mitted that the meaning is doubtful; and the rule is that remedial statutes must be liberally construed, and where the meaning is doubtful they must be construed to extend the remedy. (White v. Steam Tug, etc., 6 Cal. 462; Cullerton v. Mead, 22 Id. 95; Jackson v. Warren, 32 Ill. 331. See also decision of this department, Streeter v. M. K, T. R. R., Copp's L. O. 180, where other cases are cited.)

I am of opinion that the defects on account of which you held the entry for cancellation are cured by the act of January 22, 1880, and that if the entry is otherwise regular and valid it ought to be patented.

C. SCHURZ, Secretary. The Commissioner of the General Land Office.

No. 28. 1. The notice of the hearing should be prepared by the local officers and signed by them.

2. The testimony should be by question and answer, and refer to every tenacre tract.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

WASHINGTON, D. C., August 14, 1875.

Register and Receiver, Pueblo, Colorado.

GENTLEMEN: * * * * ** It is observed that the published notices of hearings to disprove the mineral character of land in your district are signed by the applicants themselves, who appear to make their own arrangements for hearing testimony and publishing notices. This is not the correct practice.

Notice of hearing.

The notice of the hearing should be prepared by the local officers and signed by them, in order to secure a correct description of the land and to insert the names of mineral affiants, should any mineral affidavits covering the land applied for be on file in your office.

You should designate the paper of general circulation near the land in which to publish the notice, and in all cases where practicable, the hearings should be held before you. Where distance or other good cause renders it advisable, you should designate an officer using a seal, or other person authorized to administer oaths, whose character is known to you, residing near the land, as the proper person before whom the hearing shall be held.

The testimony submitted should be as far as possible by questions and answers, and the officer by whom the testimony is taken should endeavor to elicit full information as to the mineral and agricultural qualities of each ten-acre tract of the claim.

Be pleased to acknowledge the receipt hereof.

Very respectfully,

S. S. BURDETT, Commissioner.

No. 29. Proceedings where Central Pacific R. R. Co. seek to select land in mineral region.

See circular of September 23, 1880. No. 4.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

WASHINGTON, D. C., July 27, 1880.

Register and Receiver, Sacramento, California.

GENTLEMEN: I am in receipt of a letter from G. W. Farr, Esq., land attorney for the Central Pacific Railroad Company at Sacramento, asking what proceedings will be required of said company to enable it to establish the character of lands in your district, under the provisions of office circular dated April 27, 1880.

One of the causes which led to the revocation of the order of withdrawal of lands as mineral was, that under existing laws and regulations, every agricultural claimant is required to give notice, by publication and posting, of his intention to offer proof in support of his entry, and it was thought that with this publicity in case of every entry, should any land be claimed which is in fact valuable for minerals, parties interested would come forward and prove the same.

Such proceeding is not required by law in case of selections by the said company, and while it is presumed that all affidavits submitted would be made by credible witnesses, yet I do not think that an opportunity for mistakes should be given, or all protection to persons claiming lands to be mineral withdrawn.

List to be held for thirty days.

When the railroad company shall present a list of lands that they wish to select, accompanied by the usual nonmineral affidavit, you will receive the same and hold it in your office until thirty days notice has been given by pub

lication in a newspaper of general circulation, published nearest the land, describing the same by legal subdivision, section, township, and range, and setting forth the fact that it has been selected by the company.

Provision for hearings.

During the period of publication, any person may come forward and allege, under oath, that the land is mineral, and at the expiration of such period you will forward to this office a correct list of such tracts as are not so alleged to be mineral in character, and proceed to order a hearing, at the expense of mineral affiants as to other tracts.

Burden of proof.

The burden of proof will be with the parties alleging the land to be mineral, as in homestead and pre-emption en

tries.

By complying with the foregoing, it is thought that all parties will be protected in whatever rights they may have, and a well-advised conclusion reached by this office.

Whenever the said company shall apply to select certain tracts, you will be governed by the foregoing.

