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

1t was claimed, by the counsel for the pro-
testants, that he had right to show improve
ments made since the dates of the respective
settlements, and very bombastic offer was
spread upon the record for that purpose and a
still more bombastic eTparte affidavit of Kim
ball. one of the professionals, had been placed on
file, since the close of the testimony, for the
same purpose.
The Register and Receiver very properly re-
jectcd all such testimony for two good and con-
elusive L, asons
LIST. They had before them your letter of
August llth, 1851, which letter was their sole
authority tor the inquiry stating as follows -
"You well designated time and place, of
(which all parties interested should be notified,
'.whcn, and where you will be prepared to re-
.:ceive such additional testimony as may be Of
''iered touching the facts of the selection of a
'town site of these lands, prior to the SETTLE
'ment there0n.'
I'd. If the land was not settled and occupied
as a town site in good faith. and according to
law, prior to the settlements by the pre-empt-
ors, then these professionals and their employ
ces, were not only there in violation of law,
but in wanton and wicked violation of the
lights of the pre-emptors, and their continu-
ance there, and the erection of buildings upo
the land, instead of eXcusing, aggravated their
offence instead OF showing that the land was
not subject to presumption, proved, that they.
admitting it to he SO, sought to crush he poor
prc-emptor by profuse expenditure of mo-
ney.
What monstrous pcrversion of law it would
be, if the pre-cmptor could be thus deprived of
the profits of his enterprise, by a set of specu-
latOrs, who, instead OF buying his land at a fair
price, SEEK by the power of money. to deprive
him of it, and his improvements thereon en-
Z ralv nd hon stall from hn
at tue minimum price!
Cur knowledge of your personal and official
character, convinces us that these poor men
will meet with more tender treatment at your
hands, and that You will not consider acts done
after their settlements, and in gross violation
of their legal ri ghts defeating those settle
ments and deystroying those rights We re-
ly upon the offer, and affidavit referred to, as
strongly in favor of our clients, proving, as
they do, the tremendous outrage sought to be
committed upon them.
Combining ourselves to the facts as proven,
and above stated, and to the period of time in
dictated by the acts of Congress, and your letter
OF Aug. llth, 1851, we now, with great respect,
submit, briefly, our views of the law governing
the claim of these protcstants to the land in
question. According to the evidence they are
the only parties plaintiBin this controversy
They, and they only, arc the protestants, pro-
prietors, settlers, occupants, and as they aver.
o,cncrs Of Superior City, We know, there
fore, with whom we have to deal. We know
into whose acts to inquire. We know to whom
to apply the provisions oflaw.
The Act of Congress of March Sd, 1907 pro-
vides as follows: If any person or persons,
| shall, after the passage of this act, take pos
| session Of or make settlement on any lands
| 'ceded or secured to the United States by any
treaty made with a foreign nation, or by a
"cesson from any State to the United States,
which lands shall not have been previously
sold, cedcd or leased by the United States or
1.-THE claim to which lands, by which person or
''persons shall not have been previously recog-
mixed and confirmed by the United States or
IF any person or persons shall cause such
lands to be thus occupied taken possession of OF
settled or shall survey or attempt to survey or
caused to be surveyed any such lands: or
designate any boundaries thereon by marking
trees or otherwise, until thereto duly author
'.ized by law :; such offender or offenders shall
.forfcit all his or their right title and claim, if
..any he hath OR they have of whatsoever ma
..ture or kind. the same shall or may be to the
lands aforesaid, which he or they shall have
taken possession Of or settled, or which he or
"thcy shall have surveyed, or (attempted) to
boundaries (whereo0 he or they shall have
designated, or caused to be designated by
''marking trees or otherwise"
That act of Congress was passed fOrty-seven
years ago, but If it had been enacted with es-
pecial refGrance to this case. it could not have
been made more applcable-more crushing in
its bearing upon these professionals.
It's language is clear and to the point 1t
cannot be avoided by any forced construction.
''lle who runs may read"
Now it is fully proven by the testimony of
the witnesses of these protestants, that on the
18th day of March, 1854, before the Govern
ment survey, Ben amin W. Brunson. r. f.
Slaughter, Calvin Hood, Charles Kimbal,
(aritness) A. A. Parker and John Stewart. took
possession Of and made settlement on the lands
in Gueston-that they ed or caused
them to be surveyed-that they designated
boundaries thereon by marking trees. yea,
and cutting them DOWN.
1t does not appear, and cannot be proven.
that the Government of the United States had
previously sold, or leased these lands, or coded
them, or that these protestants were duly au-
thoriZed by law to enter upon them and there
fore if they have, or ever had any claim to
them of whatever nature or kind, it is forfeit
ed.
And see the reasonableness and justice of
the law as illustrated by the shores of Lake
Superior. Ifspeculators claiming town sites
could 60 upon the lands of tho Government
OefOfe the surrey anu survey out oZO, or as IN
this instance, upwards of 100 acres of land in
to streets, blocks and lots, and thereby exempt
it from presumption, then, indeed would the
entire shore of that magnificent inland sea be
taken out of the range of the act of Sept. 4th
1871, because by the 10th sec. of that act, the
poor pre-emptor is limited to the Surveyed
lands.
There can not be a doubt in your mind in
relation to this point, and here we leave it to
your superior experience and knowledge.
Again: these professionals claim in their pro-
test 70l 2O-lOO acres, as exempt from pre-empt-
ion because the same was settled and occupied
as town site prior to the settlement of the
pre-emptors, and they prove the improvements
above specified Gnsufficiant as they clearly
are) upon lots and of section Is, and lot
2 of section "a. Theact of Congress of
May Odd. 1914. under which the claim to this
land by the prOtestants must be made, if made