Seventh-Inducement to investment in real estate, which high taxes now prevent. Eighth-Prevention of immigrants, following the opening of the Panama canal, mortgaging California for their debts. Ninth-Allowing the man who pays the debt to contract the debt. FRANCIS CUTTING. ARGUMENT AGAINST QUALIFICATION OF Second-If voters who have no taxable property should not be allowed to vote on bond issues, which involve taxation, for the same reason they should be prohibited from voting for members of congress, legislators, city councilmen, school trustees and other taxing bodies. Third-If the proposed amendment is based on correct principles, then it falls short of the logical conclusion that the ballot belongs to property rather than to men and women; and, therefore, the amendment should not only give all resident property owners the ballot, regardless of citizenship, when bond issues are proposed, but should also give non-resident property owners the right to vote on bond issues. Fourth-The amendment is based on the false idea that no one pays taxes unless he is actually assessed for taxable property. But, as is well known, the owner of property liable to be taxed for bond indebtedness, or for any other purpose, is often able to shift the whole tax to persons who are not on the assessment roll. The co sumer pays the tax, whether it be a tariff ta a tax for bonded indebtedness, or taxes for ord nary expenses of government. Many of the so-called "large taxpayers" a merely tax collectors. The merchant gets tl tax receipt for taxes paid on his goods, but t tax is added to the price of the goods, and t consumer pays it. The owner of an office buil ing gets the tax receipt, but the tax is added the rents, and the tenants pay it. The tenant in turn, shift the tax when they are able to SO. The man who lives in a rented room, eats a restaurant, and has no other property than change of clothing, pays taxes when he pays f his room and food and clothing. Fifth-This amendment would give a vote bond issues to a property owner who has alrea sold all of his taxable property, but to whom t property is assessed at the time of the bo election, and would withhold the vote on th bond issue from the purchaser of the propert in case that purchaser is not on the tax ro Yet, in this case, the seller votes on the bo issue and is not taxed for the bonds; while t purchaser will be taxed for the bonds under th amendment, though he has no vote on the bo issue. Sixth-The real purpose of this amendme seems to be to put a stop to public ownership public utilities. The amendment would endang the issuing of bonds for public ownership. Pu lic ownership is already handicapped by the co stitutional provision requiring a two-thirds vo in favor of bond issues for that purpose; and would be made practically impossible if no but property owners were allowed to vote bond issues. JAMES H. BARRY. PROHIBITION. Initiative amendment adding sections 26 and 27 to article I of constitution. Prohibits the manufacture, sale, gift, or transportation wholly within the state, of intoxica ing liquors; permits any citizen to enjoin violations; makes the showing that the manufactu use, sale, gift or transportation was for medicinal, scientific, mechanical or sacramental pu poses, a defense to civil and criminal actions, and requires regulation by law of such acts for sa purposes; prohibits transportation into this state of intoxicating liquors, unless shown to be f such purposes, subject, however, to United States laws; prescribes and authorizes penalties. The electors of the State of California present to the secretary of state this petition, and request that a proposed amendment of the Constitution of the State of California, by adding to article I thereof, sections 26 and 27, prohibiting the manufacture, the sale, the giving away, and the transportation of intoxicating liquors, as hereinafter set forth, be submitted to the people of the State of California for their approval or rejection, at the next ensuing general election, or as provided by law. The proposed amendment is as follows: The people of the State of California do enact as follows: Article I of the Constitution of the State of California is hereby amended by adding thereto, two new sections, to be numbered respectively section 26 and section 27, in the following words: PROPOSED LAW. Section 26. The manufacture, the sale, the giving away, or the transportation from one point within the state to another point within the state, of intoxicating liquor is prohibited. Any citizen of the state may, in his or her own name, maintain an action of injunction in the county where the violation occurs, to restrain such violation, provided, however, that to any criminal or civil prosecution for violation of this prohibition, it shall be a defense if it be shown that the liquor in question was being manufa tured, used, sold, given away, or transported f medicinal, scientific, mechanical or sacrament purposes. The manufacture, sale, giving, transportation of such liquors for medicina scientific, mechanical, or sacramental purpos shall be regulated by law. Any person violati any provision of this section shall be fined for first offense