Is There Any Evidence that the Lost Dutchman Mine really exists?

[Clay Diggins]

Rather than post the extremely long opening argument here, I put it on my personal blog; anyone can read it at:

https://oroblanco.wordpress.com/201...at-the-lost-dutchman-gold-mine-really-exists/

So fire away amigos, pro or con.
Oroblanco

I sure would like to see that land patent Waltz supposedly had and sold. The General Land Office has no record of a patent to Waltz for either a homestead entry, purchase or any other type patent.

There is a 160 acre patent sale entry for Jacob Starar but that was granted to Starar in 1874, outside your timeline. Patent sale entry claims couldn't be sold to another individual until the patent was granted so there is no chance that Waltz sold the land to Starar. If you want a copy of the Starar patent the CDI entry scan is available at the General Land Office linked above. If you don't trust the internet scanned version you could order a legally certified copy while you are on the website.

The location of the Starar patent is at what is now the stockyards at Washington and 7th streets in downtown Phoenix. At the time of patent it was the very center of Phoenix and Starar owned about 1/4 of the town. That patent location is about 40 miles as the crow flies from Weavers Needle (About 65 or 70 horse miles).

I hope that helps your research Oroblanco.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Ramiro valdez]

 

[Ramiro valdez]

 

[Clay Diggins]

View attachment 2068397

More fake drawings pretending to represent facts. I gave a link to the General Land Office above - you won't find a Waltz patent in any government grant records.

Here's a link to the real Master Title Plat:

https://glorecords.blm.gov/WebServices/getImage.ashx?imageType=lsr&dm_id=30314&sheetNr=1

As you can see Section 16 (where your made up map shows the Waltz "patent") is reserved to the State of Arizona - as is every other Section 16 in all the Townships in Arizona. Section 16 was reserved for the benefit of the common schools trust in Arizona by the federal government in 1889.

Here's a link to the official document scan of the original patent granting Arizona that Section:

CDI Details - BLM GLO Records

The facts are out there and not that hard to find. Stick to the facts and you will have a better chance of finding what you seek.

 

[sdcfia]

I sure would like to see that land patent Waltz supposedly had and sold. The General Land Office has no record of a patent to Waltz for either a homestead entry, purchase or any other type patent.

The GLO link is an indispensable tool for any researcher, especially in these sorts of TNet discussions. Otherwise, you are dealing with this:

 

[Ramiro valdez]

Wow! The river crossing didn’t catch your attention? Nor the arrow that points to the north! The Peralta map given to Julia has the same river crossing and same arrow? We are not looking for certified paper per say just looking for lost information that explains the maps directions.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

The map as shown was never intended to show patented sections or quarter sections. I don't know who jumped to that conclusion.

What it shows is merely who was living on the Quarter sections approximately in the year 1868 - 1870. Nothing more.

The 1889 law concerning use of and patent rights to Section 16 throughout Arizona is dated 21 years after Jacob Waltz was living on the section 16 quarter section.

I don't believe anyone ever said Waltz received a patent for the quarter section he was living on.

 

[Clay Diggins]

The map as shown was never intended to show patented sections or quarter sections. I don't know who jumped to that conclusion.

What it shows is merely who was living on the Quarter sections approximately in the year 1868 - 1870. Nothing more.

The 1889 law concerning use of and patent rights to Section 16 throughout Arizona is dated 21 years after Jacob Waltz was living on the section 16 quarter section.

I don't believe anyone ever said Waltz received a patent for the quarter section he was living on.

Maybe you should read the original post by OroBlanco where he clearly states that Jacob Waltz received a patent.

T1N 3E Jacob Waltz SE 1/4 of Section 16
Strange title for a map that doesn't show any patent sections or quarter sections.. Seems to be mimicking a Master Title Plat of ownership right down to the format and title. Kinda makes me wonder what the source of this "knowledge" might be and what purpose it would serve. Did you make the map?

Also the map is bogus on several accounts - to begin with nobody lived on any of those "quarter sections" in 1868 because the survey had not been published until the end of that year. The survey did not include quarter Sections as only the Section lines were surveyed. The locations of all the major land owners, including Phoenix Township is wrong by anywhere from 1/2 mile to two miles... but it does have a North arrow. Not exactly a map to rely on especially since the factual information is freely available.

You could have looked this up. I gave you the links to complete your research. Maybe next time?

 

[Matthew Roberts]

Maybe you should read the original post by OroBlanco where he clearly states that Jacob Waltz received a patent.

T1N 3E Jacob Waltz SE 1/4 of Section 16
Strange title for a map that doesn't show any patent sections or quarter sections.. Seems to be mimicking a Master Title Plat of ownership right down to the format and title. Kinda makes me wonder what the source of this "knowledge" might be and what purpose it would serve. Did you make the map?

Also the map is bogus on several accounts - to begin with nobody lived on any of those "quarter sections" in 1868 because the survey had not been published until the end of that year. The survey did not include quarter Sections as only the Section lines were surveyed. The locations of all the major land owners, including Phoenix Township is wrong by anywhere from 1/2 mile to two miles... but it does have a North arrow. Not exactly a map to rely on especially since the factual information is freely available.

