veins, which were thin sheets of mineral material inclosed in the foundation rocks of the country.  Still in advance of any enactments by legislature or Congress, the common sense of the miners, which had proved strong enough to govern with wisdom the ownership of placer mines, rose to meet the question of lode claims and sheet-like veins of quartz, and provided that a claim should consist of a certain horizontal block of the vein, however it might run, but extending indefinitely downward, with a strip of surface on, or embracing the vein’s outcrop, for the placing of necessary machinery and buildings.  Under this theory, the lode was the property, and the surface became a mere easement.

“This early California theory of a mining claim, consisting of a certain number of running feet of vein, with a strip of land covering the surface length of the claim, is, the obvious foundation for the Federal legislation and present system of public disposition and private ownership of the mineral lands west of the Missouri River.  Contrasted with this is the mode of disposition of mineral-bearing lands east of the Missouri River, where the common law has been the rule, and where the surface tract has always carried with it all minerals vertically below it.

“The great coal, copper, lead and zinc wealth east of the Rocky Mountains has all passed with the surface titles, and there can be little doubt if California had been contiguous to the eastern metallic regions, and its mineral development progressed naturally with the advantage of homemaking settlements, the power of common-law precedent would have governed its whole mining history.  But California was one of these extraordinary historic exceptions that defy precedent and create original modes of life and law.  And since the developers of the great precious metal mining of the Far West have, for the most part, swarmed out of the California hive, California ideas have not only been everywhere dominant over the field of the industry, but have stemmed the tide of Federal land policy, and given us a statute-book with English common law in force over half the land and California common law ruling in the other.”

I have spoken of these two incidents, the one of the peaceable civilization of the missions, and the other of the strenuous life issuing in the adoption of the mining law, as illustrative incidents of the variety of California history.  Let me briefly speak of a third one, California’s method of getting into the Union.  But two other states at the present time celebrate the anniversary of their admission into the Union; the reason for California’s celebration of that anniversary is well founded.  The delay incident to the admission of California into the Union as a State was precipitated by the tense struggle then raging in Congress between the North and the South.  The admission of Wisconsin had made a tie, fifteen free states and fifteen slave states.  The destiny of the nation hung upon the result of that issue,