Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1883-01-13

An IMPORTANT DEG1ssoN.
WAsHrxGroS, d. c., june Is, 1852.
Register and Receiver.
Yakima, Washington Territory.
Gentlemen: Registers letter of Feb.
eth Last. transmitting appeal of Geo. w.
Pressey from your decision rejecting
his application to make homestead en-
try Of the 5 Il s E = of Sec IA, $ w
8 w ( of Sec. Is, and n w N
Of Sec. n, Up 10, n Il, Is Z. was duly
secsiyed.
An early consideration of the case was
requested for the reason that number
of settlers who are DESTROYS Of fling
similar applications vere anxiousiy
awaiting the decision. The limited force
of this Office together with the great
press Of business, has prevented earlier
action In the case.
Pressey's application was received by
you Jan. 81, 1852. You rejected the APP
plication for the reason that the tract In
section 3 falls within the limits of the
withdrawal for the Northern Pacific
Railroad Company made August Is,
1873.
The corroboratsd affidavit of Pressey
FLED in support of his appeal, shows that
he settled upon the land May q, 1878,
has resided upon, cultivated and Inn
proved the same from that date; that
he was the first settler in the township,
and that be has deposited the money
aud secured they surve of said land.
It also appears that if he is not permit
ted to acquire title to the tract in SEQ.
Ii, his entry will not form q compact
body, and that that there is now no va
cant land contiguous to the remaining
tracts embraced in his entry.
The question for this Office to decide,
however, irrespective of any equities in
the case is the legal status of the land
az respects the rights of said company.
The tract in Sec. Ii, has been continu-
0usly withdrawn since August Is, 1873.
At this date it was Withdrawn for the
benefit of the Northern Pacific Railroad
Company. Subsequently the company
abandoned this line and changed the
route of its road to distance of 25 or
30 miles south of it's original line. This
was in fact new location. The with
drawal for this amended line took ef-
feet July Is, 1879, aud embraced the
tract in question. The lands embraced
in the former withdrawal were restored
Sept. 1, 1879. This tract, of course, was
not restored, but Pressey's settlement
was made prior to the last withdrawal,
and he still resides upon the land.
It now becomes necessary in order to
determine the status of this tract, to
give history of this change of route.
The map of the general route of the
original branch line fled in 1873, was
accepted by the Department as author
lied under the 9Th section of the act of
July 2, 1864, (a3 stat. 1861 az amended
by resolution of May Ii, 1870, ZIG stat.
37s.)
On November IS. 1876, the company
applied to amend said branch line. and
fled in the Secretary's office a map
greatly shortening the original line.
Nov. "a, 1876, the Secretary, Chandler,
approved this map, and directed this Of
fee to withdraw the lands along the
new line and restore those along the old
route.
Pending the preparations of the maps
of withdrawal Hon. Orange Jacobs filed
in the Department motion to reo0u-
slider the action of the Secretary, which
was referred to Commissioner William
son for report. A report was made Jan.
II, 1877.
Oct. 18th, following, Secretary Schurz
reviewed the whole subject, and de-
clined to disturb the action OF his prede-
ceesor, Secretary Chandler, and directed
the Commissioner to execute the origin
al instruction. Before the instructions
received the signature of the Commits
sioner, Williamson, he was directed by
the United States Assistant Attorney
General to suspend action in the prem
IA
was held in allegiance.
In 1879, the company hled new map
and renewed its request of 1876. This
man showed q very different route from
that represented upon the map filed in
1876. and was, as stated by Commits
sioner Williamson in his letter to Sec
rotary Schurz of May Il, 1879, with the
exception Of few miles, . new lOca-
ton" The Commissioner, however,
recommended the approval Of the map
as the amount of lands that would inure
| to tho grant under the new location
would be much less than under the old;
but calls the Secretary's attention to
| the question a. to whether or not the
grant had lapsed.
Under date Of June II, 1879, the SEQ
rotary, Schurz, reviewed the whole
question, declaring the grant to be IN
full force andVfect, and returned the
map approved, and directed the with
drawai of the lands along the now line
| of road, and the restoration OF those
| withdrawn August Ii, 1870. He added
| as follows: "The rights of settlers upon
| the lands included within the limits of
| the withdrawal to b made under this
amended route must be protected. II
settlements and entries be made before
the receipt Of notice Of withdrawal at
the local Office"
Prior to the approval Of this map Of
new location, Geo. Gray, Esq., attorney
for said company, under tho date of
June 8, 1879, by letter to Secretary
Schurz, relinquished, ON behalf Of said
company, ''aIl claim and interest" Of
said company, ITO any and all lands
heretofore Withdrawn from its branch
line in the Territories of Washington
and Idaho, except 90 far as tho same
may be within the limits prescribed by
the charter and amendments applicable
to tho amended line Of general route Of
the branch in Warrington Territory,
according to the map thereof presented
ON the 18th ult."
The question TO b determined 10 a.
to whether said company has any right
or legal claim 10 any OF the lands with
drawn August u, 1873, whether inclod-
ed in the new withdrawal or not, BY viz
tue of said Withdrawal of August Is,
1873. In other words, does the compa-
ny's right TO the lands included in both
Withdrawals, relate back beyond July
| l8, 1892 think not.
/ ConcedinQ that both Of said locations
of the general route Of the Company'l
| ~oaA s~I <ka -sth1 - vneo vyN0An r., v,v,r