Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

4391, 4396, 4399 to 4402 inclusive, 4404, 4405, 4406, 4410 to 4413 inclusive, 4415 to 4418 inclusive, 4420, 4422, 4423, 4424, 4428, 4429, 4430, 4432, 4435 to 4438 inclusive, 4440, 4441, 4443, 4441, 4445, 4447 to 4452 inclusive, 4454, 4455, 4456, 4460 to 4473 inclusive, 4475 to 4481 inclusive, 4483 to 4487 inclusive, 4489, 4490, 4492, 4493. 4497 to 4500 inclu: sive, 4502, 4505, 4506, 4409 to 4513 inclusive, 4516 to 4524 inclusive, 4526, 4528, 4529, 4531 to 4534 inclusive, 4536 to 4539 inclusive, 4541, 4543 to 4549 inclusive, 4551, 4552, 4553, 4556 to 4560 inclusive, 4562, 4563, 4564, 4566, 4569 to 4572 inclusive, 4576, 4577, 4580 to 4586 inclusive, 4590, 4591, 4592, 4594, 4595, 4596, 4597.

MISSOURI.

WAUSAU.

No. 1370. Indian Lands.

Nos. 1380, 1398, 1406, 1411, 1412, 1416, 1438, 1440, 1442, 1445, 1452, 1454, 1455, 1457 to 1461 inclusive, 1463 to 1471 inclusive, 1473, 1474, 1475, 1477, 1479. 1480, 1481, 1483, 1484, 1486, 1487, 1491, 1494, 1496, 1498 to 1503 inclusive, 1505 to 1509 in clusive, 1513 to 1517 inclusive, 1520 to 1526 inclusive, 1529, 1534 to 1538 inclusive, 1542, 1543.

CASH PATENTS ISSUED. COPP'S LAND OWNER for this month reports the issuance of patents on the Cash Entries Nos. 2558, 2995, 3314, 3323, 3340, 3363, 3465 to 3492 inclu-numbered below, which patents have been sent to the below-named land-offices.

sive.

BOONVILLE.

[blocks in formation]

LAKE VIEW.

Nos. 50, 52 to 58 inclusive.

LE GRAND.

Nos. 241, 347, 403, 439, 442, 455. 473, 478, 479. 483, 497, 525, 605, 653, 657, 659, 668, 669, 699, 715, 716, 717, 718. 719, 720, 721, 722, 723, 724, 726 to 748 inclusivé, 750, 752, 753.

OREGON CITY.

Nos. 854, 1114, 1132, 1370, 1414, 1431, 1471, 1474, 1512 to 1518 inclusive, 1520 to 1524 inclusive, 1527 to 1529 inclusive, 1531 to 1543 inclusive, 1530.

UTAH.

ALABAMA.
MONTGOMERY.

Nos. 17272, 17368, 17369, 17370, 17374, 17730, 17741, 17748, 17757, 17766, 17773, 17777, 17788, 17789, 17791, 17794, 17795, 17798, 17799, 17817, 17820.

CALIFORNIA.
LOS ANGELES.

Nos. 773, 939, 940, 942, 943, 944, 945, 950, 951, 954, 955, 958, 964, 987, 989, 992, 998.

MARYSVILLE.

R. & R. No. 2, Surveyor General's Certificate.

SACRAMENTO.

Nos. 2366, 2517, 2519, 2520, 2522, 2523, 2526, 2527, 2531, 2546, 2565 to 2569 inclusive, 2572, 2573.

STOCKTON.

Nos. 6534, 7601, 7663, 7664, 7665, 7667, 7671 to 7674 inclu-
sive, 7676 to 7680 inclusive, 7686 to 7689 inclusive, 7692,
7695 to 7705 inclusive, 7709, 7727, 7735, 7736, 7737, 7742, 7743,
7744, 7751, 7755, 7756, 7757, 7763, 7774, 7776, 7779.
VISALIA.

3411, 3412, 3413, 3418, 3420.
Nos. 3383, 3386, 3387, 3388, 3390, 3397, 3398, 3402, 3408, 3409,

DAKOTA.
BISMARCK.

Nos. 86, 103, 113, 125, 126, 140, 168, 174, 188.

FARGO.

