The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1878-02-15
LAND FRAUD.
- Chicago Man Buys . Section of
Land on = Forged Abstract

u Chicago Man Buys . Section of
Land on = F0Essd Abstract
r. z. Page, Register Of Deeds, received
Jan. Both the following telegram:
CHICAGO, I'LL, Jan. 30, 1873.
In whom is recorded title to section 81,
township 20, range IL, Lyon cou nty, Kan
sas, given here as Abner Bowman. Is il
correct! Answer. Important.
FRANK e. HOLMAN.
Mr.. Page answered that the record was
In favor Of A. C. Beldsn, aud Feb. 4th
received the following letter and copy OF
| abstract:
f. r. Page, Esq, Register OF Deeds.
DEAR STR:-I have been defrauded in
the purchase OF certain Kansas lands
designated as section 81, township 20,
| range IL, Lyon county. An abstract TO
| this property was given me Of which l
send certified copy. I am confident this
IS fraud perpertated in full upon me,
which think TO your interest as an off
ciaI Of the State of Kansas to prevent or
| assist me in exposing.
Bogus deeds and abstracts have been
put upon this market and am requested
by the prosecuting attorney here. to ask
Of you certified copy Of title to this
property, with your signature and OIL
cial position, so certified to, so that the
Please attend to this at once as L desire
using 1t in evidence, and / will remit i'm
med1ately your charges for the same.
FRANK E. HOLMAN,
81 Dearborn st. Chicago, Ill.
Whereupon MIR. Page and his deputy,
A. r. Bancroft, made a full copy of the
record as 1t Is and forwarded it to MIR.
Holman. The record is very short, and
shows that the section referred to was
patented by the United States to VIM.
Mink, and that the patent was recorded
May 9th, 1876, and the same date VIM.
Mink conveyed the section by warranty
deed to A. c. Belden. No transfer from
beiden is on the record, and he is proba-
bly, still the owner, and has the clearest
kind OF title.
The bogus abstrs ct, which Mr.. HoI-
man sends is q fraud in every respect,
including names, dates, record books, and
dates Of record. There Is nothing about
1t correct, except that of course the Sec
ton OF land described is in the county,
and is fair piece of unimproved prairie
land about six miles south Of Emporia.
The forged abstract was evidently gotten
up by some parties skilled in records, but
who had no access to the records of Lyon
county. The real record Is as we said.
from United States to Mink, patent re-
corded May 9th, 1876, and from Mink Ey
warranty deed to Belden, deed recorded
also May 9TH, 1876. The bogus record is
from United States to John T. Long, on
patent dated Oct. IL, 1858, and recorded
In book II. page II, Oct. II, 1853, whereas
the very first U. States paetnt recorded
In Lyon county was recorded in book A
Dec. Is, 1859. The bogus record goes on
to say that the land was conveyed by
John T. Long to David Strong, and from
Strong to James Bates, and from Bates to
Abner Bowman, the latter being the par
ty from whom the Victimized Holman
purchased. The name OF the recorder sign
ed the forged abstract Is gwen as John II.
Stuart, no such person being known to
reside here, and certain ly no such person
ever held the Office OF recorder in Lyon
county. The document was no doubt
manufactured entire in Chicago, by par
ties who never saw the inside OF the Ly-
on county court house, but who ought to
be furnished board and lodging In the
basement of that structure.
Mr.. Holman did not even see the original
forged abstract, but what purportS to
be copy OF 1t certified to by j. NJ. Bev-
erly, notary public, Cook county, Ill.,,
JAN 18th. Then Charles II. Waite, an
other notary pnblIc in Cook county, GER
tiGes that MIR. Beverly's certificate is
bona tide. The original { torged) docu-
ment, however, which Mr.. Beverly certi-
ties he saw, does not appear to have had
any seal upon it, and it is strange that
Mr.. Holman did not ascertain why John
H. Stuart, alleged recorder, furnished an
abstract without putting his official seal
to it. The price Mr.. Holman paid for the
land is not yet known here, but it would
hardly be less than 50 per acre. If it was
offered for less than that the exceeding
lowness of the price should have aroused
his suspisions that it was taking a great
risk to buy on the strength of a certified
copy Of . certified abstr act without con-
settling with any lawyers or other party
here to ascertain If such a recorder as
John II. Stuart had all existence.