, 1889-10-17
SCRIP FILERS BEATEN
The Seattle Land Office De-
oides Against Them.
THEY WILL GO TO WASHINGTON
The Water Front Is Not Public
Lands, Nor Is 1t Land
at All.

SEATTLE, WASH, Oct. 15.-Registcr
Reed and Receiver Hayden to-day rem.
dered two joint decisions rejecting nearly
every application madc to file scrip upon
the harbor fronts of Tacoma and Seattle.
The decision affects all the filings made
within the city boundaries. The de.
cision therefore includes every Tacoma
filing and nearly everyone made in
Seattle.
The first decision is upon the applica.
tion of Frederick w. Snow to locate
Nnn,a Valentine scrip on certain land in Ia.
of decision that Valentine scrip
can be filed upon any public lands of the
United states, If unoccupied or un-
appropriated at the date of application.
by the decision of the honorable act
ing commissioner OF the general land
office, OF the date of September 9, 1880
lands that lie between high
water mark and low water mark on
the shores Of Washington territory are
public lands of the United States,
and II unoccupied and unappropriated
States under the class of scrip. Sec. 10,
Copp, l.. o. 63, page 1856.
While there is no evidence submitted
with the application showing whether
the tract applied for comes within this
class OF lands known and designated by
the acting commissioner In his decision
aforesaid as tide lands, we assume that
the tracts applied for are such tide lands
or shore lands and within the proviso of
said decision AS such, Ii there were no
other, question arising than this, we
would allow the filing under the author.
ity OF said decision, but we find that the
tract applied for is within the corporate
limits OF thci city of Tacoma, which was
duly incorporated as municipality by
the legislative assembly of the territory
of Washington, and approved February
4, 1856 Session laws of Washington ter
ritory, 1867, page ls4. This tract be-
ing public land under the commissioners
decision above cited, there can be H.
question OF the right of the municipali-
" to extend its corporate limits over
the same. Section 1928, 4. 5. of the
United States. These two propositions
being conceded, 1t seems to us that
under the decision of the department
this track is not subject to location with
this class of scrip.
The secretary of the interior in the case
of Valentine vs.. The City of Chicago (6
Copp. l.. D.,page 22), reversing the action
OF the commissioner of the general land
office, holds that this kind OF scrip can
not be located within the incorporated
limits of city or town, and
although the same case has been
brought before the interior department
twice since that date, it has refused to
disturb the doctrine above set forth
These cases, so fur as we have been
able to discover, have not been modi-
fled or overruled by the department,
and the construction of law as therein
set forth must be the rule of this
office until reversed. We, therefore, re-
fuse the application of MIR. Snow, allow
ing him thirty'onc days from this date
IN which TO appeal to the commissioner
of the general land Office.
The second decision, also rendered BY
Register Reed and Receiver Hayden, re-
fers particularly to the SCRIP filed by
Evan Warner, holding that Mckee
scrip hus been located upon
surveyed tide lands on the harbor point
of Seattle and that the sections
filed upon are not vacant lands as re-
quired by the act of congress granting
such scrip. Also that they are not un-
occupied and unimproved. Being upon
occupied lands the land Office considers
sufficient cause for disposing of the ap-
pl ications. Additional objection is
taken that the tracts filed upon are not
lands, but navigAblo waters used for
commercial purposes.
IL Is believed here that these decisions
cannot be reversed. There is consterna-
tion amongst scrip tilcrs, and tney will
Immediately appeal to the general land
office at Washington.