R. and R. No, 2, Surveyor General's Certificate. Nos. 1645, 1649, 2562, 2955, 2960, 2966, 2967, 2970, 2975, 2976, 2978, 2979, 2991, 2995, 2996, 3001, 3002, 3005, 3008, 3009, 3011, 3012 to 3015 inclusive, 3020, 3024, 3026, 3028, 3030, 3031, 3032, 3035, 3043, 3050, 3051, 3054, 3056, 3059, 3070, 3074, 3075, 3076, 3077, 3081, 3082, 3083, 3086 to 3090 inclusive, 3095, 3096, 3100, to 3103 inclusive, 3105, 3112, 3113, 3115, 3116, 3119, 3122, 3127, 3131, 3132, 3133, 3135, 3138, 3139, 3140, 3141, 3144, 3148, 3186, 3189, 3892, 3893, 3194, 3199, 3202, 3206, 3210, 3211, 3214, 3152, 3160, 3162, 3164, 3171, 3175, 3176, 3178, 3180, 3181, 3183, 3215, 3216, 3218, 3220, 3221, 3223, 3224, 3232, 3237, 3240, 3252, 3254, 3262, 3266, 3273, 3279, 3280, 3281, 3282, 3284, 3290, 3292, 3298, 3299, 3303, 3308, 3333, 3336 to 3340 inclusive, 3343, 3344, 3345, 3351, 3352, 3357, 3358, 3361 to 3364 inclusive, 3367, 3369, 3370, 3371, 3377, 3379, 3384, 3386, 3387, 3388, 3389, 3391, 3392, 3393, 3394, 3395, 3396, 3398, 3402, 3414, 3415, 3416, 3417, 3419, 3420, 3429, 3430, 3431, 3432, 3436, 3439, 3443, 3445, 3446, 3447, 3449, 3460, 3463, 3465, 3467, 3475, 3476, 3485, 3487, 3488, 3490, 3492, 3493, 3494, 3495, 3597, 3498, 3499, 3500, 3503, 3506 to 3509 inclusive, 3512, 3515, 3518, 3532, 3533, 3539, 3541, 3542, 3544, 3549, 3550, 3552, 3554, 3560, 3570, 3571, 3575, 3581, 3590, Nos. 22, 327, 544, 1427, 1459, 1584, 1630, 1672, 1714, 1800, 3592, 3596, 3602, 3603, 3605, 3608, 3609, 3611, 3621, 3622, 3623, 1872, 1902, 1913, 1966 to 1970 inclusive, 1973 to 1977 inclu- 3627, 3628, 3629, 3630, 3633, 3636, 3641, 3642, 3645, 3660, 3676, sive, 1979, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1986 to 2004 inclusive, 2006 to 3680, 3683, 3688, 3694, 3695, 3697, 4089, 4168, 4170, 4176, 4178, 2011 inclusive, 2013 to 2021 inclusive, 2023 to 2035 inclu-4183, 4185, 4187, 4188, 4194, 4196, 4202, 4206, 4208, 4209, 4210, sive, 2037 to 2051 inclusive, 2054, 2055, 2956, 2058 to 2064 4213, 4218, 4219, 4231, 4233, 4240, 4247, 4250, 4255, 4256, 4267, inclusive, 2066 to 2070 inclusive, 2072, 2073, 2077, 2078, 4273, 4277, 4278, 4279, 4280, 4286, 4287. 2079, 2081 to 2089 inclusive.

[blocks in formation]

Nos. 1464, 1596, 1599, 1604, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1618, 1619, 1620, 1622, 1624, 1626, 1628, 1629, 1630, 1633, 1644, 1645, 1646, 1654, 1656, 1657, 1658, 1667, 1669, 1673, 1674, 1678, 1679, 1680, 1681, Nos. 23, 24, 40, 158, 196, 382, 388, 399, 400, 401, 403 to 412 1686, 1693, 1695, 1700, 1701, 1703, 1705, 1707, 2943, 2952, 3137, inclusive, 414, 415, 417, 418, 419, 420. 3486, 3527, 3667.

[blocks in formation]

Nos. 4313, 7170, 7462, 7484, 7585, 7487, 7492, 7496, 7501, 7521, 7525, 7532, 7553, 7573, 7574, 7575, 7578, 7582, 7591, 7695, 7603, 7606, 7619, 7627, 7628, 7646, 7667, 7671, 7680, 7685, 7689, 7695, 7702, 7603, 7704, 7726, 7730, 7748, 7749, 7752, 7753, 7760, 7761. WATERTOWN.

Mitchell Series. Nos. 3668, 4908. 7451, 7483, 7489, 7493, 7558, 7559, 7561, 7577, 7616, 7621, 7633, 7641, 7723, 7728, 7729.

YANKTON.

R. and R. No. 8, located at Sioux Falls, Surveyor
General's Certificate.

Nos. 812, 825, 897, 903, 919, 937, 938, 997, 1004, 1005. 1032,
1054, 1078, 1075, 1076, 1977, 1080, 1082, 1087, 1088, 1097, 1112,
1122, 1176, 1510, 1511, 1513, 1519, 1520, 1527, 1531, 1533, 1534,
1538, 1541, 1549, 1551, 1564.

