The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-07-07

February LAST pertaining to the involving the
cting presumption claims of the alleged proprietors Of
SuperoE city claiming the right to enter fractional sec
ton IL and portion " fractional section a. township
40, north OF range Ia west in the Fond du Lac Wiscon
sin land district under the act of Esd May s44 which
is contested BY Chares Brsset Antoine Warren Basil
Dennis, and Vincent Roy, within whose entries, under
the act Of lS4l, the said land is included.
The said parties BIisctt, Warren, Dcnnis and Roy
persons Of the class description known as mixed
boods OF the Chippewa Indians OF Lake Superior BY
article fourth Of the treaty with the Chippewa Indians
dated the "a day Of August l84 it is stipulated that
the half mixed boods of the Chippewas residing With
them shall be considered Chippewa Indians and shall al,
such be allowed TO participate in all the annuities which
shall hereafter be paid to the Chppewas of Mississippi
aud Lake Superior due them by this treaty. and by
treaties heretofore made and ratified
by the 18th clause Of the I'd article Of the treaties with
the Chippewas of Lake Superior dated Both of Sepen-
Der, 1884, it is stipulated that each head family or
single person twenty years age the
time, of the mixed bloods, belonging the Chippewas
of Lake Superior shall be entitled eighty acres of land
be selected by them under the direction Of the President
and which shall be secured to them by patent in the usual
form"
That these claimants, under the act of 1871 are of
the class comprehended within the terms of said last
quoted clause is obvious and unquestionable.
In addition to the testimony Of witnesses with regard
to the fact that the of said claimants the
payos OF the Indans and that they received annutes
at the time different payments and distributions were
made 1t appears by the certificate of the Second Auditor
OF treasury Ibis that their
on the halfbreed list following the annuity roll of the
Chippewa tribe of Indians of Lake Superior and the pay
ments to them atested by witnesses who certify
der date of 10Th of September 1885, that the signatures
marks of the several Indians and mixed bloods
affixed to the receipt roll in presence OF said witnesses
The name of each of said presumption claimants APP
pears the list of persons entitled claim land under
the 7th clause of the second article Of the treaty of 1854
received in the General Land Office from the Commissioner
of Indian Affairs.
Being thus entitled by reason of their Indian character
to certain rights and privileges conferred by treaty and
having to extent derived the benefits aud advanta
gees secured to them thereby not disposed regard
the claim which they assert to the right preemp
ton citizens of the United States with any special
favor and consideration But these parties have entirely
failed to show that they have settled upon and improved
the land claimed by them in good faith for their
and benefit The facts disclosed by the evidence on file
indicate beyond reasonable doubt that they were the en-
poyes of Others under whose direction and for whose ben
eft they were acting
In view Of the facts herenbeore stated the pre-em
ton entries of the said parties Charles Brisse Antoine
Warren, Basil Dennis, and Vincent Roy jr, are invalid
and hereby direct that the same be cancelled.
The act Of Esd of May 1874, entitled An act for the
relief of citizens of towns upon the lands of the United
States under certain circumstances provides for tue
entry Of any portion of the surveyed public lands which
has been may be settled upon and occupied as town
SITE The title, well the words employed in the
body of the act clearly demonstrate that the
intended to apply exclusively to actual and existing
public lands settled upon and occupied as town
site such have been selected by non-residcnts
propretors claimants the site for city or town. as
exempt from entry under existing presumption laws.
There provision made for filing notice Of selection
and the act does not specify contemplate any pro-
ceedngs whereby lands which have merely been 30 Sc
lected shall be excluded from the operation of other pre-
emption laws
Prior to the passage Of this act of 23d May 1874 it
the policy and settled practice of the to
prohibit the sale acquisition by presumption of lands
which occupied town sites trading places the
object of such prohibition being the interests of
the by the sale Of the lands at their enhanced
value in such might be deemed best to effect
that object.
That clause in the act of 1871 which provides that no
portions of the public lands which have been selected as
the site for town shall be liable to entry under and by
virtue of its provisions, cannot therefore, be con-
srued to recognise the right of selection by individuals
of portions of the public lands for town sites for their
and benefit since at that time the system Of
granting rights of presumption lands of that character
had not only not been adopted but directly at vari
ance with the established practice and policy 1t was
nanifestly not the object of the law to withhold from
presumption such lands individuals might designate
select without authority the site for probable pros
pectiye city or town If So it would have been within
the power of any person persons to defeat the pre-
emption claims of those whom they were interested in
opposing by alleging that the particular land upon which
such claimant had settled had hitherto been so selected
1t then not intended by said clause of the act of
1871 to withhold lands which might be regarded as egi
ble adapted for town purposes from presumption until
claimants should have opportunity to make settle
ents and improvements Since at that time II not
to protect the interests supposed rights of citizens Of
cities towns that such lands withheld and exclu
ded from pe-empton and therefore the supposition that
said clause would recognise and protect from the claims
of Others such selections is erroneous.
The act of 23d May, 1914, further provides that the
lands settled upon and occupied shall be entered in
trust for the several and benefit of the occupants
thereof. Referring to the title of the act ''For the
lief of citizens of towns &C. 1t may be easily deter
mined that by the term occupants is meant those who
settlers residents, and that il only embraces the
citizens thereof The parties for whose benefit and in
whose behalf the application dated September 9th 1885,
and signed by Michael s. Bright, county judge of Doug
las county, made have not shown that they
cupants within the meaning Of the law does it APP
pear that there not occupants of the town who would
be entitled to the benefits Of the law In preference to the
so-called 'propretors of Superior City
Said act further provides that the entry of the land in
tended by this act shall include only such land is
tuay occupied by the town. and shall not in the whole
exceed three hundred and twenty
The act of S4l provides for the entry Of any number
Of not exceeding hundred and sixty quarter
section Of land by those claiming the right of pre-emp
ton under It. The limiary words of the two statutes
are essentially different Tho limits the entry to
such lands only actually occupied by the town the
other gives the right of acquiring any number of
not exceeding quarter section
Before entry is permitted under the act of 23d May
1874 1t must be shown that of the legal sub
divisions of the public lands Is actually occupied by the
town. and the nature extent and sufcency of such oc
cupation must be determined by the facts In each parcu
LAT H5Evg s3Fr IA
The application above mentioned to obtain the benefit
Of the act Of 1884, not being consistent In accordance
with the views herein before expressed is hereby rejected
Very respectfully, your obedent servant,