Very respectfully,

J. A. WILLIAMSON, Commissioner.

No. 30. Persons having knowledge that land sought to be entered as agricultural in character is in fact mineral, should appear and testify. In no other way can the land department ascertain the facts or detect fraud. Hearings may be had on due application.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., Nov. 6, 1879.

CHAS. H. WYMAN, Esq., Auburn, Placer county, California. SIR: Your letter of sixteenth August last, and petition therewith from miners in your State, referred by the Hon. Secretary to this office, have been duly considered.

Said petition recites that it has been, and is, the practice of a certain class to claim land as agricultural, and conceal from the land officers its mineral character, obtain title, and then sell and bond the same, to be worked for minerals. It also refers to the Central Pacific Railroad Company as being in the practice of issuing citations for hearings to disprove the prima facie mineral character of odd sections

within its grant, and at the hearing abandoning such portions as are claimed by miners as mineral, and after a few months again citing the miners to another hearing concerning the same land. It is asked that when land is once determined or conceded to be mineral, it shall forever be deemed and held as such.

Parties knowing land to be mineral should appear and testify.

In the matter of fraudulent proceedings under agricultural claims, to obtain title to mineral lands, it is obvious that no broad and unqualified rule can arbitrarily be enforced which will be effective under the present laws. Land which is in fact non-mineral is subject to agricultural entry, and if a party seeks under such entry to obtain title to a mineral tract, it is the duty of miners and others who may know its true character to appear at the district land office and submit proof thereof. The knowledge of the character of any certain tract is local, and this office must necessarily depend upon parties in the vicinity to prevent fraud in said respect. Published notice of thirty days is uniformly required of parties who seek agricultural entry on lands withdrawn as mineral, and thereby all parties are advised and furnished opportunity to defeat any fraudulent entry.

In regard to the alleged proceedings of said railroad company, you are advised that when a hearing is had to determine the character of certain lands, those alleging them to be valuable for mineral should submit their proof at the hearing, and thereafter this office would be in a position to conclude the respective claims of all parties. But if you neglect to submit your proof, and the said company presents none, it is plain that this office can render no final decision, nor can I anticipate any particular excuse which may be urged for the neglect.

In short, if under the present laws those interested in preventing fraudulent entries of mineral lands will avail themselves of the means now furnished them by existing regulations, and appear and insist upon the right to submit their testimony at the hearings referred to above, and notify this office forthwith of any refusal to receive their testimony, or irregularity of proceedings, a just conclusion

can be usually reached; but without the co-operation of those interested in an honest disposition of the public lands, it is apparent that this office labors under great embarrassments.

You are assured that it is the desire of this office and department to be advised by affidavit of attempted fraud in any case; but it is clearly impracticable to act upon general allegations referring to no particular claim and tract. Yours, respectfully,

J. M. ARMSTRONG, Acting Commissioner.

No. 31. Any person who has knowledge of the character of land invited to appear and testify on behalf of the surveyor's return.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

GENERAL LAND OFFICE. WASHINGTON, D. C., April 22, 1875.

Register and Receiver, Boise City, Idaho.

GENTLEMEN: This office has carefully examined the papers and testimony in the matter of the application of William B. Knott to enter under the pre-emption laws the S.E., N.W. 1, N.E. 1, S. W. 1, S. W. 1, N.E. 1, and N. W. 4, N. W. 4, Section 1, T. 5 S., R. 4 W., Idaho meridian, which tracts were returned by the surveyor as mineral land.

A hearing was held to determine the character of this land, after due notice before the clerk of the District Court, at Silver City, February 17, 1874.

As the return of the surveyor is prima facie correct, the burden of proof is upon the party seeking to disprove such return. The claimant, Knott, has failed to establish its incorrectness. The testimony in his behalf does not show that the land is more valuable for agricultural than for mining purposes, and his application to enter the same as a preemptor is accordingly denied.

You will so notify the parties, allowing sixty days for appeal.

Invitation to disinterested parties to testify.

In this connection I desire to call your attention to circulars of May 6, 1871, March 20, 1872, and June 10, 1872, and the rules of practice approved November 29, 1875, requesting strict compliance therewith, and to state that in

*See circular of April 27, 1880.