not less than one hundred dolla nor more than one thousand dollars, and for second offense shall be fined not less than tv hundred dollars nor more than twenty-five hu dred dollars and imprisoned in the county ja not less than thirty days nor more than one yea provided, however, that additional penalties ma be imposed by law. Section 27. The transportation into the sta of intoxicating liquor, unless it be shown to for medicinal, scientific, mechanical, or sacr mental purposes, is prohibited, subject, howeve to the laws of the United States relating ther to. Any person violating any provision of th section shall be fined for a first offense not le than one hundred dollars not more than 0 thousand dollars, and for a second offense sha be fined not less than two hundred dollars n more than twenty-five hundred dollars and 17 prisoned in the county jail not less than thir days nor more than one year, provided, howeve that additional penalties may be imposed by la ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROHIBITION. This amendment is proposed by initiative petition procured by the California. "Dry" Federation, a non-partisan organization. Voters should enact it for every reason. License or other laws regulating the liquor traffic do not lessen drunkenness or the quantity of liquor consumed, but do make those who vote for them responsible for evil results. The enormous consumption of liquors, resulting in sickness, idiocy, insanity, crime, profligacy and death, puts the issue squarely before our race to go "dry" or die. Science proves that habitual, moderate drinking is as bad as periodical drunkenness. Of ninety-seven children observed who were conceived while parents were partially intoxicated only fourteen were normal. Life insurance tables show the life expectancy of a person of twenty years, if a total abstainer, is 44 years, if a moderate drinker, 31 years, if a hard drinker, 15 years. Three drinks of liquor daily decrease efficiency five to eight per cent. Accidents due to alcohol and employer's liability laws compel employers to hire total abstainers. Healers, physical, spiritual and mental, are hindered by alcoholic conditions. Seven hundred and seventy lunatics in our state hospitals in 1912 were registered as alcoholic insane. Half the remainder were so indirectly. (See Eighth Report State Lunacy Commission.) It cost California taxpayers $1,469,667 to maintain these hospitals in 1912, and $29,000,000 to deal with alcoholic crime. Liquor costs the taxpayer seven dollars for every dollar received in taxes or license fees. The Fifteenth Report, Bureau of Labor, shows our courts in two years dealt with 113,526 misdemeanors, of which 66,930 were "drunks" and 20,000 more were kindred crimes caused indirectly by alcohol. In "wet" towns huge police forces and many courts grind daily grists of crime; in "dry" towns few are needed. Other states show like conditions. Kansas under prohibitory laws has many counties without a criminal in jail or an insane person in hospital. Brothels and red-light districts are part of the liquor traffic. This amendment will help business and relieve poverty. Let breweries and distilleries be turned into flour mills. Let barley and corn be turned into beef, poultry or bread instead of liquor. The increased supply will lessen the cost of living. Let wine grapes worth six dollars per ton be substituted by table grapes worth thirty, or dried or turned into grape juice or syrup. Professor Bioletti says there is a market in the United States for ten times the whole product. With Our grapegrowers admit that wine grapes have been unprofitable, that their hope for future profit lies in the immigration of cheap laborers from Europe through the Panama canal. pauper labor they hope to profit. (See Vol. II, Bulletin State Commission of Horticulture for 1913.) The liquor traffic is the confessed enemy of American labor. Laboring men do not desire to earn bread from evil business. Immigrants from Europe are generally liquor drinkers. "Dry" the state and turn them elsewhere. This amendment does not interfere with personal liberty. Like laws against opium, cocaine, lotteries, and horseracing, it interferes only with personal license. Remove temptation from people of weak or abnormal appetites One who only drinks occasionally should vote "dry" to save them. The liquor traffic has never benefited any one; it has ruined millions. Voter, it may ruin your son or daughter as it has ruined others. Carefully investigate. Vote "Yes." SAMUEL W. ODELL. ARGUMENT AGAINST PROHIBITION. There are three objections to this amendment: First-Prohibition is contrary to sound political principles. The best government, as all authorities agree, is that which most liberally lets its citizens alone, constraining them in nowise inconsistent with common sense ideas of perfect freedom. Political science teaches that reform to be effective must be temperate. Nothing ever remains of any artificial reform except what was ripe in the conscience of the masses. The unripeness of total abstinence is evident from the failure of prohibition in Maine, Kansas, Georgia and other states where it is at once a scandal and a farce. Second-Prohibition