. McGOWAN. I do not believe the evidence covers all of it, but as far as constructive fraud is concerned, I believe that in view of the statements of Mr. Schwartz and the testimony of Mr. McElroy and Mr. Woodward that even though there was not-the record is not complete with reference to being conclusive to show that the mineral examiners did not actually go upon all of this land—that it does show that the Northern Pacific knew the manner in which the classification was being made and that they permitted lands to be classified as mineral land without protest when in fact they must have known that a mineral classification on those lands would be an

erroneous one.

As far as the question of values is concerned

Mr. RAKER (interposing). Before you get to that, would you read the question of the chairman, please?

(The reporter read the question, as follows:)

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McGowan, is it your opinion that we have in the record proof that the mineral classifications were fraudulent, or largely so?

I ask at this time, Mr. Chairman, that the land department, the Department of the Interior, advise us what capacity and what authority was given Mr. Schwartz in his investigations upon which

which he made the report which was presented to the committee yesterday. You can furnish that, can you, Mr. Patterson?

Mr. PATTERSON. We will endeavor to furnish that, Judge. In fact, we are going to look that up in response to the suggestion yesterday as to what action was taken on that. It is rather an indefinite memorandum. As you will recall, it is not addressed to anyone, nor is it tied up with any matter that apparently was pending.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you let us know how he came to make that? Mr. PATTERSON. Yes; we will do that.

Mr. RAKER. Will you further look up and submit to the committee, if your department has any knowledge, as to where Mr. Schwartz is, as to whether the committee can have him appear, whether he is alive or not?

Mr. PATTERSON. We will be glad to do that.

Mr. McGowAN. May I make the observation in connection with the position of the chief of the field service that Mr. Schwartz occupied at the time he wrote this memorandum? As I understand it, the chief of the field service in the General Land Office is the man who has to do, who has charge of making all of the field investigations with reference to the activities under the General Land Office, where there are any questions arising as to compliance with the laws under which the claimants are seeking title. Is that correct?

Mr. PATTERSON. That is correct; and to make report thereon. That is why it seems rather peculiar that this report that is submitted makes no reference to any matter pending, nor is it connected in any way with any matter pending. But we will endeavor to clear that up and give the committee such information as we have.

Mr. McGoWAN. I think you will recall that Mr. Schwartz in his memorandum refers to a previous memorandum that he had prepared for the consideration of the Secretary of the Interior. Let me see if I can find that.

Mr. Schwartz in this memorandum of March 12, 1908, which I read yesterday, states this:

As I have stated in a memorandum to the honorable Secretary, it is my opinion that a large percentage of the classification is fraudulent within the definition of "fraud as given in the case of Lamb et al. v. Northern Pacific Railroad Company, reported in the Twenty-ninth Land Decisions, page 102.

So I take it from that that Mr. Schwartz was in communication with the Secretary of the Interior on the subject at that time, and I suggest that is possibly a lead as to where the connecting paper might be.

Mr. PATTERSON. I thought of that, Mr. McGowan. I noticed that when you read it yesterday. He did not give any date, but we will be very glad to give the committee all the information we can on it. Mr. RAKER. Mr. Chairman, in this connection may the General Land Office or the Department of the Interior furnish the committee with one of the satisfactions of the three mortgages not foreclosed in 1896-a copy of it-and then look over the others to see whether they are similar?

Mr. PATTERSON. We will be glad to do that.

Mr. RAKER. You read into the record that there were certificates presented and it was marked on the mortgage in the department that they were canceled.