« ZurückWeiter »
this court, and reported in 7 Bissel, 201,wood and pine timber land-about the
(No. 881.] and I feel fully justified by my own con- whole timber business, in fact, from San
NOTICE victions in following in this case the con- Francisco Bay to the Oregon line. He clusions of the circuit judge in that. was only to pay $5,000,000 for all of the OF THE REMOVAL OF THÉ OFFICE OF SUR
I do not deem it necessary to decide, or property, which would to-day be worth VEYOR-GENERAL FROM YANKTON TO Hudiscuss, for the purposes of this case, who about $20,000,000. But no one here would RON, Dakota. owns the fee of the body of this lake go into the scheme, so that he lost the six Notice is hereby given that the Presiwithin the area of permanent water; it months' time he gave to the perfecting of dent of the United States has, by Execumay rest in the State of Illinois by virtue it. Now Eastern capital has secured the tive order dated January 18, 1883, directed of its attributes of sovereignty, or the redwood-timber business, and will boss our that the office of the Surveyor-General of property-right may rest in the United market. There will still be competition in Dakota, with all the books, records, and States; what I do intend to decide is, that the redwood-timber trade, no doubt, but archives thereof, be removed from Yankthe plaintiff claiming under the Holbrook further purchases or crushing out will be ton to Huron, in said Territory, on April patent, has the right to go to the perma- resorted to, to gather the whole tract 1, 1883. nent water line; that the meander lines under the wings of monopoly; many Given under my hand, at the city of run upon what is represented on the plat mills will be closed, for there are now Washington, this 20th day of January, as the margin of this navigable lake, are many more than are needed.
A. D. 1883. not boundaries of these fractional tracts,
By the President: but were run only as a means of ascer
N. C. McFARLAND, taining the quantity of land in the fraction,
Commissioner of the General Land Office. and do not, therefore, limit the Holbrook
I, therefore, find that the plaintiff at the OF THE REMOVAL OF THE SURVEYOR-GENER- MINERAL PATENTS ISSUED. time when etc., was seized in fee of the AL'S OFFICE FROM VIRGINIA City to RENO,
NEVADA. land between the meander lines east of
Since our last report, patents have been the S. E. fractional of Sec. 19, and the N. Notice is hereby given that the Presi-issued for the following mining claims : E. fractional of Sec. 30, and the meander dent of the United States, by Executive
CALIFORNIA. lines on the west side of the east fraction order dated January 20, 1882, has directed
Lake County. of the S. E. of Sec. 30, and the waters of that the office of the Surveyor-General of Abbott Quicksilver Mg. Co., Abbott QuickHyde Lake, and that the defendant is Nevada, now located at Virginia City, be silver Mine and M. S. guilty of having entered upon the same removed to Reno, in said State.
COLORADO. and ejected the plaintiff therefrom. The Further notice of the precise time when
Boulder County. defendant is, therefore, found guilty to the office will be closed at Virginia City,
Mary G. Arnett, I. O. U. Lode. the extent named. preparatory to removal, and reopening for
Sam'l Heilner, Cleopatra and Great Sphinx the transaction of public business at Reno, Lodes. A GIGANTIC TIMBER MONOPOLY, will be given by the Surveyor-General by Cornelia C. Munson, et al., Badger Lode. publication.
Chaffee County. A syndicate which is said to be com- Given under my hand at the city of New York and Colorado Mg. Syndicate and posed of Eastern men, through the Bank Washington this twenty-fourth day of Co., Patch Lode. of California, has secured contracts for the January, A. D. 1882.
James C. Spencer, Yale Lode. purchase of all the redwood timber land By the President :
Clear Creek County. and mills owned by the mill and land-own
N. C. MCFARLAND, Park Disbrow, Etta Disbrow Lode. ers of Eureka, Humboldt Bay. Between
Commissioner General Land Office. Edgar Freeman, Rising Sun Lode.
Nels Johns, Enterprise Lode. 70,000 and 75,000 acres of land have been
Paul Lindstrom, Placer. thus secured, and five or six large timber
[Public notice No.880 was never printed Chas. W. Pollard, Olympic and Titan Lodes. mills. The syndicate had previously se. - Editor.]
Joshua 8. Reynolds, Specie Payment Lode. cured 70,000 acres of redwood timber land
Jabez Rippin, Lucas Lode. in Humboldt county. The prices they are
John G. Roberts, Laurel Lode. to pay for these mills and the land that
Chas. F. Wells, Arabian Lode.
[No. 890] goes with them is between five and six
Custer County. millions of dollars. Their previous pur- .
Richard Irwin, et. al., Cymbeline Lode. chase cost them $10 per acre. The mill OF THE REMOVAL OF THE U. S. LAND OF
Lumber City and Silver Cliff Mg. Co., Copand land-owners who have thus contracted
FICE FROM COLFAX TO SPOKANE Falls, per King Lode.
