St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-07-03
THE TITLE TO DULUTH.
Justice MilIers Opinion in the Suit of
Prentice VS.. Stearns and Others.
That Prentice Does Not Show Deed Covering
the Land Claimed.
Duluth Titles Good. But Prentice Will
Appeal to the Supreme Court.

ms case, on Trial OF late in the United States
circuit court in this city, has been settled, SO
far as this court is concerned, as was
announced in the GLOBE yesterday,
by decision in favor of the present
able part of the city of Duluth-the defend
ants in the suit. The opinion of the court,
pronounced by Justice Miller, traces the his
tory Of the deed under which Prentice claims,
and finds it sufficient and valid in all respects,
except that it was fatally defective in its de
scription, as far as the land in controversy
is affected. The case, however, will go to
the supreme court of the United States on
appeal by Prentice, and this seems to have
been anticipated by Justice Miller in deliver
ing the opinion of the court here, which is as
follows:
This is an action of ejectment for land in
OF the reservation, or stipulation in the treaty
OF the Both of September, 1854, between the
Chippewa Indians and the United States.
That stipulation declares that Buffalo, one
OF the chiefs of the tribe, should be authorized
to designate some of his relatives who had
supported him, who should receive section
OF land 1t seems that Buffalo on the day of
the making of the treaty, and, of course, be-
fore it was ratified by the United States, made
an attempt both to appoint persons who
should receive the land, who should be bene-
ficiaries of the donation, if you should call it
donation, or of the reservation, if you
should call it u reservation, Il don't think it
is material which,, and to designate the land
which he assigned to them, which was as
follows:
II hereby select tract of land one mile
square, the exact boundary of which may be
defined when the surveys are made, lying on
the west shore of st. Louis Bay, Minnesota
territory, Immediately above and adjoining
Minnesota point; and direct that patents
be issued for the same, according to the
above recited provisions, to Shaw-bwaw
Shung or Benjamin G. Armstrong, my
adopted son, 'and then to the nephew whose
name is given, and to his two sons, one
quarter section to each.''
One of the questions that arises is wheth-
er that was u valid selection, valid exercise
VI
Buffalo under that treaty. The treaty was
afterwards ratified without qualification in re-
gard to this particular.
We are of opinion that so far as the ap-
pointment of the persons to receive this land
is concerned, it was valid appointment;
and the right, so far as it could then vest,
was vested by that paper in Benjamin Arm
strong, and in the other benefciaries who
have conveyed their interest in said land to
Benjamin Armstrong, and he has received
the patent from the United States for the
land under that treaty.
Buffalo died before anything was done in
the matter. Armstrong undertook to con-
vey to Frederick Prentice, the plaintiff in
the action, an undivided one half of the
section of land which had been selected by
Buffalo. The United States afterwards,
coming through the land office and interior
department to execute this treaty by making a
deed of a section of land, found difficulty
in locating it under Butfalo's directions. l
do not know whether the difficulty was in
superable, probably it was. 1t was easy to
see that large discretion was left in the
officers of the United States, because both
the treaty and Bulfalo's directions say, 1.-THE
boundary of which may be defined when the
surveys are made" 1t was therefore depend
ent upon future surveys; whether that meant
regular congressional surveys of land for
public purposes, or whether it meant spec
ial survey of the land of Buffalo's selection.
And the same question goes back to the
treaty, whether Buffalo was to select a section
after these surveys were made, or whether
he was to select the amount of section,
which is a square mile, these are questions
which are not easy to solve, neither is it
necessary to do so. In either eventwe think
that the treaty was valid and we
think that the patent which the United
States, after encountering these difficulties,
made to Armstrong of certain parts of sec
tons regularly surveyed, as found in the con-
gressional plats and surveys of the United
States, was 4 valid execution of the treaty.
And as the patent issued to Armstrong under
that selection of the United States, and as APP
pears by the correspondence accepted by
Armstrong we are of the opinion that the
and the United States, and was valid as to
them.
Now that presents the main question in
this case; and that question is whether Arm
strong made such q conveyance to Prem
tice of the undivided one-half Of any par
ticular piece of land, or of the interest which
he had acquired by what had taken place, SO
that Prentice could recover this specific piece
of land in ejectment. That is the main
question, and the one upon which we feel
ourselves compelled to decide this case.
1t will be remembered that the deed from
Armstrong to Prentice was made on the 18th
of September, 1856, two years after the treaty
was made, after Buffalo had made Armstrong
the appointee of what he was to receive from
the government, and after he had made his
attempt at the selection of the land; which
selection was described as ga section one mile
square, the exact boundary of which may be
defined when the surveys are made, lying on
the west shore of st. Louis bay, Minnesota
TERRITORY, Immediately above and adjoining
Minnesota point"
Now Armstrong CONVEYS to him ''The un-
ulVlueu halI VI the AOuoMihS uesCIlueu piece
or parcel of land, which language itself is
important; he conveys to him the undivided
oue-half Of the following described piece or
parcel of land situated in the county of st.
Louis and territory of Minnesota, described
as follows: Beginning at a large stone or
rock at the head of st. Louis
River bay nearly adjoining
Minnesota point; commencing at said rock,
and running east one mile, north one mile,
west one mile, south one mile to the place
of beginning; and being the land set off to
the Indian Chief Buffalo, at the Indian trea-
tv of September Both, 1854, and was after
wards disposed of by said Buffalo to said
Armstrong. and is now recorded in the gov
eminent documents
The main question to be decided here is
,,hether this is an attemnt to convey the snf-