Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1885-10-21

CsrrxD STATES LAND OFTrcf
9roxaxy Farl4 VT. Oct. 4. 1875.

lHlLED SkALn kAS0 OfEAs
SroxaxE FaLLs ". l., Oct 4. lss5- !
To las Edtio- Il tAs Pzio~ss ls<sssf
am In receiys OF yoar lsstsr Of recent
date In which roo state thss yea hAys
been requested BY numerous setfleu &C
irQuire IL f3iDQ on lands within -
indemnity limits OF the Northern PaciH'
Railroad Coapany's land grant VIII d
sccepted sI this Office. lnssmuso - Z
great many inq1iries upsn tins sro1sc'
are being received from others, and m
asmuch 80 some explsHsfiou shosia &C
COMPANY the answer in each case. ! Will
With ar approval, answer your isqui-
ries 40 fsrn s1Ita.ie for publicatiou. fol
tue b~ns5t of such Of yo1r readers a.
may feel an interest in the status OF the
land. referred to.
1t should be stated. in the first place,
that all lands within the indemnity or
%. q limits capn0t be regarded ss having
the same Legal ststos- Ii Is true these
laEds were 7nIil recently treated As De
longing to and constituting . part OF the
compsRy's grant; bat this G. cory. which
never lad any foandaiion 10 isu, may
nov be regarded AZ an exploded be resy.
For many yea,s past t6ese large belts OF
public land ten miles IN width on each
side of the main grant have been With
drawu from the settler without any az
thority of lag.
The indemnity or lieu land provi-
sion Of the granting set OF 1864 10 a.
fellows:
"Whesever prior TO the definite iocs-
ton of the roae any Of said sections or
parts of sections IN the main graft shali
have been granted, sold, reserved. occa
u,ed by homestead settlers, or pre- empt
ed or otherwise disposed Of. other lands
shall be selected oy said company IN
i,ea thereof, under tbs difecfion Of the
Secretary OF the Interior, 10 alternate
sections and designated by odd mum
oers, not more than ten mules beyond
the limits Of said alternate sections"
IL will be observed that this language
usakes 40 grast OF Iasds, bat simply pro
vioes that IN case any lands are lost by
the company in its main grant, other
lands may be "eleeted' sy the company
IN lieu Of the lands thus lost. Neither is
there any aothorisy in this language for
uithhoIdipg from settlement any lands
within these indemnity limits prior 70
the time Of tAeir selection by the com
pany. Neither 10 there any authofiey
as Indemnity than IL has Loss In TIA
main grant. In fact, the very essenc<
Of this indemnity provision presap
poses that the company must shov th<
los of an acre before an acre can b
selected in lien thereof. Dat vhils
such are the provisions of the Law, tbt
practise of the United States Land De
partment has been very different. Al
Of the sdd numbered sections within
the Indemnity strips have no
only been withheld from settle
meat, a. though they had bsss
granted, but the company has bscu pr
mitted TO select quantities Of land pre-
posterously in excess of the amour
lost. In the spokane Falls Land Dia
| trict, for instance, the company has g
leoted three hundred thousaua acre
| while as Q matter of fact il has lost lee
than ten thousand acres These sslse
tions are contained in lists which d
not specify the losses sustained, and
have no hesitation in saying that b
heve that all lists heretofore file
which are defective in this respect vi
soon be declared illegal add Of no efFec
The question has beep raised at th
Genefal Land Ofhce, and an answer
expected daily. In the meantime thol
Wishing TO file upon any Of the land
covered BY these selections will d
veil to hide their time and watch th
newspapers. -.-.r
In case. however, any person desire
TO file upon a tract Of land within Oh
indemnity limits which has not been il
Guided in the oompany's selections, th
| de-
other public land. 8
person had settled upon tract of Ian
and improved it prior to the date Of II
selection by the company. suoh perso
will be allowed TO contest the company
claim, according to the same rules tbs
govern contests between individus
claimants. In this same connection
may be stated that in cases where land
have been improved by individuals prio
20 their selection by the company, be
not resided upon, the question rs {
whether the company or the individus
has the Superior right to the land.
yet 90 be decided.
Should the indemnity selections here
tofors made by the railroad compan
be declared TO be ILL gal (ss they per
hsps will bel on account of their fail
ure 10 specify the lands in lieu Of whicl
they were sell cited. no doaot all settler
| who have claims within the indennit
| limits will have AMPLE opportunity 4
make their filings aud entries beft r
new lists can be flied by the company
And no doubt the company, on t.,
other hand, adjusting itself 10 the nes
| dispepsation. will stndiously avoid to,
selection Of lands claimed by individu-
ais, or 10 which Il has no legal right. i
would at first no doubt strenu
ously dispute the right Of th.
Land Department 20 snnui Il,
past selections. and would, perhaps.
contend that these selections, havIne
been approved by the Register and Re
csiver, are not subject 10 revocation. II
will be observed. however, that the acts
Of the local officers are Of little sieuiH-
canoe, the leading land officer Of the
company having only few dsys ago
declared, through the 0regoaias, that
the official acts Of these officsrs are Of
no more ooncerH to the company than
the acts Of Justice Of the Peace In
come rural precinct Adopting this
theory as correct, the fact that the com
pany's Lien land selections have bsen
certified bv Registers and Receivers
vill perhaps cut no figure should the
Commissionsr - O. 10 declare Ill selec-
ton lists heretofore fied 70 be Informal
and therefore Illegal.