Valley City Mg. Co., California Lode. to sell out are Dolbeer & Carson, Jones &
Christian Wahi, et. al., Boss and Dakota Maid Co., Hooper Bros., Vance & Co., McKay Notice is hereby given that the Presi- Lodes. & Co., and Russ & Co. The money has dent of the United States, by Executive C. L. Wall, et al., Queen of the Valley Lode. not yet been paid, but forfeits were paid order dated June 23, 1883, has directed
Gilpin County. by the buyers, and bonds given of the that the Land Office now located at Col- Michael Kelly, Big Spring Lode. selling. The boom in redwood and tim- fax, in Washington Territory, be re
Thos, McCallister, I. X. L. Lode. ber generally, had much to do with the moved to Spokane Falls, in said Terri
Gunnison County. vast scheme in the first place, but the tory.
Herman Beckurts, et al., San Juan Lode. growing scarcity of good timber East,
Further notice of the precise time when
J. C. Taylor, et al., G. G. Lode. and the patent fact that it will likely soon the office will be closed at Colfax, prepar
Lake County. begin to draw on this coast, had probably atory to removal and reopening at Spokane Chippewa Cons. Mg. Co., Coinstock Lode. also quite as much to do with it. This Falls for the transaction of public busi
Chas. O. Edman, et al., Mobile Lode.
Theo. A. Fellows, et al., Old King Cole vast monopoly is probably by no means ness, will be given by the officers of the
Lode. done, but will finally aim to control the district by publication.
W. S. Ward, Bismarck Lode. whole timber business of the coast. About Given under my hand at the City of W.J. Wilson, et. al., Carleton Lode. three years ago such an enterprise was Washington this twenty-eighth day of
Ouray County. planned by a San Franciscan, who in- June, A. D. 1883.
W. Weston, et al., Iron Clad Lode. tended to have it operated by San Fran- By the President:
Park County. cisco capital. He secured bonds on thirty
N. C. McFARLAND, 8. Hayes, Wisconsin Lode. eight mills and about 430,000 acres of red- Commissioner of the General Land Office. Jas. Connoran, et al., Connoran Lode.
Surveyor General's Certificates, R. and R., No. 488. Mathias Stauffacher, et al., Little Annie 4329, 4830, 4832 4833. 4840, 4842, 4843, 4845, 4846, 4847, 4851, Steveðs Point and Wausau Series, 10790, 15705, 15768, Lode.
4852, 4853, 4856, 4859, 4860.4861, 4862, 4864 to 4868 inclusive. 16259, 16443, 16452, 15176, 16477, 16478, 16490, 16499, 16534,
4872, 4873, 4874, 4881, 4882, 4883, 4R85, 4886, 4890, 1891. 4893, 16751 to 16754 inclusive, 16789, 16831, 16936, 10959, 16900, Saguache County.
4894, 4899, 4900 4901, 1906, 4907. 4916, 4917, 4924, 492, 4929, 16976, 17081, 17082, 17089, 17096, 17172, 17207, 17253, 17253. Alexander H, B, Harenc, Red Cliff Lode.
4930. 4935 to 4939 inclusive. 4942, 4946 to 4949 inclusive,
4951, 4355, 4960, 4961, 492, 4964, 4966, 4967, 4970, 4971, 4974.
4975, 4976, 4980,4982, 4983. 4984, 1985,4988, 1989, 4990, 4991,4995,
HOMESTEAD PATENTS ISSUED.
Copp's LAND Owner for this month reports tlio 5034, 5037, 5012, 5043, 5044, 5048, 5050, 5054 to 5063 inclusive, John McGranahan, et al., City of Durham sive, 5035, 5096, 5098. 5100, 5103,5106, 5112, 6115, 5116,5117, following final numbers of Homestead Patents and Little Rosa Lodes.
5118, 5121,5121,5127, 5132, 5140, 5145, 5146, 5149 5152, 5151, issued and sent to the below-named land-offices:
5155, 5157, 5160, 5102, 5165, 5106, 5168, 5169, 5170, 5173, 5178. Chas, J. Moore, et al., F. C. Garbutt Lode. 5186, 5188, 5189, 5190, 5193, 5195, 5198, 5201, 5205, 5203, 5208,
ARKANSAS. John W. Reid, et al., Lillie Lode. 5:209, 5210, 5211, 5214, 5215 and 5217.
HARRISON. II. I. Robbins, et al., Old Timer Lode.
Nos. 451, 1626, 1979, 2280, 2835, 3192, 3233, 3379, 3600, 3607, Summit and Park Counties.
