, 1882-08-25

L
...r-,.a .a -----s-, .-l--.-- COVE
.a- .: ,a- at. >..a 7.--''-..,. .,..- =
..'l.- '-- .-,r1r A.. -,...' ., .-= -..'-
' -|' T.,---- - .-''r-.
Drr,z-vzyr ~ TIE Is--z7,5s.
Ogg-.v ny -. ~E.EETAGT.
W,-aiy5roS. d. C., Jlly l., l-'-
ne l1Ts''as..ncr ,o-
y" ne ''"'''l La'i '-''''
',ia:-I have considered the matter
r the aQ!~a. u George >. B.-'gp.
rom youE decision Z Noy@mO@r j..
81 Rejecting MS agp.lcat!14 y p,Ic-
rna@e the ;. l.. u sc, -, ~. y
Z. - w, Aortn P.att" dlsl.ic', Ne,
vra-Sa- under the second seton u
he act u june -, $50, ~ 9lai.
30.
In" record shows ina, b'.ngp A-ai-
homestead entry ". @f- Dt t-' tract
July -. I1,t- sLi tAat u" SAN" Wa
"aHce.ed Nay ~, inn, iCr voluntary
E'lin4uishm"nt IndIT date GI AH-
-lst l5'S, one Andre" Hoacard MAJ"
timber culture entry No. 90 ol 'L@
y. ! Of sad ,; T.. = ana george !.
9treeter h!ed declaratory sta'eiAeh
No. 30, for the ,. OF the same Al
leglng settlement May I2rh preced-
Ln2. >. ,
On August Z, lSol- Blshop app!ied
to purchase as Aforesaid Dut the reg
ISter rejected his application Tor tht
reasons, Il that the SAID ming ana
rntry had been made subsequently 10
the cancellation OF MS homestead en-
try; and ~ that by reason OF said
rellnqulshment and cancellation ne
'"I eAIia1II.t I' i 80 IN
nolliT7teal Ia aht iiIe i.sHt ~ p
yua'e y! saHo''i 'iie 7eoticn ~ 9usS-ron.
icu hiili iLei tne - "oe-Tn -niiI a.
iHe ~ oGiil'i iniiy III "i'I .Io. ~. - raII55
~ ~ !ouL olil E..:a aIt .t'iu ~. S15t 80 -
liie seiliie no aPPiimT"'IoI PPLm 'itdeI I 'glu .LI
s'cllon Ii can Ue all1"eu "helT tn
iioIiieStedu cntii VI ech "Ppli'ainl ai
laS peer, Saiig,sieu- , ouen VS. IHe
G'iIe VI the IsPai tiLenI III ti;e Sss Ssse
VI 1ialla y, ~ 0aillii1r, 1a- WHO" Vi .oiIAS
uaIhher, 70 opp io''I pul tne same
was 9Nelruie1 Oy 5ni7 uepattllieh ~ uu
lsr uate vi m 'nu 2u tntltIio .n =, 10 Tue cas-
Vi JOnh w MiiIs5' 70 ADiuehl, oD
wherein II was heic tnat tne sectiVn
~ lu.s'ion speciIcalIy grants tne W
.isht 70 purchase IN ail t:t ctS's9 ~neIe sl
'ne !anu was Pfofeily Suojec* W tue
"llelhal ehtryi llnltte1 ohly Dy the
IlO'lSo Una tiils s!'alI III 10 WISE III
'Siiere n WIN tne Ilgh'S OF clalinS vi
olners VINO may nave subsequently
tai Ia,rS;,; -
s,.,.,
as no Stil'5equshI eiltr! upon any
J .laJt 'aAen .eI as nolhes.ean t1.: eau oe
inaue un'll alter t'hcellatlCh VI ii suGI
pileihai ehtry, lnlS Proviso "ouid
u we hothih9 III any case "laIeyer 70
VpetaIe ul'oh, except upon tne lheory
.tiaI the IiSut Vi purchase liitiS I'm
lteu Iilsht De eAerclseo aa wen aILer
oancellatloh as De1ore, and that the
ohly purpose 0l congress was 70 save
"uy eh@s SupSequehtly hialie III ac-
'oltlance "ltn exlstlng law, lr0m
lreJuulce vi interference under the
ne" enactineht, Dut 70 nestow upon
the oIlglnai cialInaht the otherwise
,inrestrlcted rignt 70 acquire by pnr-
cnaSe t1e iaha whlch ne had ialIedt to
secure ~ Str!cI compliance win the
"a" unuer "hlch hs originally enter
ol 1t can make no difference to the
government whether the entry has
peen Cancelled or not The mere act
"t cancellatlon has no force III con
hectioh Win the statute"
The case cited was e.r parte, no ad
verse right having intervened in the
interim of the cancellation Of SIiller's
entry and OF his application therein
drawn i'll question, whereas. in the
case at bar, the adverse claims of
s'treeter and Goddard have been in
tarposed, and it is presumable that
the land was subject to the same. as
the contrary is not shown nor even
4