FLORIDA.
GAINESVILLE.

Nos. 1231, 1559, 1632, 1647, 1795, 2053, 2070, 2102, 2103, 2157, 2158, 2160, 2161, 2162, 2164, 2165, 2166, 2167, 2170, 2172 to 2176 inclusive, 2178, 2179, 2180, 2185, 2186, 2190, 2191, 2193, 2199, 2200 to 2203 inclusive, 2206, 2207, 2209, 2011, 2213 to 2217 inclusive.

Nos. 1345, 1367, 1525, 1715, 1740, 1777, 1886, 1891, 1916, 1928,

1929, 1931, 1933 to 1937 inciusive, 1939 to 1943 inclusive,
1947, 1948, 1950, 1951, 1953, 1954, 1957, 1958, 1962, 1963, 1964,
1967 to 1973 inclusive, 1977, 1980, 1981, 1985, 1986, 1989 to
1997 inclusive, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2014,
2015, 2017, 2020, 2024, 2029, 2030, 2031, 2033, 2034, 2035, 2036,
2038, 2039, 2040, 2041, 2044, 2047, 2048 2049, 2109.
2084 inclusive, 2086 to 2090 inclusive, 2092, 2095, 2096,
2097, 2099, 2101, 2104 to 2108 inclusive, 2111, 2113 to 2116
inclusive, 2120, 2122 to 2126 inclusive, 2128, 2130, 2131,
2133, 2135 to 2140 inclusive, 2142 to 2156 inclusive.
No. 2069 in favor of R. E. Bell.

Nos. 1483. 2051, 2054, 2056, 2057, 2061, 2064, 2067, 2073 to

IDAHO.

BOISE CITY.

Nos. 4822, 485, 503, 563, also Nos. 11 and 12 Desert
Lands.
KANSAS.
INDEPENDENCE.

Nos. 5, 321, 353 to 395 inclusive, 1752, 1763, 1764, 1765. 1767, Cherokee Strip.

KIRWIN.

Nos. 1678, 1796, 1815, 1850, 1952, 2139, 2592, 2594 to 2597 inclusive, 2600, 2607, 2608, 2611, 2615, 2617, 2618, 2619, 2624, 2626, 2629, 2631, 2635 to 2638 inclusive, 2640, 2644, 2648, 2649, 2650, 2651, 2898, 2910, 3009, 3045, 3048, 3059, 3063.

LARNED.

Nos. 672, 679, 685, 687, 690, 692, 696, 699, 700, 704, 706, 719, 723, 727, 730, 736, 737, 739, 742, 746, 748, 749, 751, 752, 753, 774, 778, 779, 781, 791, 798, 804, 821.

OBERLIN.

Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 19, 20, 28, 29, 30, 33, 37, 38, 42, 48, 49, 54, 55, 58, 59, 61, 68, 75, 83, 87, 95, 106, 107, 109, 110, 124, 136, 138.

SALINA.

Nos. 4380, 4383, 4406, 4407, 4409, 4414, 4440, 4501, 4502, 4505, 4511, 4515, 4516, 4524, 4525, 4527, 4531, 4533, 4535, 4540, 4542, 4543, 4554, 4566, 4568, 4615, 4617, 4622, 4623, 4625, 4629, 4636, 4639, 4642, 4643, 4646, 4650, 4652, 4654, 4662, 4664 to 4667 inclusive, 4671, 4672, 4675, 4703, 4755, 4761, 4762, 5759.

TOPEKA.

Nos. 4237 to 4246 inclusive, 4249, 4251, 4257, 4258, 4259, 4260, 4262, 4265, 4268, 4273, 4274.

WICHITA.

Nos. 10146, 12871, 12876, 12885, 12893, 12894, 12932, 12939, 12942, 12951, 12981, 12991, 12995, 13002, 13004, 13006, 13007, 13067, 13070, 13072, 13074, 13076, 13078, 13083, 13084, 13085, 13087, 13093, 13096, 13097, 13101, 13106, 18107, 13111, 13434, 13445, 13446, 13447, 13444, 13455, 13462, 13465, 13467, 13468, 13470, 13474, 13475, 13488, 13491, 13493, 13513, 13536, 13545, 13546, 13551, 13553, 13555, 14156, 14160, 14162 to 14178 inclu sive, 14729, 14986, 15500, 15501, 15502, 15512, 15513, 15525, 15527, 15540, 15551, 15573, 15574, 15576, 15577, 15587, 15605, 15606, 15611, Osage Trust Lands. LOUISIANA.

NEW ORLEANS.

