Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1862-04-12

/ ss'>~
Rutherford rs Greene's heirs, that 1t recog-
nizes as general principle Of justice and
municipal law, that such grant. vests in
"the grantee present asd immediate inter
"ea In the language Of the Court, the ges-
"eral g!ta becomes a particular gW ~hes
"Me surrey Is made"
A reference to the whole opinion delivered
in that case. becomes valuable. A portion Of
it is devoted to the consideration Of whether
Alvarado, by certain omissions, forfeited his
grant.
In the case under consideration, much
weight is attached to the omission Of the mis-
sion to fix their lines by survey. The very
instructions under which this investigation
has been pursued. answer all these objections
Till September 1859, by positive instructions
from the General Land Office, surveys could
not be extended over the lands claimed by the
lIudson's Bay Company as covered by their
possess0ry rights secured to them under the
treaty of 1S46.
Again by the positive injunction of the
General Land Office, of date August 18th,
1853, the Mission was precluded from assert
ing its claim. The following is the language
of the Commissioner in his letter of that date
to the Surveyor General of Oregon.
"In case any mission station should be
found to fall within the unadjusted limits
claimed by tho Hudson's Bay or Puget
Sound Agricultural Companies, you will re-
ceive evidence of the claim, and all the facts
respecting the same, but be careful that no
Especial surrey or definite action is had there
" on until the receipt Of special instructions
from the Department"
| No such special instructions came until the
letter of the Commissioner to my predecessor,
bearing date the goth day of September 1859,
in which this office is instructed to extend
the public surveys over the tracts claimed by
tho Hudson's Bay Company, and to lay off
the Mission claim in accordance with section
6, of tho act Of Congress approved September
9th $780, otherwise called the Donation
Law.
The delay therefore Of the Mission, under
the circumstances apparent, can work no i'll
Jury to their claim" and works no forfeiture
of the grant.
We approach the next feature Of this case
with'cxtreme difiidence, and confess the array
of difficulties here presented, by the occupan-
cy of large portion Of this land by the Mil
itary Post at Fort Vancouver.
1t has already been intimated in this report,
that the grant to the Mission, took effect and
was in full force from August 14th 1S4S, as
between the Mission and the United States,
subject only to the lien and encumbrance,
which by treaty stipulation, had been i'm
posed upon the United States by the Sd ar
ticle of the treaty Of limits between the United
States and Great Britain.
In May 1S49, and after the grant to the
Mission, by invitation of the officers in charge
of the Hudson's Bay Company's post at Fort
Vancouver, Maj. Hathaway, u. s. A., took
post, and stipulated to pay rent, and in the
contract agreed to hold possession and use
said post, under and subject to all the rights
the Hudson's Bay Company possessed
They were in fact tenants of the said Compa-
ny, and by force of circumstances the lease
expired with the possession, or right to the
possession of said Company, that is to say at
the expiration of the license of said Company
to trade, which occurred May 3Oth 1859.
If our doctrine be correct, that on the 14th
day of August 1S4S, the United States grant
ed, confirmed and established unto the relig.
ious society, to which the Mission Of St.
James belongs, the tract in question said
tract was not within the operation Of the act
of eth September 1850, nor of the act of
Feb. IA, 1853.
All the proceedings in regard to the estab.
lishment Of this Reservation. may be briefly
stated, a. follows:
In May ls49, Maj. Hathaway, U. s. A..
leased Of the Hudson's Bay Company, sufi-
cient buildings for garrison, quarters &C.,
with privilege Of adjacent unoccupied lands.
In May 1850, by order Of Gen. p. F.
Smith, under directions Of tho War Depart.
ment, Col. w. w. Loring U. 8. A., declared
Reserve Of miles square.
Under the act Of Feb. IA, 1853, limiting
the quantity Of Reservations for forts. to GAO
acres, the War Department on 29th Oct, 1853.
directed the restriction Of the Reserve to GAO
acres it's present limits, which limits were Dc.
clared by Col. Bonneville. U. 8. Army, then
in command At Fort Vancouver, on Dec. 9Th
1859.
On 18th January 1854. board Of officers
reported on the raise Of tie impyoremesls
within the lines. the Mission asserting no
claim.
We are aware that large improvements
have been made on the Military reservation,
a vast expenditure Of public money has been
incurred. and such fact is sought 10 be urged
- . rcsson Why pessed rights Of others should
be interfered with.
The Improvements Of the Hudson's Bay
Company were not such improvements -
were included in proviso to the 9th Section
Of the act Of Congress approved Feb: la,h
1853. Under the treaty Of 1886, the United
States could not force the Hudsou's Bay Com
pany 70 take the price appraised by the
board Of officers. nor could they, except on
free volitiou Of the Company, expel them
from the trading post. established under the