locator.1 The reason for which is that he did not make them.

While the decisions of the land department are not in entire harmony on this question, it would seem that the law contemplates the expenditure of five hundred dollars for each claim, where several are entered in one group.3

§644. Approval certificate of surveyor-general. The surveyor-general must certify the plat in duplicate, after the same is prepared in his office, with the amount of work done thereon, which certificate establishes prima facie that fact, the correctness of the survey, and the mineral character of the land.

§ 645. Survey of placer.- The Revised Statutes of the United States provide that where placer claims are upon surveyed lands, and conform to legal subdivisions, no further survey or plat shall be required." But where they cannot be made to conform to legal subdivisions, then it is necessary to survey and plat them, the same as unsurveyed lands." If upon surveyed lands, reasons by affidavit must be shown why it does not conform to legal subdivision. Where the placer contains a lode known to exist, that lode must be described in the survey and shown by the return."

1 Commissioner to Max Boehmer, Copp's Min. Lands, 300; to Wm. A. Arnold, id. 161.

2 Cir. Letter "N" of Department, March 14, 1898; Bliss to Wolcott, 27 L. D. 91-95, citing Lindl. Mines, sec. 673; Gen. L. O. Cir., June 24, 1899, par. 53; Sweeney v. N. P. R. R. Co., 20 L. D. 294; Ferguson v. Hanson, 2 L. D. 336; Good Return M. Co., 4 L. D. 221.

United States v. Iron Silver M. Co., 128 U. S. 673; s. c., 24 Fed. Rep. 568; Andromeda Lode, 13 L. D. 146; Gen. L. O. Cir., June 24, 1899, par. 53. R. S. U. S., § 2325; L. O. Cir., June 24, 1899, par. 42.

Co., 158 U. S. 253; Colo. Fuel Co. v. Maxwell Land Grant Co., 22 Colo. 71, 43 Pac. Rep. 556; Serrano v. Rawson, 47 Cal. 52; Cragin v. Powell, 128 U. S. 691; Beard v. Federy, 70 U. S. 492.

6 R. S. U. S., § 2331. But see G. A. Khern, 6 L. D. 580.

7 Id.; Gen. L. O. Cir., June 24, 1899, par. 60; Pearsall v. Freemin, 6 L. D. 227; Rosina v. Gerhauser, 7 L. D. 390.

8 Pearsall v. Freeman, supra; S. P. R. Co. v. Griffin, 20 L. D. 487. See also Ferrell v. Hoge, 29 id. 12. 9 R. S. U. S., § 2333; SurveyorGeneral's Rule 33; Gen. L. O. Cir.,

5 Russell v. Maxwell Land Grant June 24, 1899, par. 32.

§ 646. Group applications and surveys.- Any number of contiguous locations belonging to the same party or parties, or in which there is community of interest, may be embraced in the same application and survey.1 But such survey must, in conformity with the statutory requirements, distinguish the several locations and exhibit the boundaries of each. And an entry may be refused if claims sought to be grouped are not contiguous. It would seem necessary, also, that all the applicants should have some interest in each of the locations.

§ 647. Summary - The doctrine of this chapter restated. The law outlined in the foregoing sections may be briefly summarized as follows:

There must be a formal application for a survey in writing, signed by the applicant, accompanied by certified copies of the location notice and of all amendments. But before the survey can be ordered there must be a deposit made of the estimated cost of the office work in the surveyor-general's office. This has nothing to do with the compensation to the deputy for field work, as that is a matter of private contract with the parties, as the applicant may employ any deputy of the district, and the order must be issued to him.

While the surveyor-general, by departmental rules, may order a resurvey to correct any mistakes, unless done by the surveyor who performed the work in the first instance, it will be at the expense of the applicant, the department not being in general responsible for the mistakes of the deputy.

1 Surveyor-General's Rules, No. 9, July 6, 1897; Carson City G. & S. M. Co. v. North Star M. Co., 73 Fed Rep. 597; affirmed (C. C. A.), 83 Fed. Rep. 658, 23 C. C. A. 333; St. Louis Sm. & Ref. Co. v. Kemp, 104 U. S. 636; Good Return M. Co., 4 L. D. 221; St. Louis Sm. & Ref. Co. v. Ray, 104 U. S. 657; Samuel E. Rogers, 4 L. D. 284; Champion M. Co., id. 362; Wm. DeWitt, 9 C. L. O. 34; F. N. Williams, 15 L. D. 532; Tucker

v. Masser, 113 U. S. 203; Lakin v. Dolly, 53 Fed. Rep. 333; Poire v Wells, 6 Colo. 406.