Surveyor General's Certificates R. and R., Nos. 2, 3, 3612, 3655, 3656, 257, 3659 10 3671 inclusive, 3673 16 3677 4, for 160 acres each located at Yankion, Dak.
inclusive, 3679 10 3682 inclusive, 368.5 to 3088 inclusive, J. O. Hudnutt, et al., Bonanza King Lode.
30.0 to 3697 inclusive, 3699, 3701 10 3712 inclusive, 3715 TANKTON,
10 3719 inclusive, 3722 to 3726 inclusive.
1753. 1761), 1761, 1768, 1771, 1775, 1770. 1778 1779, 1783, 1787.
1788, 173, 1799, 1805, 1834,1837 to 1R10 inclusive, 1-51, 183, Nos. 413, 435, 483, 510, 525, 526, 527, 520 to 537 inclusivo, Benjamin F. Gumm, et al., Miguel Otero 1854. 183, 1864, 1873, 1878, 1879, 1890. 1988, 1893, 1902 1903 539, 540, 5tv. Lode. 1907, 1911. 1913. 1922, 1930, 1932, 1915, 1951, 1901, 1970, 1983,
Yos. 893, 941, 98, 999, 991, 934, 1009, 1011, 1013, 1011, 1016,
1018. 1019, 1020, 1022, 10:23, 1024, 1030, 1031, 1033, 1036 to 1010 Eureka County.
inclusive, 1042, 1043, 1045 10 1048 incinsive, 1050, 1051, C. L. Broy, ct al., Kemp and Koch Cons. 14431, 11431, 14433. 14435. 14113 to 14150 inclusive. 14153, 1068.
Osage Trust Lands. Nos. 2997, 8418, 14126. 14428. 14429, 1053 10 1053 inclusive, 1038, 1050 10 10.5 inclusive, 1067, Lode. 14451, 14138 to 14461 inclusive, 14163, 14461, 14 166, 14467,
Nos. 211, 421, 1641, 1782, 1785, 1833, 1893, 1994, 1903, 1911, Manucl San Pedro, et al., San Francisco Lode. 14504, 1450.5, 14307, 14308. 14510. 14511. 14512, 14515. 14516.
No3. 1911, 1931, 2013, 2012, 2129, 2020, 2031, 233, 2011, 23.5), Ferd. S. Van Zandt, Brooklyn, Cooper, and 15: 14:57. 14:53: 103203; 1452 1452 14531,10 13 inclu 2058, 2010, 2001, 2002, 2001, 2005, 2005, 2001, 20:33 10 2 in
sive, 14537. 14539 to 14514 inclusive, 14546, 14549, 14550, clusive, 2098. 2100, 2101, 2102, 2105, 2105, 2108. 2:09. 2113, Galatea Lodes.
14552, 14.553. 14550 to 14762 inclusive, 145, 1450 14559 2114, 2016, 2018, 2121 to 2124 inclusive, 212, 2127. 21:33. 14570, 14572, 14573, 14574. 14.570, 11577, 14579, 14580, 14542,
Nos. 1031, 1675, 1679, 108, 1692, 173, 1741, 1768, 1709, 1771, MONTANA,
14583, 14584, 14586. 14597. 14591. 14592. 14591 10 14:504 inclu- 17799, 1791, 1805, 1808, 1809, 1813. 18.9. 1820, 1923, 1:48. 18
sive. 14606, 14600 14610, 14612. 14617: 14620; 142)1428 187, 185, 18656, 1869 1871, 1876, 1881, 1887, 1890, 19. 1. 2018 Lewis and Clarke County.
14629, 14631, 14632, 14634, 11635, 146:36, 14:37, 14839. 14644, 1918, 1938, 1989, 1942, 1947, 1948, 1972, 191, 198. 1972, 1975, Michael C. Cotter, et al., Empire Lode and / 14641, 14644, 14615, 14646, 14630, 14531, 14653, 14651, 146.).), 1989, 1998, 2000, 2034, 2035 2041, 2043, 2017, 2052. 2051
, , , 14654 M.S. sive,'14675, 14676. 14678 to 14692 inclusive: 14684 10 14693 2002, 2009, 2010, 2120, 2136.
Nos. 2001, 2006, 2007, 2071, 207:2, 2073, 2071, 2379, 287, 2009, inclusive. 14697. 14698, 14999. 14700, 14702 to 14710 incluSiloer Bou County. sive, 14712, 14719, 147:21. 14723, 14724. 14725, 14727, 14728,
Nos, 43, 177, 182, 190, 196 to 214 inclusive.
Nos. 71, 81, 89, 91.94, 100, 103, 104, 105, 109 to 117inclusive, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74 and 8I.
119, 122, 124 to 131 inclusive, 185. Salt Lake County.
MICHIGAN. Thos. J. Gibbous, et al., Benton Lode.