Nos. 5123 to 5129 inclusive, 5131, 5132, 5133, 5135 to 5138 inclusive, 5140, 5141, 5145 to 5152 inclusive, 5154 to 5163 inclusive, 5167 to 5180 inclusive.

" MICHIGAN.
MARQUETTE.

R. and R. Nos. 26 to 33 inclusive, 36, 37, 38, 39, 102,
103, Surveyor General's Certificate.
Nos. 11471, 12225.

Nos. 11767, 11768, 11837, 11838, 11839.
MINNESOTA.
CROOKSTON.

Detroit and Crookston Series, Nos. 625, 707, 1170, 1268, 1381, 1428, 1527, 1570, 1626, 1671, 1793, 1798, 1850, 1833, 1907, 1908, 1912, 1918, 1919, 1923, 1925, 1930, 1951, 1954, 1956, 1958, 1960, 1963, 1965, 1978, 1980, 1985, 1992, 1993, 2462.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT.

Beginning with the tenth volume (this

17 month), this publication will be issued
semi-monthly. As nearly as possible, the
dates of issue will be the 1st and 15th of
every month.

UNTIL recently COPP'S LAND OWNER Was
the only paper in the United States with
that name. Of course no one can claim
an exclusive right in the words "Land
Owner" as a newspaper title, yet we would
prefer that Doolittle & Graham, of Mit-
chell, Dakota, had called their monthly
the Real Estate Terror, Land Pirates'
Own, or some other cheerful name, rather
than Dakota Land Owner.

THE subscriber who wishes the publica-
tion of the Supreme Court decision in
Belk vs. Meagher, will find it in Vol. 8, p.
162. Consult your indexes.

THE Index to vol. 9 of the LAND OWNER

This change is made in response to a
demand for earlier information, and from will probably be ready in May. Only
a great increase in the matter that ought

to be laid before our readers.

The subscription price must be increased

accordingly, and THREE DOLLARS will be

the annual subscription price until further

notice.

If you want to obtain Von Laer's Binder
for nothing, secure two new subscribers
23 for the LAND OWNER. To any one dis-
posed to do a little canvassing, we would
offer any or all of our publications as
25 premiums.

TRÜBNER & CO., of London, England,

send kindly notices of our publications
from the London Mining Journal.

GREAT PROSPERITY IN LOS
ANGELES COUNTY.

No portion of the State is enjoying a
"boom" but Los Angeles county. There
30 much more than in any other portion of
32 the State well-to-do people from the At-
lantic States are buying land and settling
down to its cultivation in fruit, grapes,

32

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

ent.

MINES AND MINERALS.
ROBINSON VS. ROYDOR.

the lode must be known to exist at the patent issue for the Shonbar lode claim; "date of the application." but by your decision of June 3, 1882, you I am of the opinion that the Register declined to recall your former decision, Patent issued for placer claim in January, 1876. Robinson applied for patent for his lode claim and Receiver should not have rejected holding the matter to be beyond the juriswithin the limits of the placer claim, August Robinson's application because of its con- diction of your office. 30, 1880, alleging that said lode was known flict with the patented Roydor placer. I This case, so far as it relates to the to exist at date of application for placer pat-therefore direct that all proceedings sub- question of the existence of a known Held, That Robinson's application should have sequent to said Robinson's application for lode, is within the rule established by this been received, and thereafter adverse claim a patent for the Mammoth lode be dis- Department under date of the 19th instant, might be filed and the question in contro- missed without prejudice, and that Robin- in the matter of the Mammoth Quartz versy settled in the courts. son be permitted to proceed in compli- Mine, wherein it was ordered that the SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner Mc Far-ance with the statute. lode claimants be permitted to proceed land, March 19, 1883. pursuant to statutory provisions by application for patent upon the lode claim, by regular publication, subject to the filing of an adverse claim and the institution of suit in a court of competent jurisdiction.

The adverse claim can then be made,
I have considered the case of William and the controversy settled by the court
T. Robinson, claimant of the Mammoth in the manner directed by the statute.
Quartz Mine, vs. Joseph D. Roydor, pat-
entee of the N. of the N. of the N. W.

of the S. W. and S. of the S. of the S. W. of the N. W. of Sec. 5, Tp. 5, R. 12 E., placer location, Sacramento, California.

Your office having denied Robinson's right to appeal, the record in the case is brought to this Department by certiorari allowed upon the petition made in behalf of the owners of Mammoth Quartz Mine.

Roydor made application for a patent on his placer claim October 23, 1874, and patent was issued to him therefor Janu

ary 14, 1876.

The record shows that on the 30th day of August, 1880, Robinson made application for patent for said Mammoth Lode. The Register and Receiver refused to entertain the application, because it conflicted with the patented Roydor placer aforesaid.