is immoral and contrary to the teachings of religion and physiological science. A form of intolerance, it substitutes enmities and hatreds for peace and goodwill, the foundations of the soundest morality. It breeds general demoralization, since wherever it is enacted moonshine distilleries, little kitchen breweries and hidden wine presses flourish; the spy system, the most mischievous of all governmental agencies, is established, and officials are corrupted by lawbreakers, as always where laws are not sanctioned by a heartfelt and vigilant public sentiment. Further, prohibition is immoral in that it breeds intellectual dishonesty among its advocates. Consider their sweeping assertion that even moderate drinking causes disease and leads to vice. Scientists gathered from all countries at the physiological congress in Cambridge affirmed officially that alcohol "supplies energy like all common articles of food, and that it is physiologically incorrect to designate it as a poison," also, that "there is nothing to show that a moderate daily use of alcohol in any kind of beverage may not be beneficial to health." Third-Prohibition in California, especially on the eve of the Panama-Pacific International Exposition, would be an economic blunder of colossal proportions. Why should California destroy her great wine industry? In the cultivation of it she has spent enormous sums of public money, and has made the fostering of it one of the duties of the State University. California has 320,000 acres devoted to viticulture. The wine industry represents an investment of $150,000,000, yields annually $30,000,000, supports 75,000 persons. California breweries represent an investment of $50,000,000, distribute annually $6,000,000 to 4,000 employees, consume .annually $1,000,000 worth of California barley, $175,000 worth of California hops, and $2,500,000 worth of other essentials. They pay the general government an annual revenue of $1,350,000 and about the same amount to towns and counties. In the manufacture and distribution of liquors 282,000 persons are employed and dependent. In the distribution of liquors $10,000,000 is invested. and the annual license tax paid is $3,000,000. So prohibition would not only destroy great properties and industries, impoverish thousands of families and increase the army of unemployed, but it would substitute the vilest of poisonous concoctions for our pure wines, beers and brandies, and make every taxpayer pay the cost of the industrial cataclysm. And to what end? Prohibition has been a failure wherever the hobby has been given the dignity of legal sanction. Do prohibitionists believe, as they say, that the race is dying? Mankind has been drinking thousands of years, never so moderately as now; and Professor Muensterberg, greatest living psychologist, holds that alcoholic stimulants are essential to great achievement. Drunkenness is deplorable, but it has been steadily declining for one hundred years without the aid of prohibition. Vote "No." WILLIAM SCHULDT, Sec'y California State Brewers' Ass'n. EIGHT HOUR LAW. Initiative act adding section 3932 to the Penal Code. Declares it a misdemeanor, punishable by fine or imprisonment in county jail or both, for any employer to require or permit, or to suffer or permit his overseer, superintendent, foreman or other agent to require or permit, any person in his employ to work more than eight hours in one day, or more than forty-eight hours in one week, except in case of extraordinary emergency caused by fire, flood, or danger to life or property. The electors of the State of California present to the secretary of state this petition, asking that the proposed amendment to the Penal Code hereinafter set forth be submitted to the electors of the State of California for their approval or rejection. An act to amend the Penal Code by adding a new section thereto, to be numbered 393, limiting the hours of labor of employees and providing a penalty for violation of the provisions of this act. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: HOURS OF LABOR. Any employer who shall require or permit, or who shall suffer or permit any overseer, superintendent, foreman, or other agent of such employer, to require or permit any person in his employ to work more than eight hours in one day, or more than forty-eight hours in one week, except in case of extraordinary emergency caused by fire, flood, or danger to life or property, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not less than $50 nor more than $500, or imprisoned in the county jail not less than 10 nor more than 90 days, or both so fined and imprisoned. ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF EIGHT HOUR LAW. The fight for a shorter work day began with the wage system. It is a vital part of the labor program. The workers of California should take advantage of this opportunity to crystallize into law what has already been accomplished by organized effort. The progress of civilization is indicated in the capacity of the workers to sustain themselves with a minimum expenditure of energy. To organized labor, more than to any other one agency, are we indebted for the shorter work day. An eight hour day means an increased demand for men. It relieves the unemployment pressure. Under a long hour day some men work while others are idle. Enforced idleness is not leisure. Idleness will impoverish, degrade and dwarf. Leisure will enrich and elevate character. It will give the workers opportunity for study and organization. More idlers working, more workers thinking. The eight hour day does not reduce wages. Men are not paid according to what they produce, but according to the law of supply and demand. As the competition for jobs becomes less fierce, wages correspondingly rise. Shorter hours mean a reduction in profits and fortunes made from labor. Labor has had but a meager share in the benefits of improved machinery. The introduction of labor saving devices demands a corresponding reduction in the hours of labor. The eight hour day conserves the health of the worker, and extends the working period of his life. The passage of this bill will discourage the importation of cheap labor, and prevent the employing class from manipulating the labor market when it shall have become flooded by immigration through the Panama canal. Employers of labor in this state are planning to abolish the eight hour day. It rests with the voters to decide whether the standard of living in California shall be reduced to the level of southern Europe. The eight hour day will not paralyze industry. Skilled labor and women are already operating on this basis. California's industries are still growing. The farm laborer now bears the brunt of the extortions of railroads and middlemen, by working long hours for low wages. This bill will place him on the same basis as other workers, and shift the burden where it rightly belongs. The domestic servant will be relieved of unbroken daily drudgery. Shorter hours of labor promote purer and better family life. Long hours exhaust the toiler, and unfit him for social pleasures. They divorce the parent from the child. An eight hour day will effectively diminish the vast number of criminals, paupers and idlers who consume the people's substance. All the arguments against this measure resolve themselves into this one-it will encroach on the profits of the exploiters of labor. All the arguments in its favor converge finally into this one-for the great majority of the common people, it will bring more abundant life. THOS. W. WILLIAMS, State Secretary Socialist Party of California. ARGUMENT AGAINST EIGHT HOUR LAW. This measure proposes an arbitrary eight hour day in all occupations, whether or not it suits the interests of laborer or employer. It substitutes rigid rule of law for reasonable liberty of action. It prohibits "overtime" by which employees and employers divide the burdens of emergency by co-operation. Without overtime ships would wait at the docks for loading and repairs; delayed trains could not reach destination; business and industry would be in continual confusion. It limits "piecework," the employee's reward for efficiency; increases the cost of living, and adds to the expense of childbirth, illness and death. It affects all labor for hire, including household helpers, hospital attendants, newspapermen and professors. All engaged in manufacture and trade will pay the penalty, also farming, which produces "food for all." The farmer sustains manufacturing and trade; he makes opportunity for transportation and labor, and is the basic factor in the development of the state; but neither he nor the rule of law can regulate the weather or govern conditions which control the production of land. He cannot fix prices on export products, which must compete in the world's markets, hence he must recover added cost of production from domestic consumers. If the farmer is prevented from getting full service from his teams and implements, seeding operations will be retarded, grains may rot in the fields and fruits may perish in the orchard. His teamster may be stopped on a long haul and delayed by a sixteen-hour layover. Is it reasonable, then, to impose upon the farmer a law which subjects him to heavy penalty and makes him a criminal if the weather, which holds him to idleness today, compels him to work overtime tomorrow? He can not substitute other men to the stroke of the clock; besides, there is no labor supply for substitution, and, in view of the lack of winter employment, it would be unjust and foolish to attract to California for harvest work many thousands of additional workers by promising an alluring and easy life under the proposed universal eight hour law. To the employee, also, the results would be disastrous, for to him would fall not only the higher cost of living, but matters would finally so adjust themselves that the employee would be paid for his hours of work only, shortening his hours of labor and lessening his daily pay. And he would still have to meet the higher cost of living. Limitation of hours means increased cost of production, and thus would compel California to compete on this basis with states none of which have such law. It would be stupid business to thus limit our productive power and place California at a disadvantage in the world's markets. An eight hour day would lessen