You could have looked this up. I gave you the links to complete your research. Maybe next time?

Hello Clay,

The Ingalls survey that surveyed the sections where Phoenix is today was done in the early 1860's.

Once again, the map never was intended to show patented sections, only approximately where people resided in the 1868 - 1870 time period.

There is no doubt Waltz resided and farmed the NE 1/4 of Section 16 T1N R3E and was taxed by Maricopa county on Personal property and land located at that location on numerous occasions.

On March 21, 1872 Waltz filed a property affidavit in Maricopa county Court alleging James Chenowith trespassed and tried to jump the south half of his property located as the NE 1/4 of Sec16 T1N R3E and warned Chenowith to " get off and stay off."

Wether or not Waltz ever attempted to patent his 1/4 section is unknown, I doubt if he did. It is a fact however he lived and farmed on that property for at least 24 years.

I don't see where we are in any disagreement.

Best,

Matthew

 

[Matthew Roberts]

The original of the map was drawn by James Barney to show the Sections and residents in the early days 1868 - 1870 approximately.
It also was not a map to show patents but may have been meant to show those who filed some sort of intent to homestead. I don't know what Barney's reasoning was.
The Ingalls survey of 1865 set up all the sections and 1/4 sections around Phoenix. Barney made several notes in the upper right corner of his map

 

[Clay Diggins]

The original of the map was drawn by James Barney to show the Sections and residents in the early days 1868 - 1870 approximately.
It also was not a map to show patents but may have been meant to show those who filed some sort of intent to homestead. I don't know what Barney's reasoning was.
The Ingalls survey of 1865 set up all the sections and 1/4 sections around Phoenix. Barney made several notes in the upper right corner of his map

A lot of misinformation in your post Matthew Roberts. I'll try to clear some of this up for the readers here.

Ingalls did his survey in 1868 - not 1865. The survey was approved on December 2, 1870.

Only the southern township line (baseline) was surveyed in December of 1866 and that was surveyed by W. H. Pierce.

The Township lines were first surveyed beginning in April of 1868 by W. F. Ingalls.

Ingalls later surveyed the Section lines - not the quarter sections. The Public Land Survey contracts did not include surveying of quarter sections as they are not aliquot parts of the survey.

The Barney map was made in 1931 it did not include a reference to Jacob Waltz. A lot of the details of the original survey were left out of the Barney map.

The names inserted in the quarter sections are indeed the individuals who were granted patents along with the patent date. Barney incorrectly labels these as "Homestead Entries" Homestead entries are patents but a lot of the patents shown were actually purchase patents (Sale- cash entry) - not homestead entries. You can check that yourself and even download copies of the patents on the GLO website.

Sadly you missed the real verifiable information available on the free 1870 Survey map your later maps are loosely based on. The original survey shows structures as well as roads existing at the time - as did all surveys. If there was a building in Section 16 in late 1868 (supposedly Waltz house) it would have been shown on the survey - there is none. By following these later inferior and incorrect maps you have missed out on verifiable information available at the GLO link I have directed you to several times now.

I'm hoping some other seekers are seeing the problems involved with following rumors and botched inaccurate "copies" of the actual documents available free to the public. If you don't start with verifiable factual information you are going to waste a lot of time chasing rainbows that lead nowhere.

For those who actually care for the facts as they existed on the ground in 1868 here is a link to download the 1868 survey with all the details missing and incorrect on the later maps being shared on this thread.

- BLM GLO Records

Get it soon or you will actually have to use the GLO itself to find it again.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

Clay,

Once again, we have no disagreement, were on the same page.
The map was never intended to deceive anything, only to try and show the area Waltz settled. Nothing more, nothing less.
You are injecting all these issues that were never involved with the maps intention.
Not sure why you're doing that. We are not in disagreement on the real issues
Best,
Matthew

 

[tamrock]

Maybe not at the location most believe it to be, but who really knows these days, as dead men tell no tales.

 

[Ramiro valdez]

