Delta chief., 1885-08-12
The New stock brand Law.
From the Denver Times.

FROM the Denver iimes.
Prior to the passage of the new brand act
by the last Legislature the law required that
nil brands should be filed with county clerks.
Under tins law the same brand was liable to
be filed in every county in the State. 1t was
to avoid this evil, or rather 10 check it before
1t had assumed greater proportions. that the
new law was passed. The tendency of the
new law, while in the matter of new brands
which may be filed hereafter, will he to sim
plify the brand problem, is, so far ns al!
brands are concerned, to make confusion
worse confounded. Under the old law. while
the same brand might have been in use in IA
dozen different counties, not more than one
person could use it in any one county. In
der The new law, however, n dozen different
persons may have filed ii with III. Secretary
Of State and thus secured the right To use il
in any and every county in the State. As
there have been any number of duplicate
brands siei with the Secretary of State, end
less con fusion is likely to result.
Although the law fixed the limit of time
for receiving certified copies al brands At
August ], the Secretary Of State received all
that came in up to and including August !.
There have been received up to that time in
the ueiyhborhond Of 4, 500 certificates, con.
tanning about Il. 900 brands. While th,s ap-
pears like large number, there is reason to
believe that it is only u small proportion Of
the State. For instance: The recorder Of
Weld county informs the Secretary Of State
that he has on tiIc In his office 5000 brands.
and the recorder Of IArin.r county reports
even more than that number. Here are
nearly ns many in two counties have been
flied with the Secretary from the entire State.
Already the iaci that . great many people
have been left" and will lie Obliged To
brand their cattle. is being demonstrated. A
large number Of persons called Mt the office
Of the Secretary OF State to-day to have their
brands recorded. They were told that they
were too late To have them recorded, except
as new brands. The process to hc pursued
In such n case is 10 file for reference a crrtid.
cate Of encir brand owned by the applicant.
when the ,nicxing OF the brands recorded
prior To the 9Th instant is completed. aud IL
the brand 30 filed is found not to hav. been
recorded, then il may he recorded ss y n.w
brand. II, however, any other person shsll
have flied such brand then the applicant
will ic Obliged to select a new brand and re-
brand hi- cattle.
There are entire ncighborhoods in various
parts Of the State where absolutely nothing
l. known Of the law or its provisions. II Is Il
certainty that greater or less number of
,;,e,c people vii! dni themselves forestullcd,
and that soma one else IL alone entitled to the
use of the brand which they have owned for
years. IL Is evident that 1t will bc n long
time before the matter will he Strengthened
out, aud that much confusion and nnasoida.
able injustice to individuals will result.
While ihi. IL true Of existing brands, the
law is destined TO work much COED for the
future. Under 1t only one Pc rson in the
State can Glc any one brand. His filing
thereof will give him the exclusive right to
use such brand within ih. State. II the law
hnn further provided that only one person
could have filed any on. brand from the be-
ginning. aud that the 6r., person 50 filing
should have the exclusive right To use such
brand within the State, while perhaps few
more persons would have been Obliged 10 re.
brand their cattle, yet, IN the opinion OF many
cattiemcn, II would have been better, MS II
would have avoided all brand conf mpiications
in the future.
As IL |. II will. II Is feared, he long time
before the matter Of duplicate brands will be
Strengthened out, and II is not readily seen
how this can b. done except by nn amend.
mcni to the law requiring that only one man
can have any one brand in the State. This
will necc.siiatc the rcbranding which the
trainers Of the law, though short.sieh,cdly,
aimed TO avoid.
Another point where II would seem that the
Law was deficient was in not providing for
special notification ot some sort 10 have been
given to the stock growers. The Secretary Of
State notified all the county clerks, and few
of the latter officials ha,l the law printed and
copies Of 1t sent to all persons having brands
on filc In their offices. Had the enactment
Of the new Inv been more generally mndc
known among the cuttlrmcu doubtless much
If the confusion that the present state Of ai.
Tflirs premises would have been avoided.
IIRSRY n. Corr. the land lawyer Of
Washington, u. c.. sends the ninth edition
kcf "Cspp's Settlers Guide" an indispcnsi.
2blc book to all who IRE Interested in public
Baud. A chapter, Illustrated with numerous
ruts, shows how to tell township. section and
9uarier-scction corners, and explains tho sys.
lum Of government surveys. II gives the