The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1888-05-26

cash entrymen. The tickle-me-and.I'lI.tIckie-y
business has laid them both out; for while stock
bridge and Sawyer were compromising the canal
company = interest. Dawes. Hoar and Mcpherson
were compromised theinterests OF ecash entry
men, aud neither of them could kick without
making arrow In their own camp.
While II Is true that Palmer succeeded IN
passing only one OF his amendments he got the
substance Of all OF them Incorporated In the
amendments that were passed The bin as II
stands now not only makes valid the claims OF
the settlers. but II specifically confirms all OF
them made up 90 the first day OF May, 1883.
That cuts of all chance OF litigation. Anylands
not settled upon are confirmed 10 the cash
entrymen but the joke OF IL Is that all of Their
lands have been settled before that date. As 10
the canal lands, the settlers gain a very great
advantage. Now. here is what stockbridee and
SAWYER have gained IN the fight, and IL Is all
they have gained.
We get "A great deal more than we asked for,
and the senate has done well for Us. Palmer
has been the true friend OF the settlers from the
first TO the last, and he has been about the Only
one In the senate. During the fight Senator
stockbridee's zeal for the canal company
that the canal was well constructed and answer
ed all the purposes OF navigation; that he had
been through Il al different times on the largest
vessels navigating the lakes don't know how
he viii reconcile that statement when that bin
comes up asking the government 20 buy the
canal. Palmer has had a hard fight They got
back al him from all quarters, but he gained the
fight and deserves great credit for his skill and
a Al. o han
Hon. :. NJ Stockslader, commissioners
of the general land Office, has prepared
the following letter for publication,
directed to the register and receiver at
Marquette, in answer to questions rela-
tive to the rights 81 settlers on the On
tonagon x Brule river land grant:
GENTLEMEN This oflce Is daily n receipt OF
letters from residents OF your district relative 20
the rights of settlers on the lands known as the
ontonaeon and Brue river grant.
The questions asked by the correspondents are
numerous and varied embracing, Il would seem,
every point that eau possibly arise IN regard to
the rights OF settlers upon these lands.
therefore deem II necessary 10 give you such
information IN the matter Will enable you TO
advise the residents OF your district, (by publica
tion or otherwise) Of the status OF the lands as
regards settlement thereon.
The grant Tor the benefit of sand company was
made by act of June ., 1855 tl1 stat, p. 2l)
and embracing the odd sections within six miles
OF the road. with indemnity from odd sectors
within fifteen miles ofthe road for such lands as
might be lost 60 grant within the six mile limits.
I Alllands within limits were ordered withdrawn
for the benefit OF the company May 30, 1856,
and the road was definitely located Nov. 20,
1857
The lands (outsde the limits OF the NJ II & o..
r. r. Co.'S grant withdrawn as indemnity on
account of this road. were RESTORED" ON June
/ l 3, 1868; the lands within six miles, or granted
limits being still withdrawn on account OF the
grant, notwithstanding that no part OF the road
WAS completed within the time required by the
granting act, and that but twenty miles OF IL
have since been constructed.
! Various bills have been presented M congress
/ looking TO theforfeture OF this grant aud 20 the
restoration Of the lands 60 the public domain.
None OF said bills. however, have been finally
passed by both branches OF congress, and, as
this siIice Is without authority 20 restore the
lands 60 either settlement or entry Ia theabsence
OF legislative action. said 'andsar ascomple tely
withdrawn al this time they were upon the
day when the withdrawal took effect
! IL being the case, therefore. that the lands are
still withdrawn from settlement and entry, par
ties who settle upon the same prior 20 rcstora-
tion do SO upon their own responsibility, such
settlement conferring no rights upon them.
As TO the homestead aud pre-emption applica-
tlons for these lands now on file, win say that
as they were not subject 90 entry, they may be
considered as notice 20 the United States. and
other applicants. OF an intention by the parties
filling 70 enter the tracts applied for-should the
same be restored-and afford no protection
whatever. but will, IN the event they have not
been previously disposed Of. entitle the parties
20 special notice should the land be restored, IN
order that they may nle new applications.
Thus IL viii be seen that present settlement
coniers no rights and application at this
time affords no protection beyond that men.
toned.
This once win not undertake 60 decide in ad.
vance Of the restoration one be ordered, ques
tlons as 60 which OF two or more applicants has
the superior right under various circumstances
as such questions must walt until action ON
actual cases involving the same can properly be
taken, nor win II express nm opinion upon the
probability Of the forfeiture OF said grant or o
settlers acquiring title 20 lands upon which they
have settled
MEETING OF NATIONAL EDUCA.
/ TIONAI, ASSOCIATION. SAN