2 Surveyor-General's Rules, July 6, 1897, Nos. 23 and 33; S. F. Mackey, 5 L. D. 199; Golden Sun M. Co., 6 id. 808; Commissioner to Surveyor-General S. Dak., March 31, 1892.

3 Apple Blossom Placer v. Cora Lee Lode, 21 L. D. 438.

The rules of the department prescribe certain requirements as to making the survey, which must be observed. But, independent of that, the law requires that the survey be made upon the lines of the original location; but where there is an excess it may be cast off and the survey finally made to conform to the lawful size of the claim. And the same rule applies to the statute requiring parallelism of end lines. These must be made parallel by the survey; and if in doing so it becomes necessary to cast off a portion of the claim staked this may be lawfully done.

The return of the surveyor should show all lines made, all bearing points, be tied to the public survey if the land is surveyed, otherwise to a mineral monument, and must show all previously surveyed lines crossed by the survey.

No survey of a placer need be made if located upon surveyed land, provided the claim conforms to legal subdivisions; otherwise it must be surveyed the same as a lode claim.

The owner of a group of contiguous locations may have all the claims surveyed under one number and platted as one group.

The return of the surveyor must also show the improvements made upon the claim intended to apply towards the five hundred dollars required by statute. This return may be made, however, at any time during the period of publication.

The surveyor-general must certify to the plat and deliver it to the applicant, and is entitled to the further fee permitted by the rules of his office, of a certain sum, generally five dollars, for each conflict with a previous survey.

The surveyor-general must also certify as to the five hundred dollars improvements, which certificate can be furnished as to this point at any time before completion of publication. But the diagram as posted on the claim and filed in the land office must be otherwise certified as correct. 36

CHAPTER II.

OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE LAND OFFICE

ARTICLE A.

Of the Filing of Papers, Giving Notice and Final Entry.

§ 650. Order of filing - Application to follow with diligence. 651. Fees to be paid.

652. Posting notice and diagram on the claim - Consolidated claim. 653. What a sufficient posting - Conspicuous place.

654. Description of claim in notice - Conform to published notice — Adjoining claims - Must be posted before application.

655. List of papers to be filed with the application.

656. The application for patent-Its allegations of facts and general contents.

657. By whom and how application may be sworn to.

658. Citizenship, how proved.

659. Applications by trustees, executors, or administrators-Co-owners as trustees Equitable interests.

660. Posting and publishing notice-Summons to all the world — Statute must be complied with.

661. How period of publication computed-Length of time in daily and weekly paper.

662. Where published — Reputable newspaper.

663. Final entry - Papers to be filed - After-acquired title-Successor in interest of applicant.

664. Receiver's receipt, when issued and to whom - Owner of title — Mortgagee.

665. Value and effect of receiver's receipt - Conclusive as to what, prima facie as to what - Assessment work after receiver's receipt.

666. Placer application - Lode in placer-Known lode-Effect of

patent.

667. Known lode or vein in placer-Means of knowledge, and what sufficient knowledge.

668. Test of knowledge.

669. To whom notice or knowledge must come.

670. Time of knowledge-Sufficiency of allegation of knowledge. 671. Applications for mill sites.

§ 672. Application under the statute of limitations.

€73. Effect of application for patent-Segregates land applied for from public domain.

674. Similarities of statute to Mexican law.

§ 650. Order of filing - Application to follow with dili gence. Applications for patent must be received in the order in which they are filed in the land office, without reference to the order of filing the application for survey with the surveyor-general. A mere application, not followed by reasonable diligence in prosecuting the subsequent steps, will not indefinitely preserve the right of priority." In this case an application was made and suspended by request of the applicant; and, pending the failure to proceed with the application and give notice accordingly, a junior conflicting survey was permitted to proceed.

651. Fees to be paid. Upon filing each application in the land office the applicant must pay a filing fee of ten dollars. The cost of publishing the notice of application in a newspaper, as well as all other costs and fees necessary to be paid in the matter of the application, must also be paid by the applicant. In short, while the department regulates the fees of the register and receiver where not regulated by law, and has in some cases fixed the maximum charge per line for newspapers, the applicant must make his own contracts with the latter, settle the accounts and furnish proof thereof.

§ 652. Posting notice and diagram on the claim — Consolidated claim.- Before commencing proceedings in the land office the applicant is required to post a copy of his plat, together with a notice of his intention to apply for a

1 Big Flat Gold M. Co. v. Big Flat Gravel M. Co., Copp's Min. Lands, 299: J. B. Rice, 11 L. D. 213; A. J. Gibson, 21 L. D. 219.

2 Snow Flake Lode, 4 L. D. 30.

Five dollars each to the register and receiver. Gen. L. O. Cir., June 24, 1899, par. 97; R. S. U. S., § 2238, subd. 9.

4 See post, this article, § 664.