The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1864-01-29
s; AMT ? A q L 4.
Decision of the supreme Court Oh the
United States on MINNESOTA Schooi
Lands.

lowing telegram
Gov, MILLER
The School Land ease is decided in favor OF
the State. ALEA. hAMShh'
This case has been decided four times
adversely 10 the State in the District'and
Supre,ne Courts of this State.
The case arose in Rice county, and
the facts are these In 1857, two parties
named Mills, Father and Son, were living
unon $40 acres of valuable land III the
beautiful valley Of the Cannon River, and
Immediately adjoining the town OF Earl
bault. This land was then regarded as OF
great value, is now worth probably $4,000,
and its prospective value much greater.
The parties resident on this land, had as
is well known to all of the old residents
of the county, gone on to these lands long
after the survey, with full knowledge OF
the file to the State. and with the innocent
intent to purchase them whenever the
State should bring her School Lands into
market. but in 1857, the land office was
located at Faribault. A period of wild
speculative excitement came on and the
Mills we're induced by certain Spectators
to attempt to hold their claims under the
Joint resolutions of March Sd, 1857, allow
ing persons who had settled upon School
Lands prior to the survey, to preempt, and
requiring the State to select other lands in
place of those thus taken.
An ignorant French or half-breed trap
per, who had resided for many years upon
the frontier, unacquainted with the English
language and as there is a good reason to
believe ignorant of the contents OF the ALL
davits which he was required to subscribe,
was found to swear that the Mills had set
tied upon these lands prior to the survey,
and the presumption was allowed.
The settlers in the vicinity were indig-
nant at this gross fraud. Application was
at once made to the land Office at Wash
ington, supported by affidavits of the most
substantial citizens, to have the presumption
set aside, and the county commissioners OF
the county of Rice directed the county
attorney to take charge of the proceed
ings.
The case was returned to the land
Office, then removed to st. Peter for fur
Their proceedings, and, as it is said, notices
forwarded to the county attorney OF Rice.
Be that as it may, the notices were never
served, as is usual in such cases, upon the
affiants-no appearance being made for
the State or county, the case was re-
turned to the General Land Office, and in
1869 patent was issued to the pre-empt-
ors. With whom the fraud in this second
stage of the transaction rests it is not our
province to say. No attempt was made
during the succeeding administration to
assert the rights of the State, and the
original preemptors were enabled to dis
pose of the land to parties cognizant of the
fac.s. but who relied upon the inviOlability
of the patent, and the probability that the
State would not contest the title.
But in 1860, actions were commenced
by the State, who by tenant had retained
possession, against all the parties holding
under the original preemptors. Abundant
evidence was offered to prove the grossly
AL ohor Of
which the district court excluded, holding
that the land officers were invested with
judicial powers, and that the patent was
conclusive 1t was insisted, on the other
hand, for the State, that although the land
officers might, for certain limited purposes,
be invested with judicial powers under the
presumption law they had no jurisdiction
to grant lands which, not being settled
on prior to the survey had been granted
to the State by the act-authorizing the
people of the State to form a State gov
eminent The court very summarily over
ruled this view of the case, and in sub
stance instructed the jury to return a YER
dict for the defendant. This the jury re-
fused to do. but proceeded to return a
verdict for the State, which was instantly
set aside by the court.
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision
of the court below, and remanded the case
for further proceedings to that court.
The case was again tried, and the court
again instructed the jury to return YER
dict for the defendant, which they, upon
the intimation Of the Attorney General
that it was merely a matter of form. to
enable him to take an appeal, reluctantly
consented to do. The case again came
before the Supreme Court of the State
where the following points were made and
argued very fully:
1. That the joint resolutions of Con-
gress of 1857 were void, inasmach as
Congress by the eighteenth section of the