Nos. 1168, 1182, 1188, 1191, 1192, 1194, 1196 to 1199 inclu- Nos. 453, 651, 704, 703, 776. 777, 778, 785, 79.5, 796, 799, 811,
Nos, 4033, 4078. 4085, 4686, 1688, 4704, 4720.4728, 4751.4747, 1500, 1502, 1503, 1504, 1505, 150, 1510, 1511, 1514, 1515, 1516,
4756, 4758. 4763, 4789, 4812, 4840, 4871, 4954, 4980.5004, 501810 1517, 1521. 1522, 1524. 1525, 1528, 1531, 1539, 1540, 1541, 1544, 5014 inclusive, 2017, 5020, 5023, 5026, 5027, 5029 10 5032 in. Corp's LAND Owner for this month reports 1547. 1551, 1555, 1560, 1.561.1556.1568 1808 1824 1835 1835, clusive, 5031, 5036, 50:38, 5041, 5042, 5043, 5048. 5049, 5050,
1894, 1913, 1921, 1929, 1938, 1941, 1944, 1945, 1950, 1951,1954, 1957, 5052, 5053, 5054, 5053, 5058, 5062, 5064, 5066, 5068, 571, 5072, the issuance of patents on the Cash Entries 1960, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1976, 1982.
5074 to 5078 inclusive, 5082, 5083, 5084, 508, 5087, 5088, numbered below, wliich patents have been sent
50%), 5091, 5092, 5094, 5095, 5097 to 5101 'inclusive, 5103, to the below-named land-offices :
Surveyor General's Certificate, R. and R., Yos. 556, 512310 5130 inclusive, 5132, 5143, 5134,5136.
5105, 5107, 5109, 5110, 5111.5114,5115,5117 to 512 inclusive,
Nos. 3641, 4547, 5248, 5276, 5297. 5348, 5351, 5357, 5338,5289,
Nos. 1317. 1457, 2165, 2175, 2179 to 2182 inclusive, 2183 to
2190 inclusive, 2192, 2193.21996, 2199, 2201, 2203 to 2217 in.
clusive, 2219 to 2227 inclusive. University Lands, Nos. 7609, 7671, 7672.
Nos. 5159 and 10334.
Nos. 83, 84, 85, 92, 139. 78, 79, 80, 81 and 84 for 80 acres each.
SALT LAKE CITY.
WISCONSIY. 2410 to 2414 inclusive, 2422, 2430, 2431, 2437, 2440, 244*, 387, 989, 990, 995, 1006, 1007, 1008, 1016. 2449, 2452, 2454. 2462, 2467, 2471, 2479, 2480, 2484, 2485, 2497,
LA CROSSE. 2730, 2531. 2554, 255, 2556, 2561, 2564, 2567 to 2571 in
Xos. 4191, 4200, 4234, 4811, 4563, 4581. 4599. 4601, 4011, 4630, clusive, 2574, 3576,2577, 2578, 2585, 2586, 2587, 2595, 256, 2599, Nos. 6724, 6728 to 6749 inclusive, 0751, 6732 and 6751. 4636, 4660, 4663. 4663, 4692, 493, 4695 10 4598 inc'usive, 2100, 2603, 2004. 2605, 2007, 2008, 2609, 2310, 2614. 2619, 2525,
4700 to 1728 inclusive, 4730, 4732, 4733, 4734, 4735, 4736. 629, 2635 to 2643 inclusive. 2644, 2645, 2651, 2652. 2455, 2561.
WISCONSIN. 2562. 2664, 2665, 2666, 2669, 2674, 2675, 2878, 2881, 2583, 2685,
WATSAU. 2587. 2 189, 2694, 2695, 2896, 2700, 2701, 2703, 2704, 2705, 2712.
Xos. 1504. 1.344. 1547, 1549. 1551, 1556, 1559 to 1568 ineln. 2717, 2718, 2719, 2723, 2728, 2735, 278, 2743, 2745, 2750, 2762, Surveyor General's Certificates, Act June 2, 1838, sive, 1569, 1570, 1571, 1572, 1574 to 1584 inclusive, 1586 to 2763 and 2764. R. avd R., Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4.
WASHINGTON, D. C., AUGUST 1, 1883.
MINES AND MINERALS.
Entered at the Post Office at Washington, D. C., as This paper furnishes more valuable law informa
HALLIDAY & Rush, of Gainesville, Florsecond-class matter. tion for less money, and is read by more land attor
ida, have an extensive public land and real neys and real estate dealers, by more homestead, THIS NOTICE MARKED with a blue or red pre-emption, and other land claimants, and by more
estate business, See their card in the pencil indicates that your subscription expires with mine owners, engineers, and superintendents, thun Land Directory. this issue, and if you wish the paper continued with any other publication in the United States. out interruption, you should remit your renewal subscription at once.
