The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-11-13
LIEU LAND VICTORY.
Hoke Smith Decides in Favor
Of Big Bend Settlers.
AGAINST TnE NORTHERN PACIFIC.
nsfsrssa C..'t Take WsshInxs~n Lsssa
- gsaemaaty fsr Ferttss 81 fsshs
Grans Covered ~ Eessrsasssn-

q TIE E1gfhern Rsrk&se grant n EAstsfn
Washington that 10 far fesching Ia IFS
effect assA which will be hailed WITH in
s~nss satisfaction By nlsny occupants o.
fiss~tands u tbs state. TO which title 10
row In alsyance. A more Ar1pcrtant de-
esxs4yu has not been handed down for
xears. Il sestiss ysxed question Regarding
sAs rsxias 81 . sulssiaizsd corporation 20
sesz. es~f ythlng ia s8gEs and bod greas
sfess Of e. public domain 20 tina sxciz-
ssan Of actual settsevz. Il viii result IN
taextlsnabss banent 20 Douglas eounty,
xhase sh9 liza lands affected BY the decz-
ss<zn eaarsee some of tbs best agric1itu-
ri and Ia tn. section Of the stats, and
other portsous OF Washington vail Be
eas.sIv kenslfted. - 10. moreover, .
scarce 81 e0ngE s.uIation 20 the people Ia
fhfa vicinity. from the fact that BY psTso-
nal correspondence with the department.
ther have sueeesded IN accom- plishing
uhst the farmers Of the Paaouse country
have ssgnssiy failed 20 do, notxsthssand-
lag they smpIoyed NJ large expense "a AZ
forney = no claimed 20 have sfrong per-
sonal pasl with the present aamsnastra-
tson. The lieu lands affected by the &C
ton Of the sscresary ara lands n proxifn-
sfr 70 Wassrrille, ard we're selected IN
lieu cf lands claimed 10 have been lost.
The decision 10 u such vast Importance
that il given IA fall. preceded By brief
onflsas "a tie ease that lsd 90 the fnal
finding Of facts.
on Deeesab4r s. 1890. N. ID. Smith. Of
Waterviile. entered = contest against The
Northern pAElfc railroad for piece Of
land lsine in the indemnify strip. which
hsd been selected by the railroad COM
rsny ss shown in last No 10. fled at the
local laad cElice. and supporting 70 De q
ses@clisn In place OF lands lost N the C1snr
d Alene Tndinn reservation ia the state OF
Iaahe. Ia aae tame q hearing was bad
and the register and receiver Of the local
land Office decided Ia favor OF the contest
ans. Stating In their indings that the de-
fsmlant show their losses tract for tract
wi.h selected lands, which was not done.
and that the company could not select
land In the state Of Washington in lieu Of
tia. lost In an a.dsssning state. The rail-
rad company appealed 70 the commits
sf0nsr OF the general land Office. who sus-
tanned The local officers The company
carried the case 80 the secretary OF the In
terrier, and, under date Of October II, iss,5,
that cfiicial rules as follows:
The Commissioner Of the General Land
Oilier--Ssr. have considered the appeal by
the Northern Pacific Railroad Company
from your Office decision Of June IL. 1902
holding for cancellation lts indemnity iist
OF selections flied ia the local Office at y orfh
Yakima. Wnsi.. on October II. fsss.
tsaid list being numbered iel for the rea-
son that the losses are not arranged tract
Tor tract with the selected lands.
There can be no question that the DE-
eisions OF this department require that the
losses must be stated tract for tract with
the selected lands, In no case exceeding q
secslon. We're there no other objection 10
the LIST. however. n Encouragement Of the
losses might be allowed.
'sFrom an examination Of the list 10 APP
pears that the lands selected are located
along and 10 the north Of the branch line
OF said read. In the state OF Washington.
and consist of - items. containing from
forty 30 100 acres each, aggregating Il =
i82. - acres.
.'Ths losses designatsd are part Of the
ceeur Aiene Indian reservation. In the
state OF Idado. ursuFveyed, the area given
being estimated az 81 10 acres.
1T may be questioned whether unsnr-
veyed lands can be made the basis for an
indemnity selection, but In the present
case IL 10 unnecessary 20 consider that
question. AZ more important one pre-
scents itself. via; Can this company select
lands - indemnity in the state Of W ash.
ington for a loss Within the state Of Idaho
without fFst showing that such loss can.
not be satisfied from the lands within tbs
limits of the grant OF that state
sit IL we'll settled principle, carried
through ell the legislation pertaining e
land grants to AID tn the construction q
railroads. that indemnity lands must b
taken nearest 20 the lost lands. 50 that th'
portion Of the country benefited hv th,
building Of the road may bear the burden
of the grAnt made Go aid in its construe
ton. The cotermiaus principle. applie<
90 nearly all grants. was evidently In
tended 10 accomplish this result. Wer
IL otherwise, the company might ais,
pass over the bad lands within M
limits OF It's grant and pick out fhi
beat lands, which il has evidently done II
the present case. IL the loss named can b
satisfied with in the limits of its grants u
the state of Idaho The Joint resolution
og May ~. $50 [ 81 Stat. S1ll provides 20
n second indemnity belt from which q
satisfy certain losses that can not be salts
fed ia that state or territory within IA
nrst named Indemnity belt, at the time o
the tlnai location o. the road.
said resolution provides: And In tbs
event OF there nnt being ia any state 0
territory la which the said main line o
branch may be located ~ the time OF ia
fnai location thereof. fhs anaowHf of Ian,
com
pany within the limits prescribed By IL
charter. then sssd company shall b
entitled under the directions Of the secre
tary 81 the interior "a receive 3
many seeslens of land belonging 70 tn
United Stairs and designated hy Oh,
RuaheEE Ia saeA state or territory, within
ten niies an eaea side of said Rad bsraa,
fAe hmlss prescysbei - said charter. a
witi make ap snSh deficiency on said mai,
line ar branch eXrapt mineral ~ nsAa
lands IS exceplea IN the charter OF sal,
company 81 lsssi, 90 the amount OF IA
lands taas have been granted, sold, re
served, occupied kg homestead settlers
Irc-efnptea or otherwise disposed al. sub
ssqusat to the passage Of the &C; Of July .
lisa
ssIhe Gear d'Aisne Indian reseryatio,
waS ereagsd by executive orSier OF June "a
issif subsequent 10 the date of the ae
isssiag tals grant tJGly ,. 1854. II stat.
81. and prior - the iiaAl location Of ~
Fesd ia this cscintty August 81. ISL
aAuS beng 0f ihe speclas character Of tosse
provided FOR by the said resolution.
"ts necessity exists therefor this los
might BE- made the basis for selecsio,
within she seeoad Indemnity belt in ~
state 81 idaho.
'sfhere has been no attempt made. as "a
as knosn - uae, 30 secure the laying dowl
oE an additional indemnity limit in an
state Of Idaho. so Il Is fair 20 presume IA a
no necessity exists therefor, and that Al
losses within the limlts Of SIS grant in "a
state II Idaho can BE satisfied from IA
hrss Indemnity beis. within tae bornsiarie
ct that state. IhiS hezng 50. l am OF ia,
opinion that selections can net properly h
male IA another state ia lieu OF losses il
the state Of ldaha unfli il Is frat show,
that such leases can net ee satisfied ffo,
lands within the limits Of its grant Ia sAa