The Arizona champion., 1885-05-30
WEEKLY CHAMPION,
SATURDAY, MAY 50, 1883.
Land Contests.

We have received the following from the land Department at Washington;
 Under recent regulations and rulings of the Land Office, hearings and c, ntests before inc local officers are in great measure rep, dered unnecessary, AmSnded rule 5 of rules of practice was made especially that testimony should be taken near the land in controversy, It is only necessary in such cases that the officer, place, aud time should be designated in the notice, whether the ser vice is had by application or personal service.
 County Recorders are informed by the General Land oficc ''that when protest is of:: fered, or any person appears to object to claimants entry or proof, you should take all the testimony on both sides, first examining claimant and his witnesses, and then taking testimony on the part of protestant. Either party can cross.examiue the witnesses of the other side"
 In his circular of September r, 1884, the Commissioner says "Notiee to make proof is an invitation to all the world to contest the light of the party to make proof, and full testimony should then be taken on both sides and the record made up for action and decis- ion in. the case"
 In hia circular of December 10, 1884, the Commissioner says "Notice to make proof Is an invitation to come in and show cause why proof should not be allowed. It is not necessary that an objector should be prior party to the record. It is not necessary that he should be party in interest. When any person appears at the time and place set for making proof all the testimony in favor or against the entry should be taken, and de. eision rendered The same as in contest cases"
 In his instructions of October IT, 1884, the Commissioner said; "Claimant having by his notice invited objections to his entry, and a time and place being set where any adverse claim may be asserted, he is expected to be prepared 10 support his claim against all charges and counter claims which may be presented. Ifmore time is necessary 10 ob. tain evidence, PostP inement may be had in the uspal manner, as by consent of parties, as in ordinary contest cases, or an adjournment to future day to the local office can be he'd if parties so desire"
 In the case of Marquis vs. Olsen, (II Copp P. zIS) the Secretary of the Interior sa d: "Notice ot final proof is published that all rfiA in, ha al..ieaI of tha ceeding, and when one neglects this opportu. nity for objection it is also reasonable to pre- sume he has none"
 From the foregoing rulings it is quite evi- dent that the General Land Office has done all In its power to save parties to proof con tests and hearings, the expense of travelling long distances to the Land Office, and paying the expenses of witnesses detained for exami. nation. The mode of procedure is made as simple aad inexpensive as possible, The duty of the clerk or notary taking testimony is confined to faithfully transcrbing the tes- timony presented and transmitting it in prop CT shape to the land officers, who are allowed nothing for examination aud decision.
 If nolaries. clerks, and attorneys would provide themselves with volumes 10 and IT ofCopp's Land Owner, and subsequent nun, bels as they appear every fortnight, they would have no trouble in complying with the liberal regulations usw in force. A contest may be had before any officer authorized to take proof. The necessity of expensive trips to the Land Office is obyiated in almost ev- cry possible case,