The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1860-01-12

law and consequently void, and 10 directed the
County Judge to declare them, which he accosainnQ
did. have since learned that soma OF fA1Ds -
| tended purchasers were unwilling to heve their
lands % treated and would contest their titles With
the 6tAts, while others would give them up II their
1 money could be refunded with intersst. Al the
executive oficer OF the State, 1t was NY duty %
insist upon strict Observance Of the kw. u II
quite competent FOR you 10 do otherwise, sna II
visw oil the altered condition Of things In the State,
the fall Of property &c., would nov recommend
the passage Of law that should legaliEe these
sAles and rest in the several purchasers tho legal
title to the lands In question, with the privilege,
however, to such desire it, to surrender back the
land TO the County Judge, upon being rsim bursed
the money paid, with interest. This option should
be given for the reason that the sale had hesn de-
| carsd void by me, and some of the parties may
| have made other arrangements Such disposition
OF thts dinhcalty would obviats the axpsnss and
xation OF law suits and II the same time, under
all the circumstances, further the interest OF the
I School Fund.
500 900 ACRE GRAFT
! In the selection Of these lands the agents EN-
ployed returned Of 20 SEQ ,03 acres which
| by some mistake was approved and entered upon
the tract books both In the General Land ONCE Ut
Washington and our own books in the Registers
I Office.
vas urged, and lsarned my predecessors had
been to return back 10 the General Government .
tons, properly described, that should DO equal to
| this excess. Upon very full enquiry, found that
this could not be done without interfering with The
rights cf innocent purchAsers that the entire grant,
including part OF this excess, had already bssp
sold, leaving about S,0ls.25 acres undispossd Of.
Percsiving no good reason why this last amount
should net be given back, list containing pro.
per description Of the same was duly returned, and
an arrangement was made with the Commissioner
of the General Land Office, to the effec. that the
residue of this excess s745 acres) shon Id be son.
| irmed to the State, and that from her ave per
cent. fund an amount should be retained suthcisnt
TO pay for the same, at 81 - per acre. being 49,
oS1. This adjustment is . favorable one Ter the
State and it Is to be hoped that you win ratify IL
| by the passing of an act that much Of the Ave
per cent. fund may be retained the General Gov
| Element made, and that the title Of the 6,7k6
may vest in the State, il will also be neces-
| sary for Congress TO pass act confirming this
| settlement for the consideration named, to which
the attention of our Representatives should be i'm
mediAtely called.
For years this grant has been held to extend 10 the
source of the river. Recently the Government an
thorties have decided that II 10 limited In lie en-
tent to tho Rsccoon Forks, and refused to certify
any more lands to the State north OF this point
The Hon. Charles Mason was appointed = Commits
sioner by the last General Assembly to procure IL
possible the residue Of this grant to be certified to
! the State. For this purpose he Immediately re-
| paired TO Washington, and not obtaining salts
factory decision from the Secretary Of the Interior
appealed to the President who referred the subject
to the Attorne General, whose opinion was adverse
to the State and thereupop recourse was had to the
Judiciary. suit, In the name OF 3. @. Litchnel
| Esq, against the Dubuque Pacific Railroad Com
pany, instituted In the District Court Of the
United States, and judgment obtained In favor Of
the plaintiff for = tract of land embraced in this
| grant near Fort Dodge, derived from the State.--
| An appeal to the Supreme Court Of the United
| States was Immediately taken. has already been
submitted to that tribunal upon printed arguments
4 with assurances from the Court Of early deci-
- II. - - GA
favorable one, ii will bs impossible to conceive
how the Government il to avoid the legal effect Of
her repeated admissions that title extended 20
| the source OF the river. Too much praise cannot
| be awarded to Judge Mason for the abb and indie
fatigable manper in which he has addressed him
self to the object of his commission The settle
| ment made 1t its last session by the Legislature
| with the Res Moines Navigation 4 Railroad Com
pany, has been duly carried out according to the
| terms expressed, part Of the details Of which
1 will be found In the Report Of the Commissioner
=. Manning, Esq. 1t win be remembered that the
| River Improvement was abandoned, except tho
| completion OF four dams, the state and condition
Of which will ba found in the Reports Of the pres
| emit Commissioner, VIM. C. Drake, and the Chief
En- Ger, s. Dwight Eaton, Esq, TO which your
attention is respectfully called.
| If these four dams should be completsd. thew
will still be the source Of constant annoy ancc and
| expense TO the State, and 1t Ia clear to my mind
that it would be the part Of wisdom to do at once
what in the end viii have to be done, and that 10
4
any responsible party or parties Of such can b.
| found) who would undertake to complete and keep
! the same In repair. The dams, completed might
be disposed Of to the highest responsible bidder &C.
Justice to large number of individuals, demands
that should bring to your attention another sub
ject connected with this grant. The agents en-
poyed by the State to select the 500 600 acre grant
among others, selected I2,913.51 acres Of land
chiefly In Webster county, belonging to the river
grant. which selection, with Others, was approved
| Feb Goth, 1851.
Col. Benton, at that time the State superintsn-
| dent, with his usual caution and prudence before
ordering these lands into market, ad dressed let
ter of enquiry to the Commissioner Of the 6enersl
Land Office, whether any OF the selections in uues-
| tion connicted with the Des Mcines River grant
This was in March, 1853. Resolving . negative
| answer on the 9Th Of June, of the same year. he
ordered the lands into market. In January, there-
after he received another letter from the Com
sioner to the effect that the approval OF the selsc
tons OF these 1888 had been revoked and
confirmed TO the htats under the Des Moincs River
/ grant
In the meantime, the School Fund Comm issioner
of Webster county, under the order Of sale. dis
posed Of some 4,869 scres " this land, BY sale to
actual settlers, who have improved and stii occupy
thcTsme. Since then the State, under her contract
for the improvement Of the Des MoineA River, has
conveyed by decd these same lands TO the De,
Moines River Company who now hold the legal
q title. In this condition of things what is to be-
come of these settlerss II il true perhaps, under
the occupying claimant law, they may get the val
ne ofttheir improvements. But 10 this the measure
of justice that should be melted out to them? They
were purchasers in good faith, and although their
misfortunes the result Of the iaches Of Federal
officers, rather than that OF the State yet simple
justice demands, under the circumstances, that ths
State should 1t best do all 1t could TO have these
lands confirmed TO them. This can now only be
done by negotiation.
would respectfully suggest, where any of these
parties are unwilling to take reasonable compsu.
sation for their Improvements, and surrender the
land, that II they win pay TO the Des Moines Nav
igation Railroad Company, the price fer which
the State sells other rchool lands, that then the
State will make up the residue Of the purchase
money to said Company, either in cash or land
provided the purchase can be made Of said Company
opjust and reasonable terms.
! A special agent might be commissioned To effect
the negotiation on this basis, properly restricted
J in his powers.
I. At al events, the whole subject is submitted Il