The L'Anse sentinel. (L'Anse, L.S., Mich.) 18??-current, 1891-09-26
Another Scrip Dec,sion.
GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

'hohiN'iVN, W ~ ~, iSVpo- ~, hooA'
Register and Receiver, Marquette
Mich.
GENTLEMEN:--Th The question involved
in this case is the right to enter lot No
sec II tip SO II 30 w.
On December II, 1884, Abram Mat
hews offered to enter lot No. 3 sec II t.
03 n L 82 W under section 2306 II. S. in
the name of A. N. Ellington; this appli
cation was rejected because the land
was withdrawn in favor of the Mar,
quette and Ontonagon railroad fol-
settlement.
August 16, 1887. Seldcn offered to
make homestead entry for said. land
which application was rejected because
said land was within the limits of the
land withdrawn by said railroad COM
pany. Selden appealed from your
action rejecting his application to enter
to this Office.
Afterwards, on October 10, 1887,
Selden again offered to enter said land
as homestead, Withdrawing his appeal
and relinqp shing his application made
August l6, 1887, noting on said with
drawal OF the appeal and herelinquish-
ment of application, "not to be used
unless accompanying application is al
lowed" Selden also accompanied ap-
plication with statement that he was
an actual settler upon said land and
that said railroad company had no right
to the land in dispute.
The railroad claim to said land hav-
ing been rejected by decision OF this
department, this office on January 49,,
1889, by letter "F" ordered hearing
between Selden and Edicgion and Mat.
hews, to determine their rights to tine
land in dispute.
In pursuance to this order hearing
was had before you March s, 1889, at
which time both parties appeared and
evidence was submitted. You renderd
verbal decision in the case in favor of
Selden, and the parties then attempted
to compromise the case without furthur
litigation. Pending the negotiations
looking to compromise the 30 days
allowed for appeal expired and the
plaintiff Sreiectod al negotiations to
compromise the case. Upon these facts
being shown to this office, the defend
ant was allowed, by letter H" dated
July 10, 1889, thirty days after service
of your decision by written notice, in
which to appeal, or file motion for a
or review.
July 81. 1889, defendant filed his
motion for review and re-hearing which
was granted, and August 81, 1889, fixed
rs the date for said re-hearing. The
case was continued from time to time,
however, for various reasons, and not
heard until November 5, 1890, when the
parties appeared and submitted an
agreed statement of facts.
March II, 1890, you rendered your
lecision awarding the prior right OF
entry to plaintiff, Selden.
April 5, 1899, the defendant filed his
appeal, alleging as error, among other
hings, that you erred in awarding the
,r, ference right of entry to Selden con
lie ground that my claim was filed in
he interest of my attorney and for the
'eason that the benefits resulting from
'aid claim would inure to my said attor-
ley as the assignee for valuable con-
'ideration of my rights under my said
additional homestead claim. The local
and Office has 10 right to inquire
whether my proposed additional entry
vas for my personal benefit or not. that
lie certificate of the general land office
% the effect that was entitled to have
'uch an entry made should have been
authority for them to have
made said entry the application present
ID being signed by myself and my said
attorney was duly authorized by me to
present my said claim and demand that
,ntry be made. The question of receiv-
ng the benefits of my said entry was
oreign to the duties of the r. & II.
Ny claim being regular and my appli-
,ation prior to that of Selden should
nave been allowed.
This appeal is signed by "Abram N.
ellington, by A. Mathews, atty"
April IL, 1891, plaintiff fled a motion
% dismiss said appeal for the following
.easons:
1. Because the record does not
'how that said so-called appeal was ever
'erved upon Selden or upon any oner re-
,resen;ing him rs required by the rules
If practi~,.
2. Because said Abram N. Eding-
,on has had no interest whatever in this
case, as appears by the agreed state
nent of facts signed by A. Mathews as
attorney for said Ellington"
8. Because said SO called appeal at