The Yakima herald. [volume] (North Yakima, W.T. [Wash.]) 1889-1914, 1893-11-16


just received from the first assistant Sec
rotary OF the interior department deci-
sion in case OF more than ordinary
intere It to the people OF this section Of
the district. The land in question is
located in the Sunnyside region, in the
lower end of the county and embraces
some OF the finest territory in that famous
section.
On the Goth of April, 1888, Lncy d.
Thomas filed an application to make
desert land entry for all OF section IA,
township IL, north OF range 20 east, Yak
ina land district, which was refused for
the reason that she rendered an initial
payment of only % cents per acre, while
the local officers demanded so cents per
acre, claiming that the land was double
minimum in price.
More than one hundred other persons
made similar applications and tender Of
payment for different tracts in this land
district at the same time, which were dis
posed Of in the same way.
To avoid a multiplicity Of appeals it
was mutually agreed between the local
officers and the several applicants that
the question involved should be settled
by one appeal, and Richard Strobach was
selected as such appellant. 1t was agreed
that the applications of the other persons
should be held IN allegiance to await fur
thur action upon the case Of Strobach,
and that they should be notified by the
action taken in the case by the local
Office and the department. Upon his
appeal, the action of the local officers was
approved and the local decision was
affirmed by the department on August /,
1889. After such decision was rendered
Mrs. Thomas renewed her application for
the whole OF said section and rendered
an initial payment of fifteen cents an
acre. Her application was rejected SO far
as it related to the wiz OF the sw4 and
the seA OF the swH of said section, for
which Peter d. Brooke had made home
stead entry on the 9Th of said month.
From such rejection by the local Office
she appealed to the commissioner, who
affirmed the local decision on the l4th of
February, 1890. A further appeal was
taken to the interior department and, on
the 22d of June, 1891, hearing was Or
dered to determine the rights OF the re-
spective claimants and to ascertain all
the facts in relation to the ageement re-
ferred to, and the appeal of Strobach.
Brooke made default at the hearing on
December 2, 1891. The local officers
failed to agree as to the proper decision
to be rendered in the case, which resulted
in decision by each, the receiver hold
ing that, on account of the default of
Brooke at the hearing, his entry should
be cancelled and Mrs. Thomas should be
allowed to make desert land entry for the
whole OF said section. The register held
that Mrs. Thomas, not having appealed
from the decision rejecting her first appli-
cation, the land was subject to entry at
the time Brooke applied for the tract, and
his entry having been properly allowed,
he lost no rights by making default at the
hearing and that it should be allowed to
remain intact on the record. The register
also held that, since the passage of the
act of March 8. 1891, Mrs. Thomas could
be allowed only to make desert land
entry for 800 acres and that she must be
required to amend her application accord
ingly. The case was taken to the COM
missioner's officer by appeal and, on the
21st of June, 1892, a decision was rem
dered which concluded as follows:
"If then, as l believe, the application
was in this case rejected in 1888 for fail
ure to tender the amount of so cents per
acre, Mrs. Thomas allowed her right to
lapse by failing to appeal within the
time prescribed by the rules of practice,
the entry of Brooke was properly allowed,
and the rejection of Mrs. Thomas's re-
newed application, made subsequent to
such entry, followed as a matter OF
course, so far as the land embraced in
Brooke's entry is concerned. She may,
therefore, be allowed to make entry of so
much of the tract applied for as was not
otherwise disposed of at date of her Sec
ond application to enter"
An appeal from such decision carried
the case to the interior department.
Brooke's entry was made when the rec
ord showed the land subject thereto, and
it should remain intact until Mrs. Thorn
as showed that she had superior right
to the same. Until she established such
claim, he was not called upon to defend
his entry. Instead of establishing such
claim, she simply showed that she had
made prior application to enter such
land, which application was rejected, and
from which judgment she took no ap-
peal.
The case OF John A. Some presented
questions precisely similar to those in the
case at bar, except as above stated. He
was one of the persons who applied to
make desert land entry at the same time
that Mrs. Thomas applied, and was a
party to the Strobach agreement. 1t was
held in that case that by Stones failure
to appeal from the rejection Of his appli-
cation, such judgment became final and
homestead entry thereafter made for a
portion of the land was valid, and his
second application was properly rejected,
30 far AZ it conficted with such home
stead entry. The decision of the COM
missioner in the case at bar was in
accordance with the ruling OF the depart
ment in that case, and the decision APP
pealed from was accordingly affirmed
FRUTT GROWERS CONVENTION the