Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1889-07-31

siderable fence, "also a part of o.
hnuse, and the foundation was laid for
large frame building" lie strongly cor
roDorates Cooper rs to the number u
acres since put in cultivation, improve
ments, etc The house on the land In
been occupied since it was built by j. i
Cooper and his children, to my certain
knowledge"
| Corroborates James F. Cooper as t.
furniture, etc, in the house, which he
first saw in the spring of 1887. Strongl,
corrobOrates Cooper as to crops raised
and amount and value thereof; also as tC
value of Improvements and labor on sale
land. Mr.. Cooper has always expresscG
his intention of making that place his
residence and home" Considers the
land in question most valuable for agricul.
tnral purposes. The land is worth $ll
per acre for farming purposes.
Martin Winsor, another witness for
Cooper, testities that he has been ac-
quaintcd with the land in question since
1882. He corroborates the testimony OF
James +. Cooper as to cultivation OF the
land and Improvements. lie states that
| the house on the land has been occupied
since it was built, in 1887, by James F.
Cooper. Some part of the time he has
been there with his children. | have
been there and stayed many times with
HIM over night, and taken meals there, !"
That was in 1887. States that he is in
the employ Of the Coopers on the ranch
and at the mill.
OPINION OF TIE REGISTER AND RECEIVER
The foregoing Is the substance Of the
testimony adduced at the hearing.
In our opinion the only question to be
considered is as to whether Cooper's acts
OF settlement are sufficient to indicate his
good faith and intention to fully comply
with the requirements OF the pre.emption
law, under his filing.
De question of the disposition made of
the timber taken from the land is not one
Tor the consideration OF this Office, except
IN so lar as 1t may 60 to show the good or
bad ialth and Intentions OF the pre-emp-
tor.
The facts that the land in question is
timber land, and the pre-emptor has an
interest in Il saw mill located near the
tract, and is engaged in the manufacture
and sale OF lumber are, in our opinion,
strong circumstances in support Of the
allegation of the special agent of the gov
eminent, that claimant filed upon the land
fer the purpose of getting possession Of
the fine timber thereon, but this is about
the only support the allegation has.
The examination of Special Agent Nir
den was made in midwinter and there
was snow on the ground at the time. 1t
is most reasonable to suppose that the
evidences OF cultivation were less distinct
ly visible at that than any other season
of the year, while the stumps from which
the timber was cut in clearing the land
would show as plainly as al any other
season. Special Agent Virden says that
the rough board cabin on the claim
showed no evidence whatever Of occupa-
ton, but he states that it was closed and
all that could be seen of the interior was
seen through crevce in the boards.
Cooper states (and in this he is corrobor-
ated) that he has no one to keep house
for him, his wife being dead, and that his
two children who were with him spent
much OF the time at his brothers. house
near by.
The testimony on both sides clearly
establishes the fact that Cooper, while
claiming the house on this land rs his
home and keeping it in habtable con
dtion, spent much of his time at the
house of his brother, eating and sleeping
there. He says, however, that he has
never been absent from the land as much
as three weeks at a time since March
1881, a period of eight years, and this is
not disputed by the government witness
ses, though they testified that they passed
the place frequently and did not see
Cooper there. 1t is reasonable 10 sup
pose that Cooper could have slept in tie
house on his claim and taken his meals
there and have been seldom or never
seen by passers by, rs he testIfes that he
was engaged principally in work ut his
saw mill, and that while so engaged his
two children stayed at the house of his
brother; but more reasonable conclusion
is that he ate and slept at the house of
his brother the greater portion of the
time, and maintained quasi-residence in
the house upon this land solely for the
purpose OF showing q technical compli-
ance with the requirements of the law.
The residence must be taken as fact,
however, whatever may have been the
motive.
The improvements on the tract are
to be of considerable value. There
is conflict in the testimony as to the
character Of the house and fence, but we
think the weight OF evidence shows that
these are of a good and substantial charac-
10 fn n hn E t,Nl,
prvoements in this country.
As to the fact that the fence was Joined
to other fences and Enclosed other land
than that claimed by the contestee,
Cooper, We are unable to see in that fact
any evidence OF bad faith or unlawful
collision. If it is more convenient and
less expensive for two or three settlers
having adjoining claims on public lands to
inclose their claims together, without
Gross or dividing fences, the govern
ment certainly has no cause to object or
interfere.
In the matter OF cultivation the showing
made by and for Cooper is exceptionally
good for this country. The testimony
shows that the land in question has been
cultivated and crops raised every year for
the last four years, and that the area cult
waited and the variety of crops raised have
steadily increased, the former from three
acres in 1886 to thirty-fve acres the pres
ent year, and the latter from potatoes and
oats in 1885, to clover, orchard grass, bar
ley, potatoes, peas. oats and timothy the
present year.
A large quantity Of valuable timber has
been taken from the land cleared, various
ly estimated at from 10000 to 250, 900
feet when sawed into lumber, one-fifth
or less OF which has been used in improv-
ing the land. This timber with the ex-
ception of a small quantity "piled up in
the gulches") has all been sawed by the
Cooper Lumber Co., and all the surplus,
over the 80 900 feet or less used in fencing
and building on the land, has been sold
or hald for sale