The L'Anse sentinel. (L'Anse, L.S., Mich.) 18??-current, 1891-02-07
(Continued iron. tl,.st uage.l


patent, and by the other OF which the
attorney was authorized to sell and con-
vey by any proper deed any land which
the half-breed might thereafter acquire
in the United States. Both letters
were declared irrevocable, and contain
cd the usual provisions in such instru-
ments. The manner Of use of these let
ters Of attorney has been to file with the
scrip in the land Office the one author
izing the location of IL not disclosing
tie existence OF the other.
Nothing, therefore, to challenge the
bona fides Of the transaction then mp
pears on the surface, nor any reason
why the land Office should not recognize
it as the fair exersise OF the right to do
by an attorney what one M ght lawfully
do himself. When the location is made,
if validity made, the title vest at once in
the person to whom the scrip was
issued; and thereupun conveyance of
the land is executed by some person
who consents to the use Of his name as
attorney, the blanks OF which are filled
accordingly.
Thus the title passes to the party
owning the scrip. And thus by circum-
vention, the thing is done which the
statute forbids to he done: and the ex-
ercise OF the privilege of doing by attor-
ney whit one may do himself /, made
operative to accomplish the doing by
attorney OF what tile half-breed c0uid
not do himself.
The scrip with these blank letters Of
attorney pinned to it, passes into the
market and is sold, and transferred by
mere de livery, az freely rs u government
bond The nalf-breed about whom this
protecting limitation was thrown disap-
pears as eifectuaily from consideration
! as If he were dead until some contestant
hunts him up 10 find basis for con-
tention against the scrip, etc.
In summing up this case the secretary
says: 81 have heard full argument by
able counsel Of the question involved,
and am entitled to presume from the
character of the genllt men employed,
as we'll rs from the obvious skill and re-
search exhibited, that every resource of
reasoh and the books has been exhaust
ed 70 sustain the claim OF this location.
But continued reflection has begotten u
firm conviction that it is the duty of the
department, in administering this law,
to give effect to these limitations, for
the existence of which there was obvious
reason, and which are plainly declared
| in the statute. 10 do otherwise would
be to lend the aid OF the department to
defeat the law which it is established to
administer and enforce.
The regulation which was the basis of
your decision and is so sharply CRITICS.
ed as unauthorized, is not an addition
| to the law. 1t is but a rule of evidence
! to show that the law has been in fact
observed. Nor can parties justly make
claims of hardship by the enforcement
! OF this rule. IL mas existed since 1872,
and must have been known to them j;
and when they attempted to located
this scrip in disregard Of it, they took
| the risk lint it would I've enforced il de-
termined to be valid. They have moth
ing to complain OF because OF the fail
| ure of an attempt which they nude
with such notice Of it's risks"
On page l5l Of testimony Louis g..
Cyr testihes: That he does not know
Eliza Blake; That he and others own
the Eliza Blake scrip: That Dan H..
Ball was onIp.oyed ~ an attorney to
make this location for the benefit Of
Louis ID. Cyr OF al.
| Applying the doc rine laid down, in
! the case above cited we conclude that
the appointment Of an attorney for the
location OF this scrip was o mere subtcr-
fuge. that Eliza Blake had no inter-
est in the location made, and TINT she
has sold and assigned her enti,e right
and title under sad scrip to Louis ID.
Cyr OF al.
We therefore approve the proof OF
Patrick Fogarty and recommend the
cancellation Of the entry M de in the
name of Eliza Blake.
GEORGE A. ROYCE, Register,
| THOMAS y. MEADs, Receiver.