September 30, 1880, Robinson made affidavit that Roydor knew at the time when he applied for his patent of the existence of the quartz vein located by affiant, and with his affidavit filed two affidavits of third parties in support of the allegation.

ANTHONY H. BARRETT ET AL.

Lode Claim within a Placer.—Where lode claim-
ants fail to file adversely to a placer applica-
tion which embraces their lode claim, they
are entitled to only 25 feet of surface ground

on each side of the vein.

But the present claim exceeds twentyfive feet in width on each side of the vein. The application has been allowed, publication regularly had, and the entry made. In fact said claimants had completed their SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner McFar-proofs, and the same were matter of record land, March 26, 1883. I have considered the appeal of An- the issuance of the placer patents, and no in your office, for several months prior to thony H. Barrett et al., applicants for pat-adverse claim was filed. It would not be ent for the Shonbar Lode, from your de- practicable, therefore, at this stage of the cisions of March 28th aud June 3d, 1882, the former holding the Helena, Montana, formance de novo of such preliminary reto remit these claimants to the perMineral Entry No. 611 of the premises quirements. In the absence of an adverse for cancellation, and the latter declining claim they are entitled to take their lode to recall the former. and twenty-five feet on either side. The only question remaining is whether or not the excess over that width of surface ground can be allowed.

You held the entry for cancellation because the ground covered thereby had been previously patented as placer claims upon mineral entries numbered 575 and 553, per patents issued April 15th and May 16th, 1881, respectively.

cause,

I think this cannot be done. The lode claimants, in order to protect their right to the full extent of their claim, should have filed adversely to the placer application within the statutory period; but having failed so to do, they are expressly restricted by the statute to their lode, "and twenty-five feet of surface on each side

thereof."

patent will issue.

It appears that said applicants located their claim May 5, 1879, filed application for patent November 2, 1880, notice whereof was regularly published from November 5th to January 6th, 1881, whereupon they made mineral entry No. December 6, same year, your office 611, January 14, 1881. Their application Your decision is accordingly reversed; ordered a hearing to determine "whether calls for "1497 linear feet of the Shonbar and if on examination the proofs are a vein was known to exist at the date of vein, lode or deposit, bearing silver and found regular and sufficient, you will rethe issuance of said placer patent." Hear- other metals, together with surface ground quire a corrected plat, properly defining ing was accordingly had. The Register varying from 464 to 538 feet in width the restricted surface ground, upon which and Receiver found from the testimony * * * being situated in the Summit that at the time of the issuance of the pat- Valley Mining District, county of Deer ent to Roydor, January 14, 1876, there Lodge, Territory of Montana." Such was no "known ledge or lode of quartz claim is designated as "Lot No. 175,” or other rock in place bearing gold, containing an area of 17.19 acres, and is silver, cinnabar, lead, tin, copper, or other so delineated by the official survey thereof valuable deposits." And upon appeal to made by U. S. Deputy Mineral Surveyor your office, you reviewed the testimony Baker, June 26, 1880, plat whereof was and affirmed the finding of the local offi-approved by U. S. Surveyor General Mason, September 3d ensuing. These Although your office directed the in- applicants claim to have acquired title. quiry to be made as to whether the lode" by purchase from original locators." was known to exist at the date of the is- It further appears that, under date of suance of the placer patent, Robinson's affidavit averred that Roydor knew of its existence at the time that he made application for his said patent.

cers.

A. B. PAGE. Timber-Mill-site.-The owner of a mill-site may remove the timber thereon for the purpose of his mining improvements, but not for sale or speculation. COMMISSIONER MCFARLAND to A. B. Page, Jasper, Colorado, March 22, 1883. (J. S. P.) If the mill-site claim is timbered, there would seem to be no good reason why the lawful claimant should not be permitted May 29, 1882, the applicants' attorney to cut and remove the timber thereon for filed in their behalf the affidavits of cer- the purpose of constructing a mill, reductain persons resident in said district, al- tion works, tramways or other accessory leging that the Shonbar lode is a well- required in the development of his minThe averments in the affidavit, there- defined vein, rich in minerals; and that ing interests. In permitting the removal fore, brought the case within the rule es- its existence was known at, and long an- of the timber from such mill-site or tract tablished by this Department in the late terior to, the date of said placer applica-of non-mineral land prior to the issuance case of Becker vs. Sears and War Dance tion. of patent therefor, it is strictly forbidden Lode vs. Church Placer (9 Copp's L. O., Wherefore said attorney requested that to make such timber an article of sale for 211 and 212), in which it was held that your former decision be recalled and that private gain or speculation.

