act of May 10, 1872.1 Applications for claims lying partly in one district and partly in another should be filed in the district where the principal workings are situated, and the plat and notices should be posted near such workings. A copy of the plat and notice should be posted in the land office of each district.2 Where two applications conflict, a compromise may be made by the claimants, and the surveyor-general will order a survey of the lines agreed upon.3 1 Copp's Min. Dec. 169. 2 2 Landowner, 130. 3 1 Landowner, 83. § 109. Same-Requisites to application for.-An application for patent to a mining claim should show compliance in all material particulars with the local and United States laws.1 Applications have been rejected because the location was not in accordance with law.2 Where the survey did not accurately define the boundaries of the claim.3 However, no survey or plat is required in placer applications upon surveyed lands;4 but the law does not authorize the sale of quartz lodes by legal subdivisions.5 An error in the government survey could not affect the application for placer patent on such lands, as the applicant for a patent should not suffer by the neglect of duty of any officer.6 Applications will nevertheless be rejected by the general land office on account of erroneous or insufficient description of the premises;7 because of want of notice of the application or that such notice was published without the knowledge and sanction of the register, or not in a newspaper designated as published nearest the claim; and because a previous application for the same premises has been made which was withdrawn on account of the pendency of a suit in court commenced by the adverse claimant.s Those only who have possessory rights, acquired accord ing to law and custom, being entitled to obtain patents,9 it should in general appear that the record title of the applicant is perfect.10 Copies of deeds or full transcripts from the record of conveyances are not required to show a perfect chain of title. A complete abstract of the record title will suffice.11 And where a mining claim is not situated in a regularly constituted mining district, or where there are available means of having the title recorded, affidavits of the facts should be made and secondary evidence of possessory title will be received in lieu of the abstract.12 Ex parte affidavits may be received in support of the applicant's title, but the officer receiving such testimony should be satisfied of their truth and the credibility of the witnesses.13 In order to show title where the applicant is a corporation, it must file with the application a copy of its certificate of incorporation or charter.14 And where an applicant claims title to the mine through a deed signed by a party as executor of a decedent, he should file a certified copy of the letters testamentary, with a copy of the will. If the title depends upon the revocation of letters testamentary or of administration, a certificate of the clerk of the court having probate jurisdiction in the premises, and evidence showing authority to convey the interest of deceased must also be filed.15 Where a party has obtained title by proceeding against co-owners for failure to contribute their proportion of annual expenditure, he should file with his application a copy of the original notice of location, an abstract of all conveyances, a copy of the notice published to delinquent co-owners, embracing the names of all delinquents, with the affidavit of the publisher attached, that the notice was published for the period of ninety consecutive days, giving dates; the affidavit of claimant who made The required expenditure, corroborated by the separate fidavits of two disinterested witnesses, showing the work or improvements done or made upon the claim, and the time when done or made, together with the sworn statement of the claimant as to the failure of the delinquents to contribute during the ninety days' publication or the succeeding ninety days. These requirements would be modified in some particulars, of course, where the notice was personally served on the delinquent co-owners.16 The application for the patent must be sworn to by the applicant.17 1 3 Landowner, 162; 2 id. 2. 2 Copp's Min. Dec. 209. 3 Copp's Min. Dec. 340. 4 Copp's Min. Dec. 235. 9 Copp's Min. Dec. 19. 10 1 Landowner, 50; Copp's Min. Dec. 204, 340, 157. 11 1 Landowner, 178. 12 Copp's Min. Dec. 147. 13 Copp's Min. Dec. 16. 14 Copp's Min. Dec. 223. 15 3 Landowner, 18. 16 4 Landowner, 50. 17 1 Landowner, 66. See infra, § 115, "Affidavits." § 110. Same-Filing and posting diagram and notice. The filing and posting of the plat and notice are important requisites. The plat or diagram required to be posted on the claim should be an exact copy of one to be filed with the application,1 and must show the necessary expenditures to render the claim patentable.2 The notice and diagram should be posted on each separate tract or location, even when it is permissible to apply for several in one patent.3 And the proof of posting for the full time required by law should be by affidavit of one of the owners at date of entry, and should be specific as to when such posting commenced. Where the owners reside out of the district, or are absent therefrom, the affidavit of an authorized agent who is acquainted with the facts, will be sufficient. The amendment of January 22, 1880, to Section 2325 of the Revised Statutes, authorizing the affidavit by an agent, was held to apply to all cases pending at the date of the amendment.5 In the absence of more convincing evidence to the contrary, this affidavit, when specific in its statements, is deemed satisfactory.6 Where the affidavit of the party who posted the notice could not be procured, the testimony of two credible witnesses has been received in lieu thereof.7 The notice and diagram should be drawn and posted in a manner best to subserve the purposes for which they were intended, and when it is evident that they were prepared in a manner to deceive or mislead, the general land office will reopen the case for investigation, or reject the application and require proceedings to be commenced de novo.8 But when the notice is merely somewhat indefinite, the test of its sufficiency is whether anybody was, or could be, misled thereby.9 The posting of notice five days after publication, and thereafter for the full time, was held to be an irregularity, but not fatal to the application.10 1 1 Landowner, 134, 178. 2 1 Landowner, 2. 3 1 Landowner, 134. 4 1 Landowner, 178; 2 id. 2; 6 id. 71, 92. 5 Sickel's Min. Laws, 495. 6 3 Landowner, 36, 163. 7 Copp's Min. Dec. 233. 8 Copp's Min. Dec, 75. 9 3 Landowner, 162. 10 2 Landowner, 2. § 111. Same-Publication of notice.-When the published notice does not properly describe the locus of the claim as the same is set forth in the application and diagram, proceedings should be commenced de novo.1 And adverse claims filed during the time of the first publication should be re-filed, upon notice received of the publication of the corrected notice; but no fee should be charged for such re-filing, and in case suit had been commenced prior to the correction, it will be a stay of proceedings subsequent to publication.2 An error in the description of the claim, making the published notice inconsistent with itself, will put the adverse claimant on his guard, and will not be treated as fatal to the application unless it is misleading in its character.3 The law leaves the register no discretion as to the newspaper in which the notice shall be published, except where two papers are equidistant from the claim, or nearly so. He is required to designate the paper, and his designation seems to be conclusive upon the applicant.4 And where the daily issue of a paper is designated, it is not a compliance with the law to publish the notice in the weekly issue of the same paper without the authority of the register.5 It is no objection to the paper, the same being published nearest the claim, that a part of it is printed in another city or state.6 Publication need be in only one newspaper for the period of sixty days, and in estimating this period, the first day must be excluded.8 Nine insertions in a weekly newspaper is not publication for the period of sixty days. Notices must be published ten consecutive weeks in weekly papers, and in daily papers sixty days must elapse between the first and last insertions.9 1 Copp's Min., Dec., 51, 69. 2 Sickels' Min. Laws, 313. 32 Landowner, 114. 4 3 Landowner, 163; id. 50. 5 3 Landowner, 18. |