employment for white farm labor, and increase leasing to Oriental "partnerships" which would escape the proposed law; it would compel many farmers to send wives and children into the field, as in Europe. Both alternatives are offensive to American standards and should be opposed. This measure, if carried, will further increase the existing industrial depression. Vote "No." LAND TITLE LAW. G. H. HECKE. Initiative act amending act for certification of land titles. Constitutes county recorders registrars of title; prescribes procedure for obtaining decree establishing title and ordering registration; provides for issuance of certificates of title, method of effecting transfers, notation of liens, encumbrances and charges, correction of register and certificates, protection of bona fide purchasers, registration fees, and penalties for fraud and forgeries; regulates transactions respecting registered land; creates from certain fees, paid on original registration, title assurance fund held by state treasurer to indemnify persons for loss of any interest in land through operation of act. The electors of the State of California hereby petition, and present this, their petition, to the secretary of state, that there be submitted to the electors of the State of California, for their adoption or rejection, the following proposed law: An act to amend an act entitled "An act for the certification of land titles and the simplification of the transfer of real estate," approved March 17, 1897. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: An act entitled "An act for the certification of land titles and the simplification of the transfer of real estate," approved March 17, 1897, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 1. Recorders and ex officio recorders in the several counties of this state shall be registrars of titles in their respective counties, and their deputies shall be deputy registrars. All laws relative to recorders and their deputies, including their compensation, clerk hire, and expenses, shall extend to registrars and their deputies, so far as the same may be applicable, except as otherwise provided in this act. Registrars of titles shall be county officers within the meaning of the laws of this state. Sec. 2. The official bonds now required by law to be given by recorders before entering upon the discharge of their duties, shall also apply to and cover the faithful discharge of their duties as registrars, and of their deputies, whether such additional condition be specifically provided for in such bonds or not; provided, however, that recovery on such bond be had only for damages sustained through the gross or wilful negligence or gross or wilful neglect of duty or gross or wilful mismanagement on the part of such recorder or registrar or any of his deputies. Sec. 3. Deputies may perform any and all duties of the registrar, in the name of the registrar, and the acts of such deputies shall be held to be the acts of the registrar. Sec. 4. Registrars and deputy registrars are prohibited from practicing law, or acting as attorneys or counselors at law, or having as a partner a lawyer or any one who acts as such, or from acting as searchers of title under this act, excepting only such deputies as may be appointed as attorneys pursuant to the provisions of section 108 of this act. Sec. 5. All land may be brought under the operation of this act by the owner or owners of any estate or interest therein, whether legal or equitable (other than an undivided share or an easement) by filing with the county clerk his or her or their verified petition to the superior court of the county within which such land is situated, which petition shall set forth the following facts, to wit: The full name, occupation, residence, and post-office address of the applicant or applicants, and where any applicant appears by any representative because of any disability, also, the full name, occupation, residence and post-office address of the person so representing the applicant and the reasons for his so acting; if the application is by a corporation, its name, when and where incorporated, its principal place of business and the names and post-office addresses of its president and secretary, or if none, its executive officers; whether or not the applicant is married and if married, the full name and residence of the husband or wife; and if unmarried, whether he or she has been married, and if so, how the marriage relation terminated, and if the marriage relation was terminated by annulment or divorce, where and by what court; that each of the applicants is of the full age of twenty-one years and free from any disability, or if a minor or under disability, his age and the nature of such disability; a description of the land; the value at which the land and permanent improvements, if any, were assessed on the last assessment for county taxation; and if the application is by more than one person, any one of whom claims title in severalty to any part of the land described in the petition, the particular part of the land to which each petitioner severally claims title; a statement of the estate or interest which each applicant has or claims and