HOMESTEADS.

years of age at the date of his settlement,
by reason whereof he was not a qualified

In the latter case (Sec. 2172 R. S.), it is provided that the children shall be deemed citizens if they were under twentyAlthough such allegation was unsworn, one years of age at the time of the naturand although it could not be regarded as alization of their parents. "newly discovered evidence "-it not hav- In section 2168 the word "children" is ing been shown that a knowledge of such used in its natural sense, and is not qualimaterial fact could not have been pre-fied by reference to minority. viously procured-I deemed it advisable "In this case the period of residence of to suspend said decision, in order to per- the widow and children is immaterial, nor mit Ball to furnish such duly verified pre- is any distinction made between minor liminary proof as might serve as a basis children and adults." Hon. C. P. Daly, for a new trial. Ch. J., N. Y. C. C. P. in Am. Cyclopædia, ed. 1881, v. 12, p. 164.

THOMAS VS. THOMAS. Contest-Divorce-Six Months.-Residence-Res- pre-emptor. idence is largely a question of intent. A contest by a divorced wife against her absent husband's homestead entry should be treated as between parties who were never married. COMMISSIONER MCFARLAND to Reg. and Rec., Salina, Kansas, March 7, 1883. (G. B. C.) The case of Thomas vs. Thomas involves H. E. No. 20, 199 in the name of Wm. R. Thomas, and is before me on appeal from your decision adverse to the

contestant.

It appears that the contestant, who was the wife of claimant, obtained a divorce from him, the decree being dated March 18, 1882. It was conclusively shown that W. R. Thomas abandoned the tract and his family in the spring of 1880, and at the date of the hearing-June 5, 1882-had not returned thereto. You, however, decide against the contestant, for the reason that at the time of complaint, six months had not elapsed subsequent to the date of the decree of divorce. This apparently proceeds on the assumption that the prolonged absence from his land by a homestead claimant is not cause for cancellation, if his family continues to reside on the same. do not consider this assumption well founded. The question of residence is one largely depending on the intent of the party. While, therefore, the residence of one's family may ordinarily be considered prima facie the residence of himself, in this case the absence of the claimant appears to have been intentional and willful; so much so, that, as before stated, the local courts have granted a divorce to his wife.

I

By your letter of the 17th inst., you transmitted such proof; which consists of I construe the words in section 2168 the affidavit of Ball touching Myers' "upon taking the oaths prescribed by minority as alleged, and of his inability law," to refer to the final oaths required to prove the same in the first instance; upon admission to citizenship. also the affidavit of one John F. Brazil, The pre-emption laws provide that who alleges that he is the parish priest of entries of the public lands may be made St. Ambrose (Romish) church of the by persons who are citizens of the United city of Des Moines, Iowa, and as such ex States, or have "filed a declaration of inofficio custodian of the record or register tention to become such." of baptisms in said parish; that such In the case submitted by you, therefore, record contains the following notation: the declaration of intention by the father "Entry 120, John Myers, born Decem- being in law the declaration of the ber 2, 1858, legitimate son of Samuel daughter, she is legally qualified to exerMyers and and Elizabeth Ebby, his wife," cise the right of pre-emption. and that "said entry is under date of child's baptism. December 25," which was the date of the

MCKITTRICK AND ANDREWS. Unlawful Enclosure-Settlement.-The enclosure of large tracts of public land for grazing purposes is unlawful, and a trespass. Persons desiring to become bona fide settlers may tear down the fences surrounding such tracts.

Inasmuch as such allegations suggest false swearing by Myers, touching his personal qualifications as a pre-emptor at the date of his filing his declaratory statement, to wit: May 31, 1879, I deem it advisable SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner McFarto direct that a rehearing be ordered to the end that Ball may duly verify his allegations by proper documentary proof.

W. S. JACKSON.

Naturalization.-The daughter of an alien who,
after filing his declaration of intention to be-
come a citizen, died before taking out final
papers, is deemed a citizen upon taking the
prescribed oath. Before doing so, she may
initiate a pre-emption claim.
COMMISSIONER MCFARLAND to W. S. Jackson,
Streator, Ill., March 22, 1883.

This seems to me to be good cause for the cancellation of his entry. Contests by a wife against her husband have been discountenanced on sound principles of public policy, in harmony with the general system of practice in the courts; but in this case the marriage relation has ceased to exist, and the parties have the same legal relations to each other as if it never had existed. I think, therefore, that there has made a pre-emption entry, claimis no good reason why the contest of Mrs. Thomas should not be entertained. And in view of the foregoing, I am constrained to reverse your decision, and adjudge the entry forfeited.

PRE-EMPTIONS.
MYERS VS. BALL.

