The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-04-11

acts of the register and receiver Of the local
land Offices In the disposition Of the public
lands undoubtedly authorizes s. to correct ana
annul entries Of land allowed ~ them, where
the lands are not subject to entry, or the par
ties do mot possess the qualifications required,
or have previously entered all that the law per-
mits. The exercise of this power IN necessary
to the due administration of the land depart
ment. If an investigation of the validity 81
such entries were required in the courts OF law
before they could be cancelled. the necessary
delays attending the examination would greatly
impair, If not destroy, ths efficiency Of the de-
partment But the power Of supervision ana cor
rection Is not an unlimited or an arbitrary power
1t can be exerted only when the entry was made
upon false testimony, or without authority OF
law. 1t cannot be exercised 10 Is to deprive any
person Of land lawfully entered aud paid for.
BY such entry and payment the purchaser se-
cures . vested interest in the property and
right to patent therefor, and can no more be
deprived of it by order Of the commissioner than
he can be deprived by such order OF any other
lawfully acquired property. Any attempted de-
privaffon in that way of such interest will be
corrected whenever the matter is preeensed SO
that the Judiciary can act upon it.
1t 10 true that in it, opinion the court in %
many words declares that power to cancel entries
Of public land after final proof has been made
and approved BY the register and receiver, and
sioner of the general land ONCE, and in connec-
tion with this decision the recent decision in the
case of the United States W.. Coal and Coking
Company, l37 U. S., LOO, may also be considered,
in which 1t is held that 1t is not necessary for
the government to return the money paid rs the
purchase price for the land before an entry can
be lawfully cancelled; and also to consider the
further proposition established by the decisions
Of the court that the decisions OF the commits
sioner upon questions of fact made within the
scope of his authority are not revisibie by the
courts, aud still the decisions of the supreme
court up to the present time, do not enunciate
or support any rule broad enough to sustain the
defense pleaded in this answer.
The power of the commissioner has limits ana
in the case OF Cornelius VS.. Kcssci the limits are
clearly defined. In the opinion Of the court II
Is pointedly said, that his power to correct and
annui entries of land allowed by the district
officers sscan be exerted only when the entry
was made upon false testimony or without
authority of law"
The supreme court has never yet decided that
in q contest proceeding instituted after an entry
has been allowed in which there is conflict Of
evidence, the commissioner can make decis-
ion adverse to the entry upon mere prepon-
derence of evidence, or that any decision OF the
commissioner stated merely in general terms,
or as an ultimate conclusion to the effect
that q party has not in good faith COM
piled with the law 90 to be lawfully
entitled to make the entry-is such a decision as
to justify the cancelling of the entry or warrant
any claim jumper in wrestling from another the
fruits OF years of toll. Until the court of last
resort in proper case does make such decision
/ cannot do 90.
In this answer it is not alleged that the allow
anee of the entry under which the plaintiff
claims was predicated upon false testimony, aud
no want of lawful authority for allowance OF
the entry Is shown.
In my opinion 1t does not appear from the
facts stated that it was within the power of any
officer of the government to annul the entry
made by plaintiffs grantor or deprive plaintiff
of his rights as owner of the land, and there
fore sustain the exceptions.
c. II. HANFoRD, Judge.