The weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1891-1894, 1893-05-12

ing decision IN the case OF John j..
Mitchell against Louis Kommers:
On Jan. %, 1892, Louis Kommers
made homestead entry 5i5S for lots |. ..
3, and f., northwest quarter northwest
quarter section -. n north, four east.
which he committed to cash entry No.
1924, March 3, 1892.
October II, 1892, Jno. l.. Mitchell
filed application to contest sail entry,
alleging Kommcrs never established a
bona fide residence or lived upon said
land at any time; that said land was
never settled upon and cultivated as re-
quired by law; that on March 10, 1892.
he made a deed conveying this land to
one Henry ii. Porterfor a consideration of
$1,000, the land IN account of having one
mile of frontage on the Missouri river
being worth from ten to twenty thousand
dollars, and on information and belief
that the entry was fradulently made
for the benefit Of one Norton L. Porter.
BY letter az November II, 1892, the
honorable commissioner directed an in
vestigation, and on November n. 1892,
on contestants application notice is
sued ordering a hearing for January }.
1893, testimony to be submitted before
the clerk Of The district court a. Great
Falls, Mont. December 20, 1892.
Testimony 50 taken was received in
this office January :, 1893. Claimants
attorney appeared specially before the
officer reducing testimony to writ
ing and objected to the service. it appear
ing at the time service was made
claimant was lying ill in the hospital
On Jan. 4. 1893, however, counsel stipu-
lated for continuance or ~postponment
of the hearing in tins Office. which was
filed in and assented to by this Office
Jan. Is, 1893. This stipulation valves
all irregularities in the service, being in
a general appearance.
Anderson V. Rey. 10, l.. ID. G2O.
From the records of this office it ap.
pears one Jas. Haven made Il. G.. entry
No. 2lGi for said land March II. 1885,
April p, 1890, Anthony Wink filed a
contest against said entry which re,
suited in the cancellation of the entry
March %. 1891. Wink made lid. iSGC
for the land April -, 1891, which was
cancelled on hi REIMBURSEMENT Jan. II.
1892.
Claimant is charged with failure to
establish or maintain a bona tide resi-,
dcncc on the land, failure 10 cultivate as
required by law, entry made for Others
benefit. and sale or conveyance thereof
March -, 1892. Either Of these charges
established must be followed by can
collation. of the entry. 1t will be OBJ
served claimant made Hid. entry for the
land Jan. p, 1892. committing to cash
entry March 3, 1892. BY act of March
3, 1891, communication can only be legal,
ly done fourteen months after date OF
original entry upon making proof OF
settlement and Of residence for such
period of fourteen months. In this case
but IS days elapsed between Original
and final entry,
Therefore if he had sold the land, il
would be impossible for him to cure the
defect and cancellation of the final anC
original entry must follow.
We find that until Wink r%elinquish,
ed his entry on the land in Jan. 1892 he
as well as Kommers we're claiming the
land and residence thereon. Both hat
small shacks or cabins upon it.
1t appears kommers built a small
shack on the land in the fall of 1890
Winks also built a cabin on the land il
1891, after he had exercised his prefer
ence right of entry for tho land ant
maintained a residence thereon until Ii,
relinquished. This REIMBURSEMENT wa
filed by agreement with kpmmers
whereby Winks was to receive 500. +
be fully paid after Kommers receives
final certificate, Winks to act as one o
Kommers witnesses when he made tina
proof. As to his residence the testi
mony is somewhat slight, one witres
tcstifying for contestant that up to July
1891, he rode oyer the land and nea
Kommer's cabin very frequently search
ing for stock and at nom of those time
did he see KOmmers there. Anothe
witness testified foI contestant that from
MAY. 1891, to March, 1892, he occasion
ally visited Winks and passed over tn
land and very close to kommers' shacl
; ten or twelve times and never saw kom
mers there. During much the large
|, portion of this time Kommers was work
ing for the Cascade Land company. Ac
cording to the statement or testimony o
the company's manager, n. L. Porter. h
commenced working for the compan,
April 10, 1890, and worked for the com
pany all of the first year save about tw,
months. The second year he worked al
but about two months, and the thiIC
year all but about three or four months
That brings up to September. 1872, whel
he quit work. He was getting wages
and board and lodging furnished. Wink;
also commenced working for said com
pany April 10, 1890, and worked continu
ously until Christmas. 1891. In addition
to this shack, valued at about So, Kom
mers had a smal! piece of breaking o.
blowing on the land estimated from tive
to five acres, which was midway between
his and Winks' shacks. Whether dont
by Kommers or Winks none Of the wit
nesses knew. 1t does not appear to have
been cultivated to crop. These are hit
total improvements. Fol claimant, II. II
Porter ~testities he saw kommers cooking
some victuals there. y. II. Porter test.
ties he saw kommers there a number
of times. Saw him going and coming {
good many times, he kommers, stopped
at the company's ranch part of the time
during the winters of 1891 , saw him
there quito a number of times. he SAID
he was living there, etc. When thi'
testimony WAS hc!ng submitted kom,
mrrs it appears was lying i'll in the hos,
pital. Not having had an opportunity
10 testify, and Dies ring he should have
every opportunity to defend his entry
a., IStN 49,, ,,,ll,.I ili. T., III, 80