Pre-emptor's Minority-Unsworn Letter--Decision Suspended-Rehearing Ordered.--A rehearing is ordered in view of the documents submitted.

SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner McFarland, March 22, 1883.

Relative to the right of a party who

land, March 26, 1883.

You transmit under date of the 10th instant, for my consideration and action, "a petition and resolution of citizens of Barbour county, Kansas, relative to the unlawful enclosing of large tracts of vacant Osage Indian lands in said county, amounting in all to about two hundred thousand acres," and also sundry affidavits corroborating the alleged facts, and showing that, among others, one John McKittrick and one

Andrews, his

partner, have enclosed, for grazing purposes, a tract of about six thousand acres, subject to pre-emption, situate wholly or ing the right of citizenship through the in part in Tp. 31, R. 13 W., in said county, naturalization of her father while she and by such enclosures and by threats and was a minor, but who now finds that her violence, have prevented bona fide settlefather declared his intention to become a ment on the enclosed tract. You also citizen, and died without taking out his state that like enclosures are believed to naturalization papers, I have to state that exist in adjoining counties, and recomsection 2168 Revised Statutes of the mend that speedy action be taken for the United States provides that when any relief of settlers intending to locate on alien who has declared his intention to such enclosed lands, and that the fences become a citizen, dies before he is actually be removed. naturalized, the widow and children of I need not advise you that enclosures such alien shall be considered as citizens of the character described are unauthorof the United States, and shall be entitled to all rights and privileges as such upon taking the oaths prescribed by law.

Under date of September 21st last, I suspended my decision, rendered July 7th Under this statute, the declaration of preceding, in the case of John E. Myers the deceased husband and father becomes vs. Joseph Ball, upon the receipt of a let- in law the declaration of the widow and ter from the latter asking for a rehearing children, thus supplementing the statutes in the premises, and alleging that Myers, that make the citizenship of the husband to whom eighty acres of the land in ques- or father the citizenship of the wife or tion was awarded, was not twenty-one children.

ized and illegal, or that settlement on such lands is limited to one hundred and sixty acres, or that such mere occupation without settlement is trespass only, and gives no right to the occupant, or that such occupation does not legally exclude bona fide settlement by another. Such trespass on the public land is equally offensive to law and to morals as if upon private property, and lands not legally appro

priated are vacant and subject to disposal to whomsoever legally applies for them. Until settlement is made under the settlement laws, there is no objection to the grazing of cattle, or cutting hay, on government land, provided such unappropriated lands are left open to all alike. To allow a few wealthy stockmen to fence these lands, and thus not only practically withdraw them from the operation of the settlement laws, but deprive men of small means of the advantage of acquiring a settlement, will not be allowed under any pretense whatever. Attempts, therefore, by persons in illegal occupation of such tracts to prevent their settlement by fence or threats or violence, will be discountenanced by this Department, and should be by all good citizens.

It is immaterial that such enclosures are for stock-range purposes. The law recognizes no such purpose. The grazier may as equitably claim any other as the landed property of the government, but neither is permissible. He may have only what is allowed all others.

It appears that Mr. Chaffee is the agent of the said R. R. Co. for the purpose of securing ties for that road; but it is alleged that he cuts ties by men not borne on the rolls of the company, and buys ties of men who have cut the same on the public land. The railroad company comes within the provisions of the act of March 3, 1875, and is entitled to take timber from the adjacent public lands for the purpose of the construction of its road. I do not understand the word "adjacent " to mean that the lands from which timber is taken must adjoin the line of the road. The word "adjacent" may mean "adjoining," and it may mean "in the vicinity of."

line of its road, and within the terminal points thereof.

I do not see any objection to allowing the agent of the company to employ men not borne on the company's roll to cut ties, and it is immaterial whether they cut such ties by the day or for a certain price per tie. In either case the company is liable, if they go beyond the authority conferred on the company by the act of March 3, 1875.

JOHNSON VS. ST. PAUL AND SIOUX CITY

RAILROAD COMPANY.