whether or not the same is community property or is subject to a homestead or to any easement, lien or incumbrance and if so the name and post-office address, if known, of each holder thereof, the nature and the amount of the same, and if recorded, the book and page of the record; a statement of whether or not the land is occupied and if so. the full name and post-office address of each occupant and what interest he has or claims: a statement of any other person who has any estate or claims any interest in the or any part of the land, in law or equity, in possession, remainder, reversion or expectancy and the names and post-office addresses. if known, of every such person together with the names and post-office addresses of all the owners of adjoining lands, so far as the same can be ascertained upon diligent inquiry. If the application is by a husband or wife and the property is community property or is subject to a homestead, both spouses must join in the application; persons who collectively claim to own the entire legal estate in fee simple to the or any part of the land may join in the petition; a corporation may apply by its duly authorized agent; the estate of a deceased person by the administrator or executor and a minor or other person under disability by his legally appointed guardian, but the person in whose behalf the application is made shall be named as applicant. Land constituting a single parcel and lying partly in two or more counties may be included in one application, which may be made in either county in which the land lies, but the certificate issued therefor must be filed with the registrars of all the counties within which such land is situate. Sec. 6. If said land is part of a city, town or subdivision of which a map or plat made and verified as required by the then existing laws of the State of California or an official map is on file in the office of the county recorder and upon such map the land appears in such manner that it can be identified thereon by reference, the application may refer to such map. In all cases where said land can not be identified by reference to such map or where no such map is on file in the office of the county recorder, a plat or plan of survey of the land made by the county or a licensed surveyor must accompany the application. Such survey must show the boundaries of the land and its relation to adjoining lands and streets and any encroachments if any. The court may, in any case, before decree, require a survey to be made for the purpose of determining exact boundaries. If the application describes the land as bounded by a public or private way, it shall state whether or not the applicant claims any and what land within the limits of the way and whether the applicant desires to have the line of the way determined. If it appears by the petition that the applicant, either by himself or by himself and his predecessors in interest, has been in the actual, exclusive and adverse possession of the or any part of the land described, continuously for more than five years next preceding the filing of the petition claiming to own the same in fee against the world, and that he has or that he and his predecessors in interest have paid all taxes of every kind legally levied or assessed against such property during said period, the petition must then also state the character of such possession and the applicant must prove the same to the satisfaction of the court on the hearing. Each application must be accompanied by an abstract of title to all land which does not appear by said petition to have been adversely held as hereinabove provided. When the title to the or any of the land described has been previously determined by a final decree of a court of competent jurisdiction, no abstract regarding the same need antedate such decree. When the title to the or any of the land described has been previously insured by a corporation transacting business in insuring titles to real estate and a policy of insurance has been issued by said corporation and at the time of the issuance of said policy, said company had fully complied with all laws of the State of California, such policy may be made the starting point of any abstract to be filed under the provisions of this act and the abstract of title so to be presented need only commence at the date of such title insurance policy and the verification thereof hereinafter provided need only apply to the portion of said abstract subsequent to the date of said title insurance policy, but must include all defects or exceptions stated in said policy. All abstracts herein referred to must be verified by the searcher making the same, as in proceedings in partition, or if made by a corporation, by the certificate of such corporation, under its seal. Where actual, exclusive and adverse possession and payment of taxes is alleged but not proved to the satisfaction of the court on the hearing, the court may require an abstract of the title as herein provided to be furnished which shall then be used in the same manner as if such abstract had been filed with the application. No person, nor any corporation which, at the time has not fully complied with the