In view of the unabated demand for Parties renewing their subscriptions will find it
THE BUTTE Town SITE CONTEST. advantageous to send $1.00 for their card in the Land bound LAND OWNERS, vols. 1 to 9, a new Directory one year. index thereto is in course of preparation in Montana, declaring that there is no sta
The recent decision of Judge Galbraith, to replace the indexes now out of print.
tute of the United States authorizing CONTENTS.
the department to insert in a patent for a Editorial Notes - Land Personals - The Butte SPECIAL AGENTS will confer a favor by lode claim any exceptions as to town-site Town Site Contest.......
sending their addresses to the office of rights, nor does the law make any such this paper. We often have matters of in- exceptions, and such exceptions are there
terest to them. Walker vs. Sewell......
fore void, is attracting wide-spread atten
tion. The decision was rendered in the
If you have not yet purchased Copp's case where the owners of the Pawnbroker Cornelius Cadle, jr.......
135 Public Land Laws, 1882, you will be voted lode brought suit to determine the possesslow, or worse yet, without any land busi- sory right as to surface ground.
There are several similar cases pendArant vs. State of Oregon...
ing, involving a considerable area of the - Our new temporary binder is at hand. town site of Butte. The case heard and
Instead of twelve metal strips, this has decided was the Silver Bow Milling and Instructions for Survey of Islands Omitted from the Regular Surveys....
135 twenty-six. It is intended to accommo- Mining Company vs. W. A. Clark, et al.
date the semi-monthly editions of the The suit was for ejectment; a jury was
LAND OWNER. The price is $2.00, instead waived, and the case was tried by the John Farson...
of $1.50, as formerly. Read advertise Court.
The main facts were admitted in the
pleadings, and the question of title, thereInstructions to Special Timber Agents...
ACCORDING to a St. Paul paper, the Big fore, was one purely of law. The lodeForms for Official Use of Special T'imber Agents. 111 Woods of Minnesota are rightly named, claim was located November, 1875, under
for they cover 5,000 square iniles, or the law of May 10, 1872, and patent obMISCELLANEOUS.
3,200,000 acres of surface. These woods tained January 15, 1880. The patent Notice Relative to Unlawful Inclosures of Public Lands...
contain only hardwood growths, including contained the following provisions, for Proclamation, Withdrawing from Sale Certain white and black oak, maple, hickory, bass- the insertion of which, the Court says Lands in Wisconsin and Minnesota.. Millionaires from Street Railroads, etc.. 147 wood, elm, cottonwood, tamarack and there is no law : “ Excepting and excludMineral Patents Issued
147 enough other varieties to make an aggre- ing, however, from these presents, all Cash Patents Issued Homestead Patents Issued.
148 gate of over thirty different kinds. This town property rights upon the surface,
hardwood tract extends in a belt across and these are hereby expressly excepted PROFESSIONAL CARDS.
PAGE the middle of the State, and surrounding and excluded from the same, all houses, Redington & Hill, Washington, D. C....
I its northeastern corner is an immense buildings, structures, lots, blocks, streets, Curtis & Burdett, Washington, D. C....
pine region covering 21,000 square miles, alleys or other municipal improvements Capt.John Mullan, San Francisco & Washington. D. H. Talbot, Sioux City,
on the surface of the above described Iowa....
or 13,440,000 square acres. Ellery C. Ford, Washington, D. C....
premises not belonging to the grantees Sickels & Randall, Washington, D. C....
herein, and all rights necessary or proper Drummond & Bradford, Washington, D. C...... J. A. Sibbald, Washington, D. C...
Ex-COMMISSIONER BURDETT, of Curtis & to the occupation, possession and enjoy
ment of the same.' Henry N. Copp, Washington, D. C...... IV Burdett, visits Denver, Colorado, to attend
The town site was patented in SeptemW.J. Johnston, Washington, D. C...... IV the convention of the Grand Army of the Chas. & Wiliam B. King, Washington, D. C...... IV Republic, of which organization in Wash-ber, 1877, and contained a provision that Walter H. Smith, Washington, D. C........
no title should be thereby acquired “to ington he is the District Commander. H. J. Frost, Washington, D. C...... Riddle, Davis & Padgett, Washington, D. C...... IV
The many correspondents of this pros- any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copperous firm will give him a cordial wel. per, or in any valid mining claim or pos
session held under existing laws of Concome.
gress." No adverse claim was filed against Land Directory....
BEN. F. LLOYD, of Washington, has the issuing of either patent. American Settler's Guide....
III been restored to practice before the ExecCopp's Land Owner-Bound.
The points decided by the Court are, in utive Departments, and G. W. Everett, of brief, as follows: Copp's Public Land Laws. Copp's U. S.Mineral Lands Millersburg, Ohio, has been dis barred.
