Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1890-05-17
TROUBLE OVER LAND,
THE "CAvANAGH DESERT ENTRY,
AGAIN BEFORE 1HE PUBLIC.

Lewis W. Walker and Relf. Biedso,
Both Claiming the Same Portion u
1.-THE History VI the Case.
More trouble is brewing between
Lewis w. Walker and Reif. Biedsoe
over the title to the land above town
known as tho Caranah entry. This
land was first claimed by Frank P.
Csvanah in 1881, under the Desert
Land Act. The entry was contested
by l.. w. Walker, and sitter hearings,
appeals, etc, the case finally aeac'.ed
the General Land (tlice for final
hearing, when the following decision
was made:
WASHINGTON, D. c.,
Dec %, 1888.
Register and Receiver, Hailey, Idaho.
GENrLEMEN:--l enclusc here with
copies OF the Hon. Secretary's decis
ions dated, respectively, October 30
and December z, 1888, in matter OF
final Desert Entry No. IL, made by
Frank p. Cavanah, embracing S. w.
t. II. W. I. aud w !, S. W. t Sec.
80. S. +. t, N. E. /, aud E. ], S. 4.
t. Sec. 81, r.. 3 N, Il. IL w., the
papers in which we're transmitted to
the Hon. Secretary Angus, 20, 1887.
upon appeal IRON Office decision OF
June 22. 1887, holding the entry for
cancellation.
The appeal having been dismissed
by the decision Of October 30, aud
motion fnr review thereof denied by
that Of December z, the entry has
accordingly this day been cancelled;
no proper appeal having been filed,
You will 50 note on your record, and
advise parties in Interest, and hold
the land subject to entry by the first
qualified applicant.
] return herewith the application
of Lewis w. Walker to enter as
homestead portion Of the tract m
braced in .Cavanah's Desert Entry,
which application was rejected by you
August ~, 1887. Mr.. Walker ap.
peals from your action and asks that
his entry be allowed, claiming that he
Is entitled to the preference right OF
entry in view of the material assist
ance he rendered the special agent il
the investigation of the case, and the
large amount Of money expended in
contesting the Cavanah entry.
| am Of the opinion that the facts
stated do not warrant giving appel.
lant preference right of entry and
concur with you in rejecting bis ap-
plication.
You will advise him of this decis.
'on, and also Of the cancellation Of
Cavanah's entry.
Very respectfully,
7. J. ANDERSON,
Assistant Com missioner.
With this decision tho Homestead
of Lewis ". Walker,
lied August ~, 1887, was returned,
VIZ. Walker having failed to apply to
'"ter on the ground Of priority OF
ight as contestant of the original
ntry.
The decision reached the HALEY
Land Office December 20, 1883, and
the day following, wit: Dec. mber
20, 1888. Rrlf. Ble<lsoe fled Home.
stead entry OH the land which was
allowed, there being no valid entry
on file.
Since that date Walker and BLEED.
soc have b.th claimed the same land
by virtue of their Homestead entries.
Walker also claims by virtue of prior
possession, he having built . house
and erected fence on the land in
1884, while Bledsoe could not, of
course, have built his house or made
any improvements On the land prior
to his entry-in December, 1888.
The parties have had several spat.
over the question from time to time
until the last week, whom Bledsoe
erected = fence on the land in such
way as to prevent Walker having &C.
cess to the house or land which he
fenced years ago. This morning Mr..
Walker wishing to have some plow-
ing done, removed = panel Of the
fence TO admit his employe. Mr..
Bledsoe thereupon threatened to have
MI. Walker arrested, aud proceeded
to the District Attorneys Office. The
official advised Bledsoe to remove his
fence SO that Walker might have free
access to his (Walker's) Enclosure.
The question at issue is: Is Mr..
Walkers claim Of prior possession
valid?