The L'Anse sentinel. (L'Anse, L.S., Mich.) 18??-current, 1891-11-14
A Black Eye for Scrip.

The following decisions were handed
down by the Hon. Comm 'ssioner to the
local Office, this week, involving lands
in the ". II. s. o. indemnity limits in
Ontonagon comfy:
A. Menge, homestead applicant. and
Robert Connacher, pre-emption appli-
cant. VS.. A. Kneeland and Il. II. Arnold
soldiers additional Homestead appli-
cants, involving the swf, sec. 3, 47-40
Decisions of Marquette Office reversed
on all points and Connacher's declara.
tory statement returned for fling.
Dennis Carney, prc-emption claimant
VS.. Joseph Russell, soldiers additional
homestead applicant, 81, net sec 81
1880. Decision reversed aud land
awarded 10 Carney.
Louis Forster, pre-emption appli
cant, vs.. Simon =. Rice, soldiers ad'
ditional applicant, nj nwf and set nwt,
sec. 81, 47-40. Decision reversed and
forsier's D. s. returned for fling.
Patrick Nester and William w. Black
homestead applicants, and James Field
ing and Thomas Currie, pre- cmption
applicants, VS.. Kittil Torgason and John
Stearns, soldiers additional applicants,
swl sec. 13, 47-40. Decision reversed
and land awarded to Black subject to
Fielding's rights.
John Landberg vs. Patrick Lawler,
involving homestead entry No. 4,84g
for the ne1. sec. 3, F-4O Decision Of
firmed and LAWYERS proof accepted
subject to Landberg's right to appeal.
Oliver @. Monroe vs.. Elias ID. Gallo
way, homestead entryman, and Ole N.
Kohn, intervenor. involving homestead
entry No. 4.765, for the swt sec 3,
49-37. Decision affirmed and Monroe
awarded preference right to enter the
land.
Joseph Foster vs.. Orlando Walker,
homestead case involving the swt, sec.
81, 1886. Decision affirme and land
awarded to Foster.
The first four on the list above are
what are commonly known as the Sold.
iers Scrip cases. and in each the scrip
locations are declared void as against
the actual settler.
The commissioner does not pass upon
the question of whether or not the scrip
was, as matter of fact, assigned by
soldier to Boeing and Fordney. this
being unnecessary under the rulings as
made. He holds that where bona tiie
settlement was made upon the land
subsequent to August IA, 1887, (the
date the indemnity withdrawal was re-
voked) and Oct. 10. 1887, (the date
when filings and entries were to be
made) the settler had the prior right
OF entry.
The first mentioned case presents
some very peculiar features, and the
commissioners decision throws some
light on one very important point that
has been the subject of much discus
sion in this locality, lie. the necessity
of residing upon the land in contests
pending final decision on priority of
right of entry.
Menge was in point OF time both first
applicant and first settler upon
the land. His first application,
made Dec. II, 1883, was rejected be-
cause the land was then reserved for
the benefit of the railroad. He made
settlement on the land June rs, 1887,
and performed several acts of settle
ments between that date aud Oct. 10.
Oct. IL he went to the land Office to
make his entry and was then required
to relinquish his first application and
file new one. Being also informed
that it would be unnecessary for him
to reside upon the land until his entry
was allowed, he has not since estab-
lished residence thereon.
Connacher fled his declaratory state
ment Oct 10, (alleging settlement Sept.
25, 1887 aud the scrip attorneys also
renewed their applications on that date.
At subsequent hearing to determine
the rights of the parties the register
and receiver awarded the land to the
scrip, and also decided that as between
Menge and Connachor, Menge had the
prior right Of entry.
The commissioner reverses their de-
cision on all points and awards the land
to Connacher. He holds that Con-
nacher's was legal, bona Jide settle
ment which appropriated the land
Sept. 25; that Menge's settlement was
not bona tidle, on account Of his subse-
quent abandonment of it, and hence
conferred no superior or prior rights;
and that the scrip applications could
not take effect on the land before Oct.
10, tho date the land was opened to
entry.
As to whether or not an applicant is
required to live upon the land pending
contest W, inter from the commits
sioner's deer - IN this case that when
an applicant asselts priority by virtue
Of settlement, the settlement must be
b0,aa fde. and followed uu by actual