Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884-09-28

Among the decisions recently ren-
dered by the Supreme Court Of this
Territory is the following MAYNARD
~ Hill ct al; Judgment affirmed"
TITS decision afArns the Legality Of
Legislative divorces The facts in the
care are Of local iutsres:, the property
IL dispute being near she center Of
this city. They are. briefly. as follows 4.
In Is2s. David ;. Maynard and Lydia
4. Maynard were married 10 each other
10 the state Of Vermont. They lived
together until Is50. having two chill
drsn born 70 them. Ia 1880. David 4.
Maynard left his wife and children 10
the State of Ohio. where they moved
from Vermont, went TO California, and
in September Of that year came to this
Territory. Ia April, 1852, be settled
upon and claimed a. a married man,
60 acres Of land in this co1ntv, lying
in Wha; - now the southern part Of
this city. This claim was made under
an act Of Congress approved septem-
Der q. 1880, commonly known as the
Donation Act. IL the December fol-
lowing. the LsQsl alive Assembly Of the
Territory Of Oregon (of which this
Territory WAS then = part passed an
act granting a divorce between May
nard and his wife. Shortly afterWard
Maynard married another woman. With
whom be lived until his death, in 1873.
Lydia Maynard, his divorced wife. died
ia 1873. Neither left will.
Ia 1872. Lydia A. Maynard came to
this Territory and appeared before the
nited States Register and Receiver al
Olympia, making application for half
If said so acre claim. After hearing
the case, donation certificate was is
sued, giving to David ). MAYNARD the
west half, and 10 Lydia A. Maynard the
east half Of the claim. Appeal was
taken from this act of the Register 10
the Commissioner Of the United States
Land Office At Washington, and
again from his ruling to the Secretary
Of the Interior. This latter official, by
his final decision, gave the west half Of
the premises to David ). MAYNARD, but
held that Lydia was not entitled to
the said east half aud directed the can
collation. of the donation certificate az
to that portion of the claim, thereby
restoring it TO the public domain. Sub
sbqnently. scrip was located upon por-
tions Of this east half, and patents is
sued therefor IN January, 1882. The
heirs of Lydia A. Maynard brought
suit against the owners of these patents,
praying that they be declared trustees
for plaintiffs and required to convey the
land to them. The main question decid
ed ia the validity of the divorce granted
in 1852, and to that point the argument
WAS principally directed. The decision
affirms that said divorce was legal and
binding. frsm which it follows that af-
ter it was granted Lydia A. Maynard
could not, az the wife of David 5. May
nard, perfect title to her portion of said
doRation claim. The law OF 1880 gave
Go acres, one-half to the man and one
half TO his wife, to be held by her in her
own right, TO that married man only
who shall have resided upon aud eul-
tivated the same for four consecutive
years" The title could not vest until
the conditions we're complied With, aud
IS the divorce was granted only eight
months subsequent 20 entry upon the
claim, it is obvious that, fer over three
years before title could vest in May
nard, Lydia had ceased to be his wife.
This was the view taken by the court in
Maynard Va. Valentine, and il reaffirmed
Ia this recent decision. The case has
been appealed 10 the United States Su-
preme Court.