Let’s say, if I ciphered a map and I use the needle as a reference point to point, on the map? Because it is noticeable and iconic, I would have to make this my first coordinate because a rock pointing is probably going to go over mountains, valleys, and rivers. This will not define an actual trail, road or way to the area in question? It is just a line of sight even if the area is called the rock horse? In order for you to intercept the first coordinate you will need as second coordinate? One that will help you by providing a starting point with a certain compass direction assigned by map maker. In this case we should say north and you don’t need an arrow? Because the place given faces to the north and there is no other section of the Salt River that faces true north than the section that contains the nail creek crossing because the map directs you to cross and therefore there should be a crossing? This is the actual starting point that is going to lead you to the north in order to intersect the first coordinate. This trail has been selected by the map maker because he has been there and he believes that this the best way to go. There are two things that you must need like a telescope and a compass because the trails are not all that straight.The telescope is going to be needed to keep an eye on the pointing needle as you go up the mountain range until you line up with the side of the needle that is pointing. The intersection of both coordinates will define the area of the rock horse? The paper, although not certified, does describe in detail the only section of the Salt River that faces north containing a river crossing. The stone map details the length of the river facing north while the uncertified paper describes what you will find on that specific section of the Salt river? We’re not looking for everything to be signed or recorded because it’s an unclaimed hidden goldmine? Secret to be exact! And your not going to find it looking for a certified claim! Your not going to find it if you don’t use the map! Or if you don’t know how to use the compass! Or if you keep going in the wrong direction! Stick to the map first and then apply Peralta’s or Waltz trail which will take you into the rock horse area where you will find the mouth of the rock horse containing the two large funnels that hides the small dark hidden canyon. The canyon wall hides the goldmine and you need to locate the entry point. Do not go west of the Salt River! Do not cross the Salt River to the west! It is not there! Please stop directing people in the wrong direction! Consult a navigator to help you find the place if need to! I’m hoping that I don’t have to write anymore but some of you keep interject wrong directions! Make it happen! Time is only getting shorter for some of you! And I have to drink a beer!

 

[Clay Diggins]

Maybe not at the location most believe it to be, but who really knows these days, as dead men tell no tales.

Actually dead surveyors do tell tales. Each surveyor was required to keep Field Notes describing the work done, the value of the land surveyed and descriptions of the land and any settlements, development or occupation of the land.

Ingalls did keep extensive Field Notes and we can still read those today. In his survey of Section 16 he noted that the land was poor and subject to wash outs. He also noted that the entirety of section 16 was thickly covered with sage and mesquite. The access to the northern portion of the section from the south was prevented due to a large cut bank on the river.

Clearly the man on the ground in 1868 tasked with discovering settlements could find no evidence of occupation by anyone where the legends say Waltz had a homestead. You can verify that for yourself by downloading and reading the scanned Field Notes for that portion of the survey.

https://www.az.blm.gov/surveys/Rectangular_Survey_Field_Notes/AZR0002.pdf

If I recall correctly the field notes for section 16 will be found beginning on page 191.

As for Waltz occupying a nearby section the notes and maps cover this area as well as the 5 adjacent ranges. I haven't read all of the field notes but the area to the west of section 16 has no indication of occupation at all. If you downloaded the Survey Plat I linked to earlier you will see that the map has all the houses, fields and ditches drawn out on the map as well as the house owner names added to the relevant buildings on the map.

The information is out there. You just need to track it down.

 

[RockyGoltra]

what woul dthe cross streets be here?

View attachment 2068397

 

[sdcfia]

Actually dead surveyors do tell tales. Each surveyor was required to keep Field Notes describing the work done, the value of the land surveyed and descriptions of the land and any settlements, development or occupation of the land.

Ingalls did keep extensive Field Notes and we can still read those today. In his survey of Section 16 he noted that the land was poor and subject to wash outs. He also noted that the entirety of section 16 was thickly covered with sage and mesquite. The access to the northern portion of the section from the south was prevented due to a large cut bank on the river.

Clearly the man on the ground in 1868 tasked with discovering settlements could find no evidence of occupation by anyone where the legends say Waltz had a homestead. You can verify that for yourself by downloading and reading the scanned Field Notes for that portion of the survey.

https://www.az.blm.gov/surveys/Rectangular_Survey_Field_Notes/AZR0002.pdf

If I recall correctly the field notes for section 16 will be found beginning on page 191.

As for Waltz occupying a nearby section the notes and maps cover this area as well as the 5 adjacent ranges. I haven't read all of the field notes but the area to the west of section 16 has no indication of occupation at all. If you downloaded the Survey Plat I linked to earlier you will see that the map has all the houses, fields and ditches drawn out on the map as well as the house owner names added to the relevant buildings on the map.

The information is out there. You just need to track it down.

Again, excellent advice for avid researchers. While tracking down the old patents on the BLM's GLO Records website (mineral, homestead, township surveys and others) we have found detailed historical observations and information available nowhere else by reading the Surveyor's accompanying detailed field notes. These notes, along with the original surveys themselves, are indispensable tools when you need facts and physical proof in the field.

 

[sdcfia]

As an aside, this is dedicated to all the Dutch Hunteres, past and present.

 

[SPARTANOC]

I read your first link, very well written, nice job.

However.....the fact that Waltz could produce rich ore, after he sold the Bradshaw claims, doesn't really prove he had another mine that became lost.

He could have had a stash of ore somewhere. I think if you look at it from the other side, you have to agree. That's why normal prospecting for the mine hasn't worked, perhaps the reason there is no trail of gold to follow to his mine, is because it was just a hiding place.

The fact that he sold the Bradshaw claims, makes me wonder why he didn't sell his "lost" mine. He was getting old, and knew how to sell a claim...

Just my friendly opinion, good luck to all the searchers, I would love to see someone find a mine, but I'm skeptical.

Trust me, it's still out there - just waiting to be....revealed. I have a feeling that THIS is the year of it finally being discovered.

-SpartanOC