The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1854-12-30

ho" hCoi J aoO, diu OuC vi tutIu
planted four hills Of potatoes. The Land o.
licers at Minneapolis, or Saltwater, in this Ter
ritory, would not for one moment entertain
Exemption claim based upon such a sham set
Element and illegal acts, as it can be proved
these presumption settlements and improve
ments were made upon the lands claimed as the
site of Superior City.
The halfbrccds who were making these
claims for the Company, never lived upon them.
but in the meantime. the settlers and occupants
Of Superior City continued to improve their
town, by building houses. stores, store-houses
taverns, getting out timber for pier, cutting
out their streets. &c. &c, and up to the 9th of
November last, they had erected IS or 50 hous-
cs, two of which cost over $4,000. There were
seven stores of goods there during the past
summer, and at the present time, there is some
$50 people settled there.
1t has been proven that there has been at
least the sum of $50, 900 expended on this town
site, not one dollar of which was expended by
the Company which is now seeking to plumber
the actual settlers and occupants of this to,cn-
not only of the lands upon which the town
is built, but of their improvements also.
In the month of May last, Mr.. Brunson filed
in the Land Office at Hudson, protest against
the sham pre-emptors entering the TOWNSHIP of
Superior City, as the same was I" claimed as a
tO,cnSite."
After this protest had been filed, and the land
officers thereby notified that there were adverse
claimants upon this land, Otis Hoyt, Receiver.
and J. O. Henning, the Register of the Land
Office at Hudson, in violation of all the usages
of the Land Office, permitted the bogus pre-
emptors to come before them and prove up
their prescriptions, er parte, and without Civ
ing the settlers there the least intimation that
the pre-emptors would be allowed to prove up
their prescriptions.
Does any one believe that Messrs. Odds and
Russell, at Minneapolis or Messrs Fullerton
and lIolcombc, Of Saltwater, would allow such
proceedings in their Offices, when they had
been formally notified that there were adverse
claimants?
Would they suffer party to prove up, with
out notice to the opposite party?
Yet the officers at Hudson permitted this
outrage, notwithstanding the protest of the op-
posite party. We DO not understand this action
of the uninieresied Land Officers at Hudson!
The Commissioner of the Land Office, howe
yer, sent back the proof which had been taken
in these cases, and ordered the officers to inves-
tisate the question raised by the protest of Mr..
Brunson and others, viz, that the lands claim
ed by the pre-cmptors was occupied as a toun-
site.
To determine this question, the parties ap-
peared before the officers at Hudson. 1t was
proven beyond all question
LIST. That at the time these pretended pre-
cmption claimants made the settlements upon
the site of Superior City. the same was occu-
pied and settled as u totcn-site.
End. That the settlers and occupants there
had some fifteen men engaged at that time, i'm
proving the town-site, by building houses, lay
ing out and opening streets, and getting out
timber for pier.
Sd. That there was at that time tavern,
store and store-housc there, besides several
other houses which were completed and occu-
pied.
4th That several persons had selected lots.
and were clearing them off to build upon them,
and that all of the above mentioned improve
mcnts were continued by the settlers and occu-
pants.
9TH. 1t was proven by affidavit (but testimony
was not considcred) that since that time Is or
so houses have been erected on the site of Su-
perior City.-that seven stores of goods were
there during the past summer,-that there are
two taverns there, and about $50 inhabitants
there at this time, and that there has been ex-
pended upon the said TOWNSHIP the sum of
$4,000, by the settlers and occupants thereof.
Such was the case made before the Land Off
GERS by the settlers and occupants of Superior
City.
One would think that there could be no
doubt as to the result of such an issue. But
the Land Officers, not denying that the said
lands were occupied as a TOWNSHIP, held that
such occupancy was void, because the improve
ments were commenced before the Government
survey. That this decision is clearly wrong
there can be no doubt.
The Presumption Act Of 1871, declares that
''nO lands Uhich hare been selected as the site
for city or to,cn, shall be the subject Of pre-
emption."
After this decision was made, the settlers and
occupants of Superior City demanded the right
to appear and contest the right of these pre-
emptors to enter the lands. This was denied
Ly the Land Officers, and Benjamin Thompson
was there with these halfbrccd pre-emptors, to
prove up and we suppose they did prove up
and enter the town-site, with all the improve
ments.
AS a further evidence of the overt acts of
the Company, and those who are pre- empting
for them, we assert that while this contest was
going on, and before any decision was made,
the Company were making their survey and
map of their city, which very map, we are led
TO believe, includes part of the site of Supe-
rior City.-thus showing that the prescriptions