The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1886-12-16

THE OLD AND THE NEW OFFICERS.
The present board of county commits
sioners held what was doubtless their
last meeting on Friday last and the
proceedings will be found elsewhere.
These officers, Messrs. P. Blaine, Emil
Graf. James Gown. VIM. Parry and
D. Shell (named in the order of their
districts), have made, we believe,
much more than average board in abil-
ity and faithful attendance to public
business. The people ought to say
"well DONE"
1t is to be regretted that some of
them do not hold over as the law gen.
orally contemplates this in all legisla-
tive bodies, 8 that men of experience
in public business shall always lap
over and Keep the business running
readily.
But a new deal was made under the
amendment providing for biennial
elections and it so happens that n
''sweep" was made a> to the board in
this county.
Under the new order the new board
will meet on the first Tuesday in Janu-
ary. or on the 4th. At the same time
all the retiring county officers retire
and the new ones come forward. take
the oath of office, give bond and enter
upon their duties.
Of the new board. those from the
odd numbered districts, viz: J. II.
Denton, of the first district, o. ). Mel
ick of the third and J. A. Town of the
fifth, hold two years. Those from the
even.numbered districts, viz S. b.
Bedford of the second and Richard o.
Hearn of the fourth, hold four years.
The clerk of court holds four years as
usual, and all the other county officers
hold for only two years.
Changes occur in the following off
| ces:
Clerk of court, L. B. Bennett retir-
ing and F. A. Stevens stepping in;
Sheriff. r. r. Miller retiring and Gil
bert Anderson taking his place; treas
urer, Capt. Wigham retiring and r..
W. Moberly taking the office; Judge of
probate, I. p. Durfee retiring and E.
l.. Wemple taking the judicial ermine.
| Auditor, register of deeds, county at
torney, coroner and superintendent of
schools are re. elected. A new survey
or is also elected, w. D. Smith.
1t would be little premature at
this time to do as Homer used to do,
"welcome the coming, speed the going
guest" and we shall reserve this for a
| future article.
THE PETER JORDON LAND
CASE.
| A Letter From the Rcceirer of the
Land Office al Wort"ington.
| WORTHINGToN, MINI. Nov. II, 'S6.
Editor Times, Luverne, Minn.,
| Dear Sir: In your issue Of Nov. II.
the following notice relating to the
contest of Peter Jordon VS.. Milton NJ
Merris involving L. G. entry No. 946.
sw sec. 81, 4. 1O2, Il. 43 ". appears:
"On Tuesday, ". n. Davidson receiv-
ed information from the land depart
ment of Worthington that a decision
had been reached in the land contest
case of Peter .Jordon VS. NJ. NJ. Merris.
The citizens will call to mind 10 doubt.
the trial which took place a year ago III
Worthington. Mr.. Merris lives in
Grand Prairie township. in Mobiles
county. Il few miles south of Adrian,
/ (,0 t,n r.,
him as it was to Mr.. Jordon. The
parties in Worthngton, who had
charge of the office at that time, dis
missed the case upon the grounds that
Mr.. Merris had made his final proof and
proved up on his 100 acres of land.
This was found 20 be a misrepresenta-
tion on the part of certain ones and
papers were made appealing the case to
the interior department., where, after Il
years rest a decision was ground out
in favor of JordOn. The land is worth
$4,000. is we'll improved aid has ample
shedding for a No. stock farm"
As the above is very misleading,
wish to make che following explanation
Peter Jordon filed affidavit of contest
October %, 1885, alleging that ten acres
had not been planted AS required by
law, in either trees. cuttings, or seeds,
that the trees Oh said claim were not
cultivated during 1884 and 1885,
or after October 1st, 1883, that
there has not been the required
number of trees growing on the claim
during the past two years and that no
trees have been replanted during 1884
and 1855. Tie trial was held on De-
cember 2nd, 1885, both parties appeared
with attorneys. now quote from a
letter dated April 23th, 1886, forward
I'd to the Hon. Commissioner from this
Office. mot until some days after the
testimony was taken, was it discovered
that final certificate had been issued on
said tract, of which fact the attorneys
Of the parties were promptly ho.itied,
upon which the attorney OF Peter Jor-
don motif I'd US thai he would withdraw
the case" On February 18th, 1886,
Peter JurdOn made application through
Daniel Rohrer Esq, attorney at
missioner, for hearing under rule 5.
OF practice. BY Commissioners letter
dated March 3lst. 1856, the application
was returned to Daniel kohrer Esq.
stating that all applications under ule
S, Of practice, must be transmitted by
the register and receiver with special re-
port and recommendation to the com.
10 issiOner for his determination and in.
structiOns On April 2Sth, 1856, this
office forwarded the affidavit of Petel
Jordon together with the evidence tax.
en- in the case of December 25th, 1885.
the letter concludes rs follows: 1--WE
Enclose herewith the evidence in the
case above referred to and jointly rec
Ommend that the case be dismissed ant
the entry of Milton NJ. Merris allowed ,
1t has since come to the notice of th(
department that the trees on said claim
are not such as represented by the de
fendant's testimony, at leaset enough
to warrant the Hon. Commissioner il
holding the entry for cancellation anC
allowing Merris sixty days to apply fo
a new hearing The Hon. Commission
er concludes his letter as follows
"You will so advise him, allowing six