(1) The Land Department has no right Munn & Co., Patents...
ATTENTION is called to the card in the to insert in a patent any exception or W.C. Hill, Washington, D. C....
IV Land Directory of G. H. Wells, attorney- reservation which the law does not authorPreston, Kean & Co., Chicago, Ills.. Copp's American Mining Code...
at-law, in Lake Charles, Louisiana, a live ize. If it is done, such exception or resGeneral Price List IV | man.
ervation is void and of no effect, and this
may be shown at any time, either in an abandonment, which resulted in the cancel- Moore acted as the clerk in taking testiaction at law or in a suit in equity. lation of Sewell's entry, February 13, mony in that contest; that when he ap(2). A party receiving a patent from 1871.
plied to amend bis filing in March, 1881, the United States is not bound by excep- William Sewell made homestead entry (prior to the date of Sewell's entry) Maxtions, reservations or conditions inserted of said W. } of S. E. , March 14, 1871, well was absent, but Moore was present in the patent, without authority of law. and in June following a trial was had be- and told him he was attending to the
(3) There seems to be no law author-tween Walker and William Sewell to de- business of the office, and prepared his izing the Land Department to decide a termine their respective rights. In April, applieation. conflict between a town-site and a lode- 1872, your office decided that Walker had Other witnesses testify that Moore claim.
not resided upon nor improved said W. ), acted in other cases as a regular clerk in (4) By the location of the Pawnbroker as required by law, nor made formal appli- the office—no other clerk or person being claim in 1875, the locators, according to cation to amend his filing to embrace that present. the Act of Congress of May 10th, 1872, tract, but that the tract was subject to the Maxwell testifies that he was absent acquired the exclusive right of possession first legal applicant. Without appealing from his office on leave from February and the enjoyment of all the surface from this decision, Walker was (errone- | 15th to April 3, 1871 (which included the ground included within the lines of their ously) allowed, June 24, 1872, to make date of the transaction in question), and location, etc. (Sec. 2322 U. S. Revised pre-emption cash entry for the N. W. of that one Hoffman was his regularly apStatutes.) This Act of Congress was of the S. E. 1. In 1874 and also in 1876, he pointed and sworn clerk, under the usual itself a grant of right of possession and applied for a rehearing of the case to en-regulations of your office, and that during the right to purchase. And the “exclu- able him to show that he was the first such absence Moore was not his clerk, sive right of possession " granted is ut- legal applicant for the tract after cancel- either de facto or de jure. But on terly inconsistent with a right in another lation of Joseph Sewell's entry. These cross-examination he says that Moore to occupy or use the surface for town-site were refused by your office, but June 12, had general supervision of all his busipurposes.
1877, Secretary Schurz ordered a hearing ness when absent at the time named, (5) No authority is given by the Sta- for that purpose, and under the testimony, and was left in charge of the office, and tutes to the officers of the Land Depart. your office decided in May, 1879, that that he sanctioned his doings; that he ment to insert in a patent for a lode-claim Walker was such applicant, and held Sew- left with him (Moore) various certificates any exceptions as to town-site rights, and ell's entry for cancellation. Sewell then signed by him (Maxwell) in blank, which such exceptions are void.
applied for another hearing upon the Moore may have filled and delivered to (6) The provision in the Butte town- ground that your decision was based the proper patries ; that both prior and site patent was authorized by Sec. 2392 chiefly upon testimony that Walker's ap- subsequent to the date of Walker's appliU. S. Revised Statutes, and was properly plication to amend was made before one cation Moore was a clerk in his office, but inserted in the patent.
John M. Moore, who, although he re- without appointment by your office, (7) At the date of the town-site patent, ceived and filed the application, was not and that he assisted him (Maxwell) in the Pawnbroker was a valid mining claim, authorized to act in the matter. This preparing papers, making entries and reand no title passed to it by the town-site hearing was held in November, 1879, to turns to your office, and registering claims, patent.
ascertain the facts. The local officers as well when he was absent as when he (8) The patent for the Pawnbroker rendered opposite opinions, and you de- was present; that he was familiar with all lode-claim related to the location of the cided, April 17, 1882, that Sewell's allega- the routine of the office, and the reason claim of 1875, and confirmed the right of tion was sustained, and allowed his entry he was not left in charge of the office possession.
to remain intact subject to his final proof. during the named absence was because he (9) The plaintiff's title, under the lo- I think this was erroneous.
was postmaster, and they both thought cation in 1875 and the patent in 1880, was The question submitted is, whether or official trouble might result from such an prior and superior in law to that of the not Moore was a clerk de facto in the office arrangement. defendant's.-Eng. and Mining Journal, of the Register, and as such, competent Overton, the Receiver, (whose office New York.
to receive Walker's application to amend was some distance from that of Maxwell's,)
his filing, and thus give it legal effect, as testifies that he had no knowledge that PRACTICE. if made to the Register in person.
