The record-union., 1893-05-06
BEFORE JUDGE CATLIE.
Surveyor-GeneraI Reichert and Dep
uty Anglers.
They Come Into Court With Part of
the Applications for
Lieu Land.

California, on the relation of L. B. Willis
VS.. Theodore Reichert, Surveyor Gem
eral. were decidedly interesting ..and al
most sensational at times. The case at
tracted great deal of attention, and there
was large attendance of lawyers and
persons interested in lands, all of whom
listened with keen attention to the pro-
ceedings.
Surveyor-General Reichert had been
subpenaed as witness and commanded
to bring into court the now famous ap-
piications for lieu lands which have been
locked up in his safe for several months,
together with the envelopes containing
them and all other papers pertaining to
them. His Chief Deputy, d. NJ. Anglers,
was directed to bring with him a certain
book in which it is supposed there is
record of the applications that have been
filed from time 10 time in the Surveyor
Generals offico. When these gentlemen
appeared Mr.. Anglers carried two good
sized bundles which were supposed to
contain the applications which the REC
oRD-UNIoN has been demanding should
be exposed to public examination.
When Judge Catlin had taken his seat
and disposed of his law calendar, J. G.
Campbell, attorney for the Surveyor
General, opened the proceedings by de-
clarlng that he was ready to have a writ
issued allowing the petitioner to inspect
the applications just as soon as they
could be entered upon the books of the
Surveyor-GeneraPs office. He said that
officer could not permit the inspection
sooner, because his Advisory Committee
having advised him that he ought to file
the applications and had no right to keep
them in his safe as he had been doing,
hn Of h i- rff FOO h.,e-
gagged in preparing for their filing. The
Surveyor General, he said, had never had
any intention OF keeping from public
view any application that had been filed,
but he contended that the applications
that have been locked up in the safe had
not been filed. They had just been kept
In the safe TO accommodate applicants who
wanted them filed as soon as the Sur
veyor-General could determine his own
duty in the premises. He had submitted
the matter TO distinguished lawyers and
as they had decided that he had no
authority TO retain them in his safe, but
must file them, he was ready to do so.
He claimed that this was all the petit
toner asked in his prayer and that ended
the case.
William Singer, Jr., attorney for the
relator, did not see it in that light, and he
promptly pointed out to the court the
TACT that it would be Impossible to issue
further showing by the defendant to
guide the court in directing what applica-
uons should be filed. The answer
showed that there were a number OF ap-
plications made that were not accom-
panied by the fees, and the court ought to
be informed as to how many such appli-
CATIONS there are, and also whether thew
had not in fact been filed or noted by the
urveyor-General, as alleged by the re-
lator.
Judge Catlin said that the answer was
ambiguous. in that it stated that the Sur
Veyor-General did not know how many
applications were accompanied by the fee
OF 30. In tact, 1t was sham answer, on
Information and belief, whereas il should
have stated how many applications were
received and how much money accom-
panied them. He would not recognize
the right of party to have mis- applica-
tlon there unless 1t was a filing. That
would be making the Surveyor-General
the agent of the applicant for the purpose
OF fling his application or not filing it.
This was matter of public concern. He
looked upon these papers as filed when
presented, and the Surveyor-General
ought to know how many of them there
are and how much money accompanied
them. He said that the answer was un-
satisfactory to him, and he would give
the defendant until o'clock to make
proper answer.
The parties then retired and came into
court again at O'Clock, when the same
interested crowd was present.
Mr.. Campbell then reported to the court
that it was found that there were 1876 ap-
piications, l29 of which were accom-
panied by the fee of So. He stated that
the Surveyor-G was willing that
the relator should make note of all the
applications upon which the fees had
been paid. and if the court saw fit it could
order an inspection of the sixty-six APP
plications i'll his possession on which
the fees had not been paid; that he would
enter them upon his books, and imme-
diately, as soon as entered, or as soon as
the court directs, make application to the
proper land office for the lieu.
MIR. Singer insisted that the relator had
right to an inspection of the applica-
tions now, and not be compelled to wait
until a record was made OF them in the
Surveyor office. He wanted to
inspect them as they were, not after thew
had been weeded out by the SURVEYOR
General.
Judge Catlin said that the applications
were public records, and that the Sur
veyor-General had no right TO keep them
from public examination for any such
reasons as he had given; advising with
lawyers was not sufficient excuse. His
idea was that when an application was
presented the Surveyor-General must file
it or refuse to receive it. OF course if it
was not in due form he could refuse to
receive it at once, but if he takes il he
must file it at once. II assume" said the
Judge, that since this petition was filed
things have remained in statu quo, hut
some of those applications may have been
removed"
That is just the ooint. your honor,7
said Attorney Singer. I'VE simply want
to know whetaer these hundred and
ninety-fiye are ali there were in the safe
at the time this petition was fled"
Then we will have to examine the
Surveyor-General,"r !" replied Judge Catlin.
This was exactly what Mr.. Singer
wanted, and Mr.. Reichert was put upon
upon the witness-stand and asked how
many applications were now on file in his
office applying to select lands in lieu OF
sixteenth and thirty-siXth sections falling
within the Sierra Nevada, Tarbuca, San
Gabriel and San Bernardino forest reser-
Vations.
Mr.. Reichert replied that personally he
did not know; he had not counted them,
but he understood there were l95.
Witness was subjected 10 long exam
ination, but would not make direct an
swer 10 most of the questions pro-
pounded, because he said he was not per-
sonally acquainted with the details of the
transactions in regard to the filing of ap-
plications. Mr.. Anglers attended to all
that business and most of his information
was obtained from Mr.. Anglers.
lie was asked if he knew how many
applications there were in his office for
such lands on the 18th of April, when the
petition was filed.
He declared that he did not know, nor
could he swear whether a fee of So ac-
companied any of the applications with
which the fee is not now found. He did
not personally receive or file the applica-
tions. He finally admitted that he be-
lieved there were applications where the
i 49,, aud uOt raoaira1