Fairhaven herald. [volume] (Fairhaven, Wash.) 1890-????, 1890-03-30
VALENTINE SCRIPT Void
The Secretary of the Interior
Decides Against the
Land Grabbers
The Mckee, Half Breed Sioux.
and Girard Scrip Meet
the Same Fate
The People of Seattle and Ia
coma Jubilant, as Both are
Affected by it

WASHINGTON. March 27.-ln the case o
Frank Burns and others who made appli,
cation TO locate Valentine scrip upon lid,
lands near Seattle, the secretary of TN,
interior has decided that such land is moi
within the intent Of the act of congress.
authorizing the issue of Valentine scrir
on public lands Of the United States. lie
holds further that since the location was
upon unsuryeyed lands il was merely a
preference OF the right to perfect such
location after survey as against the claims
of all Others except the United States. but
that until such location is adjusted by
public surveys the United States has
authority To dispose Of the lands covered
thereby. such disposition he holds was
made OF the tract In controversy by the
admission of Washington into the union
as state. and hence. even were il To he
conceded that the lands were at the date
OF location subject To the disposal of the
general government. the rights of the
state are superior To those Of scrip appli-
cantS. II Is stated that the lands i'm
question were located on the water front
OF Seattle. which together with improve
mehtS. are valued at several million dol
lars.
Following is a resume Of the tide land
scrip cases. as they are called. ON Jam
uary 7. $50. Frank Burns. IT,. ATTEMPTED
10 make Valentine scrip filing On the tide
lands in the south end of seattle harbor.
The register and receiver refused the fill
ings ON the ground that the land was not
public land within the meaning Of the act
OF April = ls79. The decision was an
81
number Of other filings we're made. ON
September q. Acting Commissioner W. NJ
Stone. of the general land office. reversed
the decision of Register Reed and Re-
ceiVcr HAYDEN, and directed that he ac-
ccpt the filings made by Burns aud issue
a receipt TO him therefor.
The decision greatly clated the scrip
hlers ana had corresponding depressing
effect ON the DcarbOrnS aud others who
claimed large areas Of tide land by virtue
OF ownership Of the land Immediately
adjacent and along the shore of the bay
After the decision by Acting Commits
siOner Stone the local land officers re-
eeived scrip filings and issued receipts
therefor To those who filed on the tide
lands outside the city limits, but refused
those made inside the corporate bounda-
ries.
DOth0r scrips. such as Mckee. half-breed
Sioux and Girard. made eirappearance.
aud the harborS Of Seattle. Tacoma. Port
Townsend, Nhatcom and Grays Iarhor
were plaStered over with them. A total
Of 3,ij5 acres was filed on. of which l.32O
acres were in Seattle harbor. with Nalen-
tine scrip in the lead. All this. with the
exception of one filing OF forty acres of
Valentine scrip. was filed before \OYem-
Der n. when Washington became state.
Then the filings stopped. which was
A VIRTUAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT
on the part Of the scrip men. that the title
70 the tide land had become vested in
the land filed on is worth Si.i55.0O. Some
estimates are as high a SlO,eD.pD.
Application was made at the land Office
for "A reheariug of the Burns eases and
protests were filed by the shore owners
against every filing of scrip made ON the
harhors of seattle and Tacoma. The re-
opening of the Burns case was refused by
the local land office authorities and the
seat of war was transferred to Washing
ton. NJ H. Baer and Bcriah Brown. Jr..
went thther late In November 10 repre-
sent the scrip interests, while John L.
Gallo followed to look after the interest OF
the shore line owners.
The ease was heard on December II In
Washington before United States assist =
ant attorney general Shields, assistant
secretary VI wv tNi'i VI "''
second assistant attorney Campbell.
! On behalf of tho state 1t was held thai
the soil underlying navigable waters and
below the line of ordinary high water
mark was not "land" within the meaning
OF the act Of April ,, ls72. -.
That the land was not unapproprlated
within the meaning of the law at the
/ time respondent sought to appropriate
/ IL, -. .,
! That the United States never had any
legal authority to make such soil the sub
iect Of private ownership.
The argument Of the Valentine scrip
men was to the effect that all the land ~
Washington was acquired by the nlted
States by virtue Of discovery ana occu'
pancv. Ii was not acquired IN the SAINT
manner that the original thirteen states
were. As the United States acquired u
hy discovery and occupancy the tue tt
an its lands was vested absolutely IN th'
Tinted states. and not in the future state
Therefore. il was held that the nitet
states could issue valid patents Ia lane
soupht for hy Burns as readily a. u eoul'
issue patents to a homcstcadrf or 70
prc-emptor. Tie scrip men held lhat IN
only question at issues was whether w
lands sought to be- covered by the scfll
filings were unOccupied public lands .
the Tnltsd States, II they We're ~
filings were valid aud patents should
issued to Burns and other scrip men.