, 1890-08-21
TIMBER LAND FRAUDS.
An Important Decision by
Judge Hanford.
EVIDENCE MUST Be COMPLETE
Case of the United States VS..
David L. Budd and j. b.
Montgomery.

TACOMA, WASH, Aug. 20.-A decision
OF moro than ordinary Importance was
handed down in the United States dis
trict court in Tacoma to-day by Judge
Hanford, in the case of the United States
against David Il. Budd and j. b. Mont
gomery. The points covered by the de-
cision are chiefly as to the construction
of the statutes in defining timber lands,
and also as to the necessity OF having
proof beyond question of fraudulent con-
spracy for the entry and purchase oi
timber lands to invalidate transfers
made soon after the purchase. The de-
cision is fur reaching in its effects, and
many contracts or purchases oftimbel
lands by corporations which have been
held by the officers of the land depart
ment to be fraudulent, are thus re-estab-
lished and legalized
The decision is as follows: "When the
government of the United States applies
for equitable relief it must, like an indi-
vidual. bring suit, or do equity OH its
part. In suit to cancel patent for
land on the ground ofan error in issuing
1t, when the patentee is not guilty OF
fraud, it is essential for the government
to return the purchase money to the
patcntee of the offered lands according
to the act Of June 3, 1873.
according to the construction within
the meaning of the act OF June 8, 1851,
providing tor the sale of timber lands In
California and other Pacific coast states,
lands which had been offered At public
sale, but not sold by the United States,
and which were thereafter withdrawn
from sale because situated within the
limits of the land grant to the Northern
Pacific Railroad Company, belong to
the class of unoffered lands and may be
lawfully sold AS timber lands under
said act. The same timber lands,
the hilly. stony land covered
with fir and cedar and other forest trees.
common in the western part of this
state, are chiefly valuable for their tim
Der, and unfit for cultivation within the
meaning of said act, although the soil Is
not barren, and may be made to yield
crops after the removal of the timber
and stumps. The true Interpretation of
the act does not require the substitution
of the word solely iotthe word chiefly,
nor do the words unfit for
cultivation mean not capable OF
being made tit for cultivation.
the word Improvements as used
in said act, means valuable improve
ments. An abandoned and dilapidated
fence, which are of use, are not such i'm
provenents. We
Gas to fraud:and insufficient evidence
the fact of a patentee of the United
States having conveyed the land within
one month after entering il in the land
office, and prior to the issuance OF his
patent to vendee, who at about the
time of said transaction also purchased
other lands from a number of persons
who within recent period entered the
lands so conveyed by them respectively
under the laws of the United States, is
not circumstance from which an in
ference, much less a conclusion, can
fairly be drawn that there was an agree
ment between said patentee and his
said yendee, made prior to the entry,
whereby the title to the acquired should
inure to the latter, and there being no
evidence tending to connect said pat
entee of any conspiracy, no inference
unfavorable to him can be drawn from
the evidence tending to prove that his
vendee had received conveyances OF
other lands from other persons, made
pursuant to agreement ante-dating the
entry of the lands.
Further, a purchaser from the Uni
ted States, under the acts above referred
to, is not required to retain the land
after pertecting his right TO 1t in good
faith. The proprietorship immediately
becomes vested in him, and a suit to
cancel a patent on the ground of fraud
without evidence of a fraud on the part
of the patentee, other than as above in
dicated can not stand.
"The prayer of the bill will, therefore,
be denied "