Moore was an employed clerk in MaxWALKER VS. SEWELL.
At the date of the transaction, one well's office during the time named—the Clerk de facto.A clerk de facto in the office of Maxwell was register of the local office, Government having made no appropriathe Register, with the Register's knowledge one Overton was Receiver, and Moore tion for such purpose—but that he freand sanction, is competent to receive applica- was Postmaster at Salt Lake City, having quently prepared papers for persons dotions and give them legal effect.
also a private office in the same building ing business at Maxwell's office; that so SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner Mc Far- with that of the Register, and acting as far as he knew, Sewell was the first legal land, July 10, 1883.
agent or attorney for settlers, in preparing applicant for the tract, and that at the I have considered the case of Thomas and presenting their applications and time in question Hoffman was in MasB. Walker vs. William Sewell, involving other papers, He testifies that he was well's office, preparing papers for settlers the N. W. of the S. E. ¢ of Sec. 26 Tp. also a clerk in the office of the Register and abstracts of title to land throughout 6 N., R. 2 W., Salt Lake City, Utah, on at various times from 1869 to 1874, in the the Territory, it being understood that he appeal by Walker, from your decision of absence of the Register as well as in his and Moore were co-partners in that busiApril 17, 1882, holding his cash entry for presence, and attended to the various ness. the tract for cancellation, and allowing business of that office, and that in the Sewell testifies that when he made his the homestead entry of Sewell to remain absence of Maxwell, he accepted Walker's entry, Hoffman was in charge of Masintact.
application, which was the first legal ap-well's office, but that he made his affiIt appears that Joseph Sewell made plication for the tract.
davits before Overton, to whom he paid homestead entry of the W. } of the S. E. Walker testifies that he was at this his money and with whom he left his
of the section in March, 1869, and that office on several different occasions in papers. Walker filed declaratory statement for the 1869, 1870, and 1871, relative to his claim The testimony satisfies me that Moore E. } of the S. E. & in November, 1869, and to his contest against Sewell; that was a clerk de facto in the office of the alleging settlement the same day, and Maxwell and Moore were usually there Register at the date of Walker's applicathat in order to secure an amendment of present; that when he applied to contest tion, and that his acts as such, as rehis filing to embrace the whole S. E. &, Sewell's entry, Maxwell told him to “go to spects third persons, have equal vahe instituted a contest against Sewell for Moore, my clerk," about the matter; that'lidity as though he was a clerk de jure.
A like question was discussed in the St. Stephens Meridian, Montgomery Dis- withdrawn, nor reported as mineral, recase of The Dean Richmond Mine vs. trict, Alabama, upon the ground that the mained subject to private entry as agriculThe Bronkow Mine, decided by this De- lands have been reported to your office as tural at date of the application, March 6, partment, August 18, 1882, (L. O., Vol. 9, containing coal, and must therefore be 1883. p. 114,) in which the general doctrine was offered at public sale under act of March held well settled that the acts of an officer 3, 1883. (Pamphlet Laws, 487.)
SWAMP LANDS. de facto are valid in so far as they affect By what is known as the “Winter Re. ARANT VS. STATE OF OREGON. the rights of the public or of third per- ports,” made to your office in 1879, cer- Disposalm This term means alienation of sons, it being founded in necessity and tain tracts in this township were desig- title.--A pre-emption filing may be received upon principles of public policy ; that if nated by a list as containing “ valuable for land claimed as swamp and overflowed. he is a mere intruder or usurper, third coal ;” after which on the same list ap
SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner McFarpersons are bound to take notice of that pears this entry :
land, July 11, 1883. fact and can acquire no rights from his “ Balance of public land in 24 N., 9 E.,
I have examined the testimony, and conacts, but if he is in possession of the not valuable coal and non-mineral.”
cur with you in the opinion that the tracts office, under color of right or authority, It appears that after examination of were not swamp and overflowed land, and he may exercise its functions; reference this report, you placed in the lists to be did not inure to the State under said act. being made in that case to the opinion of offered as agricultural lands, under the It is claimed, however, that by reason of Attorney-General Black, who said, (9 Op., act of July 4, 1876, (19 Stat. '73,) all the the selection of February 7, 1872, which 432,)“ I am of opinion that if Mr. Hooper lands in said township not designated in was prior to A rant's settlement, Arant's was the Acting Secretary of the Territory, the list under the first classification, and filing must be rejected under Secretary (Utah) though he was not regularly ap- the same, including the tracts involved in Schurz's ruling in the case of Crowly pointed, a public obligation created by this appeal, were offered at the public sale, vs. Oregon, (Copp., May, 1880,) wherein debts which would have been binding on on the 28th of February, 1880, and no the Government, if made by a regular bids were offered.
