The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1885-12-18

AnC 0CO1OA VI gA1o Tt&lSGoT 6llU TcCCl
yer of the United States land Office il
accepting the proofs furnished by {
pre-emptioner as satisfactory, and re
the usual duplicate receipt, is q judicial
determination Of his rights which il
conclusive in all collateral proceed.
ings."
Judge Cooley further says that he
knows of no act Of Congress which
authorizes the commissioner of the
general land office to review and re.
verse the register and receivers action
in a case where there has been no ad-
verse claim under the pre-emption laws
| (See also l3 Pet, 498, and 8 How, 333.)
If the honorable commissioner of
the United States land office should
commit the error of attempting to
cancel title by arrogating to his office
the powers of court-that is, after
the title has parted from the govern
ment and becomes vested in the indi-
vidual, his act will be annulled by the
courts when contest arises between
parties claiming title to the hands up
on his ruling. (Shepley vs. Cowea, 81
US, r. /. Otto, $50. .45 Wis. 1856,
Sheldon VS. KearneO
When the purchase money has been
paid under the pre-empti0n laws, and
the receivers receipt issued to the pur-
chaser by the local land office, the title
is vested in the purchaser. and the land
ceases to be under the control Of the
government; the purchaser has avested
right, that cannot be interfered with
except by a judicial tribunal Frisbie
VS.. Whitney, 8 Wall. 1877; 81 Cal, 475).
The U. s. land Office occasionally
Il N oil o. rpp1 IN
established principles Of law; one of
which is found IN Hensley VS.. Ayres.
Land Owner, vol. 3, p. So, which is as
follows:
when pre-emptor makes final
proof and payment, and the certificate
for patent is issued such certificate may
be assigned to bona fide purchaser for
value, who will beprotected in his pur-
chase"
On the 21st OF last August Justice
Brady, Of the us. circuit court for Or
egon, decided in case before him that
the honorable commissioner of the u.
s. land office had no power to cancel
pre-emption entry after the local land
Office has issued the receivers recent
and received the money therefor, the
government having parted with the
title to the land had no control over it
whatever, and nothing to do but to per.
form the ministerial act Of issuing the
patent, the evidence that the title had
already passed.
| The government has the absolute
power to dispose of its public domain.
There are several modes in which this
is done. One of the modes by which
the United States disposes Of its title is
by private entry under the pre-emption
law and each payment upon proof to
the officers within the districts where
the lands lie Another mode is by Sc
lection and entry with scrip or warrant;
and in some cases by treaty, in others
by special acts Of Congress, which oper-
ate as grants. (Wash, on Real Estate,
Sd ed, vol. 3, p. 10D.
And if the register Of the land Office
has duly admits the location of the
the government cannot cancel such title
and sell to another individual Gbid
i17G.
When the government has once dis
posed of the land in any one of the fore
going modes the title is effectually
transferred as it could be by any instru-
ment within the power of the United
States to give. LANDS which have
once been sold by the United States can
in no sense be called the property of
the United States. They are no more
the property of the United States than
lands patented" The government
merely holds the legal title in trust for
the purchaser. Qb 178)
The idle decision of the commissioner
that he cancels title is of no force.
The commissioner is not a court to
divest citizens of the United States of