If the Georgetown, Breckenridge and Leadville Railroad Company cut ties on the public land and sell the same to the Union Pacific Railroad Company, such cutting becomes a trespass, for the right The act of March 3, 1875, was passed given is not to cut timber to sell, but to for the benefit of railroad companies, and use; and the government may proceed now to restrict the word "adjacent," and against such company for such cutting, make it synonymous with the word "ad- and will doubtless also have its remedy joining" is not justified by any canon of against the Union Pacific Railroad Cominterpretation. Webster defines "adja-pany for the value of the ties so cut, if it cent as "lying near or close adjoining; choose to secure its damages from that contiguous; neighboring, etc." So it company instead of the original trespasser. appears that timber growing within the Mr. Chaffee will be allowed to remove neighborhood of a railroad that comes the ties cut, and if used in the construcThe enclosure of McKittrick and An- within the provisions of the act of March tion of the Georgetown, Breckenridge and drews is illegal, and against the right of 3, 1875, may be cut for ties to be used in Leadville Railroad, or in the construction others who desire to settle or graze their the construction of the road, although the of an extension of the Colorado Central cattle on the enclosed tracts. It gives land may not be contiguous. What is Railroad, neither he nor said companies them no exclusive right to such tracts, meant by "within the neighborhood" can be charged with any violation of the and they cannot thereby, or by threats or must be determined by the circumstances law. If other disposition is made of such violence, prevent entry thereon by others of the case. If the initial point is in a sec- ties, you will determine the right of the who desire to graze the same land, or to tion destitute of timber, and no timber matter in the light of the circular of July enter thereon for any purpose within the grows on the land along the side of such 15, 1881, and this letter. law. This Department will therefore in- road for a considerable distance, it is conterpose no objection to the destruction of sistent with the spirit of the act that the their fences by persons desiring to make company be allowed to cut timber at or bona fide settlements on such enclosed even beyond the terminus of the road, if tracts, should McKittrick and Andrews timber otherwise could not be obtained; endeavor to prevent the same by their and it is not a fair construction to put fences, or their threats or violence; but on the word "adjacent " to say that timwili rather lend its influence to their ap- ber must grow opposite the line of the propriate punishment under the law for road, and within the terminal points of their trespass. You will therefore cause the road. The right is given to cut timthem (and all others enclosing tracts of ber, and it is immaterial to the governthe public land beyond that allowed by ment whether it is within one mile of the law) to be notified by a circular letter that road, or fifty miles distant. The spirit of the government will prosecute or other- the act is, that from the country having wise express its disapprobation of their the benefit of the railroad the timber must trespass whenever, after such notice, it come. The country beyond and away shall appear that, by such enclosure, they from the terminus of the road may receive prevent settlement on the enclosed tracts equal and perhaps greater benefit than the by persons entitled thereto under the law. country within the terminal points. The railroad company should be allowed to cut timber at any point within the neighborhood of the line of road so being constructed. If it is found necessary to take earth and stone for such construction, such material must be taken where it is found most practicable for the company to take it. If the adjoining land is of such a character that no stone can be had on it, the company must be allowed to go away from the line of the road where it can be obtained. Any other construction will de

RAILROADS.

GEORGETOWN, BRECKENRIDGE AND LEADVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY. Adjacent Public Lands Defined.-Material to construct a right-of-way railroad may be taken from any of the public lands within

the neighborhood. Such lands need not ad-
join or be near the road.
Trespass-Agent.-The agent of such a railroad
company may hire men to cut ties, or contract
at a certain price per tie. But such company
cannot sell the ties so obtained to other par-
ties or railroad companies.
SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner McFar-feat the intent of the act. In all cases
land, February 7, 1883.

I have your letter of the 1st inst., concerning the cutting of railroad ties by A. J. Chaffee, in Clear Creek county, Colorado, as agent of the Georgetown, Breckenridge and Leadville R. R. Co.

where the timber can be obtained in the
immediate vicinity and along the line of
the road, it should be so taken; but the
company must not be deprived of the
benefit of the act because the timber may
not be found on the land adjoining the

Patent-Certification. The title to lands passes
to the State for this railroad company by pat-
ent and not by certificate.
Declaratory Statement.-A declaratory state-

ment on file at date of definite location of the
road opposite the tract in question, excepts
the land from the grant.

Cancellation-Notice.--In view of the want of
notice of cancellation of entry and the facts
shown, patent will issue on the reinstated
homestead entry,
COMMISSIONER MCFARLAND to Reg. and Rec.,
Worthington, Minn., March 23, 1883. (F. B.)
G. W. Johnson made Homestead entry
of N. E. 4, 5-105-27, December 8, 1863.
March 22, 1866, it was canceled upon the re-
cords of this office, because at date of en-
try the land was withdrawn and reserved
for the benefit of the St. Paul and Sioux
City Railroad, which was definitely located
opposite said tract in June, 1857. John-
son enlisted in the army after making the
entry, and died in service in 1865. His
family, consisting of a wife and three chil-
dren, remained upon the land.

In March, 1869, his widow was allowed by the local officers to make final proof, there being no record on the local office tract books of the cancellation of the entry by this office. The land is within the 15 mile indemnity limits by act of March 3, 1857, of the St. Paul and Sioux City Railroad, and was certified to the State for the benefit of said road on March 7, 1872, having been previously selected August 1, 1871. The certification of the land to the State did not convey title to the land,

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »