Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1879-09-19
THE TELLER.
SEPTEMBER 10th 1879.


to our notice which is new TO Us. The
case was where the party fled declara
tory statement upon 160 acres of tim.
Der land. The party built . house
upoa the land, moved into it with bis
family, and resided there continuously
during the time required under the
presumption laws, and while :here he
cleared and cultiva.ed two acres OF the
land, and cut down much Of the timber
on other portions Of the land, and man
ufactured i int lumber, partly for his
own use and partly for sal, to his
ucighbors who occupied prairie lands 10
the vicinity. He constructed saw
mill upon the land as means Of util
iziog the timber cut in clearing the
land instead Of burning it. The
amount Of cultivation, it 10 true, was
small, but a. we have understood the
law it is not required to cultivate any
given number Of acres so long as there
is bona fde cultivation of even one
acre. But in this case when the party
applied TO prove up and enter be
proved his location, settlement, cultiva-
ton and residence for the requisite
length Of time. But his witnesses. 10
answer 70 the question to what uses he
had put the land since settlement,
swore that it had been used principally
for milling purposes. Under this testi.
noey he was not permitted to enter.
but his case was referred to the CON-
missioner Of the general land Office for
. d cision, as we suppose, under some
instructions Of the land department 1t
Washington. This case presents to US
an entirely nee phase Of the rights Of
pre-smptors under the pre- emrtion
laws. W. have always understood the
Law to allow filings and residence upon
timber lands Of the governm INT the
same - upon prairie lands, and tina,
residence upon and cultivation Of tim
Der lands, oven though the quantity
cultivated be small, would entitle the
pre- emptor to make cash entry aud gel
his certificate for patent by proof d
residence aud cultivation the required
elk months, and that because the pre-
emptor cut timber on other portions o.
the land filed upon and converted THU
timber into lumber and sold the cam,
to other parties rather than cutting i
down and burning it to clear the land
DO would not be debarred an entry
Suppose this pre- emptor had simpl,
located, filed, resided upon the trac
and cultivated only the two acres AM
not cut any Of the other timber an
converted Il into lumber for sale, woul
he have bssn permitted to make casl
entryi We think he would. Suppos
he had cultivated IS acres Of this Ian
10 wheat and sold the wheat to hi
nsighbora could be have made cas-
entry after proving residence 81
mouths? We think be could. The
Why can he not utilize the timber grow
ing upon his pre- emption by convertin
il into lumber and ceiling the same I
acquire means for further improvement
rather than be required to cut and bur
tia. timber IN order TO clear his lane
We cannot deduce from the law an
provision whereby the pre-smptor
required to destroy the timber that
outs upon his presumption in placc
selling i after being cut in order
ontitle him to make cash entry aft
the required residence and cultivatio
If there be any such provision or il
struction Of the land laws or ruling
the department. then it il all importa
that settlers be fully made acquaint'
With il. We understand that up,
Puget Sound hundreds Of pre.empto
have fled upon timber lauds, resid
upon them and cultivated not mo
than ono or two acres; have cut al
cold timber both for milling and shi
ment, and yet ell Of them have be-
permitted to make cash entries at Il
expiration Of the required residen
and cultivation. Ia fact, in that til
bered section Of country it would
next 70 impossible for poor man
ii iaequire . presumption title unless
we're permitted to sell the timber Q
from his claim to acquire the means
clearing the land aud bringing i, into