of March 12, 1860—that pending conSecretary, cannot lawfully or justly be re- You now decide that the words
sideration of the State's claim for land pudiated on the mere ground that his title valuable coal,” as used in Mr. Winter's re
asserted to be swamp and overflowed, and to the office was defective. The acts of port, imply that coal is found in the lands, before final determination that the land an officer de facto are always held to be but not of much value. Yet, as the act of was not of the character contemplated by good where the public or third parties are 1883 requires that all lands which have
the act, it would be erroneous to permit concerned. The legality of his appoint- been heretofore reported as containing pre-emption entries of such land ; in other ment can never be inquired into except coal and iron shall first be offered at pub- words that, after the State has claimed upon quo warranto, or some other pro- lic sale.” You conclude that however in- land under its grant, it cannot be disposed ceeding to oust him, or else in a suit considerable the amount or value of thé of under other general laws for the dispobrought or defended by himself
, which coal, the statute requires the offering to sition of the public land, until after such brings the very question whether he was be made.
claim has been adjudicated adversely to an officer de jure directly in issue. * * *
It appears to me that this act should be The irregularity of Mr. Hooper's appoint- construed in pari materia with the pre
I concur in this ruling, but it is not, in ment (by the Governor of the Territory vious law, Section 2318 of the Revised my opinion, applicable to the present case. instead of by the President) ought not to Statutes requires that " In all cases, lands A disposal of a tract of public land inbe set up by the accounting department as valuable for minerals shall be reserved volves an adjudication-a determination a plea for refusing payment,” (of certain from sale, except as otherwise expressly of its status and condition and alienation. disbursements Hooper had made.) directed by law.” It is the value for min. But an application to file for a tract or
The present case is clearly within this erals which makes the cause for suspen- even a filing is not a disposal, but a step doctrine. Moore was not an usurper or sion, and if an agent specially detailed to only to that end. It is only when a preintruder in Maxwell's office. He had con- examine the lands, reports them as not emption entry is allowed, with the conseducted its business both in Maxwell's containing valuable coal, and, acting upon quent right to a patent, that the Governpresence and absence, with the latter's such suggestion, your office has afterward ment disposes of a tract of its land under unquestioned sanction. The appointment included them in a general public offering, that law. Disposal in this sense is equivato supersede Moore, who was the real and and creates a new suspension, by bring; Schurz in Crowly vs. Oregon, and thereof Hoffman was nominal and not intended I do not think the act of 1883 goes back lent to sale and alienation, and such I acting clerk. The public had a right to ing them within the category of mineral infer his authority in the conduct of the lands—they never having been previously fore he well held that Government could office, and especially had Walker, from so classified.
not alienate its title so as to deprive the all his transactions relative to his claim. The obvious intention of the act is to State of its asserted claim in case such
I reverse your decision and permit open to market, by a new offering, lands claim be finally held valid. I know no amendment of Walker's filing, holding previously withdrawn on account of hav- reason why Arant might not file for the Sewell's entry subject thereto.
ing been reported as containing coal and tract, subject to the prior asserted claim iron.
If they were not withdrawn and of the State, or why upon decision addesignated as mineral lands, there was no
verse to such claim his filing, if otherwise MINES AND MINERALS.
thing for the act to operate upon-for, being regular, should not take effect.
I affirm your decision that the State has Alabama Coal Lands.-Lands not valuable for were not excluded from entry as mineral. no claim to the tracts in question, under
minerals, as herein, should not be offered at To render lands subject to suspension its grant, because not of the character public sale, under the Act of March 3, 1883. from disposal on account of their mineral thereby contemplated, and that the claim
of Arant be allowed. SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner McFar- character, it is well settled that they must land, July 16, 1883.
be found more valuable for mining purI have considered the appeal of Cor- poses than for other appropriation. The
SURVEYS. nelius Cadle, Jr., from your decision of act of 1883 did not intend to establish a INSTRUCTIONS FOR SURVEY OF ISLANDS OMITMay 14, reiterating your decision of April different rule, but must follow the ac- TED FROM THE REGULAR SURVEYS. 27, 1883, rejecting his application to pur- cepted interpretation of the existing law. SECRETARY TELLER to Commissioner Mc Farchase at private entry the N. of S. E. Your decision is accordingly reversed ; land, January 16, 1883. of section 2, the S. E. # of S. E. 1 of 4, as the lands in question had been duly I am in receipt of your letter of 27th and the N. of N. E. of 10, 24 N., 9 E.,' offered, and not having been subsequently'ultimo, submitting for approval a draft of