provisions of the laws of the State of California, shall be authorized to make or furnish such abstracts of title until after entering into an undertaking with two or more sufficient sureties to the people of the State of California in a sum not less than $10,000.00, which may be increased from time to time by order of the court whenever it shall appear to such court that by reason of the number of abstracts of title which any one person or corporation is making or furnishing under one bond, the state is not sufficiently secured thereby. Such bond shall be recorded in the record of official bonds in the recorder's office of the county. Said bond shall be conditioned to pay all damages and costs which the state may sustain by reason of any error or insufficiency in said or any of said abstracts. The sureties on such bond shall qualify as provided in section ten hundred and fifty-seven of the Code of Civil Procedure and the sufficiency of the bond and of the sureties thereon shall be approved by a judge of the superior court of the county where such bond is to be filed. The sureties upon such bond may become severally liable in portions of not less than five hundred dollars each, making in the aggregate at least two sureties for the whole sum. Upon any petition hereunder being filed, the clerk shall immediately endorse thereon the exact time of its presentation and shall enter the same in a book kept for that purpose known as the land register docket. Sec. 7. No mortgage, lien, charge, or lesser estate than a fee simple shall be registered unless the fee simple to the same land is first registered. It shall not be an objection to bringing land under this act, that the estate or interest of the applicant is subject to any outstanding lesser estate, mortgage, lien, or charge; but every such lesser estate, mortgage, lien, or charge shall be noted upon the certificate of title and the duplicate thereof, and the title or interest certified shall be subject only to such estates, mortgages, liens, and charges as are so noted, except as herein provided. Sec. 8. No title derived through sale for any tax or assessment shall be entitled to be first registered, unless it shall appear to the satisfaction of the court upon the hearing of the application that the applicant or those through whom he claims title, have been in the actual, exclusive and adverse possession of the land under such title at least five successive years and have paid all taxes and assessments legally levied thereon during said period. But the foregoing shall not apply to any title derived through sale by the State of California of any property which has been sold by the state for taxes and held by the state for the period provided by law. Sec. 9. The application may be amended only by petition verified as in the case of the original. Such amendinent may be ordered by the court on its own motion, or upon the motion of any person interested in the proceedings. Sec. 10. The filing of the application in the office of the county clerk shall be sufficient notice of the same to all subsequent purchasers or incumbrancers without the filing of a lis pendens in the office of the recorder. Sec. 11. The court shall, in its discretion, where one or more abstracts are presented with the petition, examine them itself or refer the same as provided in section 18 of this act. If it shall appear to the court from an examination of the abstract or abstracts or from the report of the examiner of titles or from the petition where no abstracts are required, that the title to the land described in the application appears to be substantially as alleged, the court shall order notice to be given as provided in this act. Sec. 12. When the court shall order notice given, a notice must be issued, under the seal of the court, which shall contain the name of the court and the county in which the action is brought, the name or names of the applicant or applicants and a particular description of the land involved, which notice shall be directed to all parties appearing by the petition or the petition and abstract or by the report of the examiner of titles, if any, to have any interest in the land or any part thereof and which notice shall contain a statement that the petition has been filed by the applicant or applicants for the registration of the title to the land described therein as provided by this act and praying for a decree declaring the applicant or applicants to be the owner in fee of such land in accordance with the prayer of said petition and which notice shall direct all whom it may concern to appear and answer said petition within ten days after personal service if served within the county or within thirty days if served elsewhere and that otherwise the court will grant said petition and direct registration of the title to said land in accordance with the terms of this act and that said person so served will be forever barred from disputing the same. When the notice is issued, service thereof shall be made as follows: In all cases said notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county, to be designated by the court, for four successive weeks; if the notice be published in |