The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1876-06-16
PUBLICATION OF APPLICATIONS
FOR PATENT.
A Change from Daily TO Weekly Edition
Nullifies a Publication.

A Change from Daily TO Weekly Editor
Nullifies Publication.
From Copp's Land Owner for May.
Where the Register designates the daily issue of
newspaper for publication of notice of mining aI
plication for patent, it is not a compliance wit
law to change to the weekly edition of the sam
paper without authority of the Register.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
GENERAL LAND OFFICE,
WASHINGTON, D. c. april 30, 1876.
REGISTER AND RECEIVER,
Helena, Hon taaa:
GENTLEMEN:-Ol the 27th December
1875, Charles W. Cannon, Catharine B
Cannon and Henry Cannon filed in YOU
Office an application for patent for the N
w. of section 25, T. 10 N, r. 4 W
Montana, and ON the same day the Register
ordered the publication of the notice il
"the Helena Herald, newspaper publish
| ed daily at Helena, Montana"
by the affidavit of Andrew j. Fisk, one
of the publishers of the Helena Herald
daily and weekly edition, it is shown thai
said notice was inserted in the Helena Daily
Herald on the 28th December, A. d. 1875
and continued to be published therein OF
the Goth, 30th and 31st of the same month
"that on the third day of January, A. d
1876, at the request of G. w. Cannon, one
of the parties named in said annexed
notice, said annexed notice was ordered by
said Charles w. Cannon to be changed
from the Daily Herald, and to be pub.
lisEed in the Weekly Herald, which said
notice by the order of Charles Cannon was
SO changed from the daily to the weekly
Herald, and the first insertion of said
notice being published in the Weekly Her
aid on the 9Th day of January, 1876, and
the last notice in said Weekly Herald on
the I'd day of March, A. D., 1876.''
In view of these facts, the question is
presented whether said notice was pub
lished in the manner and for the length of
time prescribed by the statute.
| The sixth section of the mining act of
May 10, 1872, Revised Statutes, Section
1895, provides "That the Register of the
Land Office, upon the filing of such appli-
cation, plat, field-notes, notices and afida-
Wits, shall publish notice that such appli-
| cation has been made, for the period of
| sixty days in a newspaper to be by him
| designated as published nearest to said
claim.''
In the case under consideration, the
Register directed the notice to be published
| in the Daily Herald for sixty days. The
notice was published in said paper only on
the %, 80, 30 and 3fst of December four
insertions.
The notice was then discontinued in the
Daily Herald by instruction of G. W. Can
non, and inserted in the Weekly Herald.
In the Weekly Herald the notice was in
serted from the 9th January to the I'd
March, 1876.
In case of Jenny Lind Mining Co., ct al,
VS.. Eureka Mining Co., the Hon. Secretary
of the Interior held that in estimating the
sixty days of publication required by the
act of May 10, 1872, the first day of publ
cation should be excluded and the last
included.
In the case of ]. Fl. McMurdy ct al, vs.
E. s. Streeter ct al, the Hon. Secretary of
the Interior held that the time elapsing
between the first and the last insertion
must include the full period of sixty days"
From the 9th of January to the I'd March,
excluding the first day, is only fifty-six
days the publication, therefore, in the
Weekly Herald was not sufficient, even
though the notice had been inserted therein
by direction of the Register.
From the foregoing it will be seen that
the applicants have not given sufficient
notice by publication, having published the
notice for four days only in the paper
designated by the officers to whom the law
has delegated the power to authorize the
publication of noticesin case of applications
for patent to mining claims.
The second notice was inserted in the
Weekly Herald without authority of the
Register, and for fifty-six days only.
The statute having in this material re-
quirement been disregarded, the publica-
tion as made, and all subsequent proceed
ings founded upon it were irregular and
invalid. Said application for patent is
accordingly rejected.
Other objections have been urged against
said application, which it is unnecessary to
consider in view of the fact that the publ
cation was not made in accordance with
law and instructions.
You will inform all parties in interest
and acknowledge the receipt hereof, allow
ing sixty days for appeal.
Should said applicants desire to COM
mence de nooo, they win be permitted to do
SO upon full compliance with the law and
instructions.
Very respectfully,
U. j. BAXTER, Acting Comn'r