The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-08-23

duce the same kiud of crops: alter rsmoFai OF
the valuable timber and while the stunts re-
main. it is readily converted Into pasture, Dbl
Is unfit for cultivation because 1t cannot be at
once made tillable without an expense greater
than its value for agricultural purposes Such
land is chiefly valuable for its timber, ana vast
areas OF it are to be found within the limits OF
the surveys. It is the character OF land con-
templafed by this statute and is a. much SUD
ject TO sale under its provisions, If situated In
near proximity 10 navigable water, or farming
community, or = city, or railroad. as II II were
in some remote broken, rugged and mountain
Gus region. To person acquainted with this
country, this class of land is as readily distin-
guishable from the alder bottom and valley
lands, which are considered valuable for cult
walton, as q forest is distinguishable from .
prairie.
The evidence before me leaves no uncertainty
or doubt as to which class the tract conveyed by
the patent to Budd. belongs to. On the part OF
the government eight witnesses have testified,
proving that the land can be cultivated after
the removal of the timber and stumps; that 1t
is similar to other lands in the immediate vi
cinity occupied by settlers, who each cultivate
small tracts thereof: that in their opinion the
land is valuable for agricultural purposes and
that the land Is covered with . crust OF leaf
mould. which is an excellent fertilizer. And to
confirm this testimony, samples of the SOL and
settlers have been introduced.
These witnesses show by their evidence that
the tract. except about fifteen acres, il timbered
and show nothing as to the value of the tim Der,
except that there has not been any market or
demand for it. This evidence is insufficient to
warrant the cancellation of patent. But the
defendants have been not content to accept
Scotch verdict They have met the issue with
evidence of the most conclusive character.
Thirteen witnesses were called who testified
that the soil is stony and inferior for farming
purposes, and that it contains excellent fir and
cedar timber besides hemlock ald an under
growth of various shrubs and brush; that the
trees are large, tall and straight, and sound and
viii yield from $1,000 to 10000 feet Of the best
quality of lumber per acre, and this testimony
and estimate is not controverted. The field
notes made by the government surveyor at the
time of surveying the land more than twenty
five years ago describe the land as being stony
and second-rate, aud the timber as fir, cedar
and hemlock, and the most convincing testi-
mony of ali is a series of twelve photographs
taken near the center of each legal subdivision
of the tract. These pictures exhibit with unerr-
ing certainty and faithfUlness magnificent trees
standing so near together as to force each other
to grow straight and tall. They satisfy the
court that this tract is valuable and desirable
for the timber upon it and also that no man
would be willing to subjugate this piece of forest
for the mere sake OF cuitivating It.
But few words are needed to dispose of the
third proposition. The evidence shows there
were no valuable Improvements on the land at
the time Mr.. Budd purchased it. Mr.. Doherty,
who at one time settled upon and attempted to
improve the land, soon became discouraged and
abandoned it, his cabin became dilapidsted and
worthless and all his other improvements disap-
peared long prior to Mr. Budd's entry.
The fourth reason for caucelling this paten
also yanishes upon an examination of the evil
dence, for there is nothing to support the
charge made in the bill and explicitly denied in
the answer, that prior to his application to pur-
chase this land Budd entered into an agreement
with Montgomery to acquire the title for him.
If such an agreement was made, the evidence
certainly fails to show how, when or where it
was done. There is no direct evidence of such
an agreement, and the circumstances shown
lead only to a suspicion, not to q reasonable in
ference, much less to q concl usion. These cir
cumstances briefly narrated are as follows:
l. Mr. Budd gave deed of the land to Mont
gomery within one month from the time OF
making final proof in the land Office and re-
ceiving the receivers receipt 2. About the
time of this transaction, Montgomery purchased
large number of other tracts of land in the
vicinity OF this one from persons who entered
1t as timber land. and he was known to be in
market as a buyer of timber lands in that local
ity. 8. A man named White spent a consider
able time previous to these purchases made by
Montgomery in exploring the lands, and repre-
sented himself at the time as being in Mont
gomery's employ, and he acted as a witness for
nearly ell the parties who made entries of tim
Der lands and afterwards sold them to Mont
gomery, and he was also a witness for the de-
fendant, Budd, in making his final proof as to
tins fraat