The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-01-23

a Iuvsrtsnt Railing 20 Hosssts 6ai
Unfortunass settlers.

A 1Dpertent hotsng 20 nooeess 80
Unfortunate Ssttlers-
An important decision. involving points
- in land office matters, has been re-
saved ss the land office from the depart
,rsut Of the interior. II not only estab-
Ilsb~s the precedent Of common sense
ming in relation to tho rights OF we'll
meaning settlers who have trouble in full
6lling their obligations owing TO sickness,
bus brings out the point that, in view Of
sbs fact that there 10 no express statutory
provisions prohibiting the transmutation
IL . exemption claim after the statutory
Ne OF the fling has expired, while steps
lookine IN o transmission have been pre-
vsonsiy begun, the proceedings when COM
plesed are regular.
On December 3. 1883, John p. Amss fiied
hIs prescription declaratory statement for
tns north half of northeast quarter of
northeast quarter OF northwest quarter
and lot Of section Is. township Is north.
range east, land on the Snohomish river.
PEAR Tolt, alleging settlement October 50.
isss.
On July 30, 1891, William r. Bales made
homestead entry for the same tract
August 5, 1891. Ames presented his APP
plication TO make homestead entry flor
the tract he had previously prs-smpted)
and siso iled q sworn protest against the
sn,ry of Bales. alleging that he was the
prior settler and had continuously resided
there since October 30, 1ess. aud that he
had improved the land to the value of $500.
He intended to transmute his presumption
cling into homestead entry, but by rea-
con Of sickness Was prevented from SC do
Ing before the expiration thereof Bales.
being fully conversant with the facts in
the case. took advantage OF his sickness
and made homestead entry for the tract.
Accompanying the abatement was petit
ton for hearing TO determine the rights
OF the respective parties The hearing re-
suited in favor of Ames and an appeal Was
taken. The facts established by the eyi-
dcnce corroborated Ames' claim, and Ii
was shown that he sent his father to In.
form the local land officers that he In.
tended 20 transmnts his presumption into
a homestead. Bales offered no evidence,
relying upon q strict construction Of the
Revised Statutes, which provide that
every claimant under tho presumption law
must make his claim In writing to the
register within three months from the
time Of settlement or his claim will be for
teited and the tract awarded TO the next
settler who gives notice and complies with
the law: persons shall be entitled To enter
under the homestead Law, 100 acres of unap-
propriated land. upon which they have
tiied presumption claim or which is SUB
ject to pre-emption, section 22s7 provides
tha, all claimants of presumption shall
make proper proof within thirty months
after tho date prescribed for fling their
declaratory notes has expired.
Assistant Secretary Sims In his decision
SAYS: Three months after Ames made
settlement expired January 80, 1850.
Within that time he made his claim in
writing. Thirty months expired July 30,
ISL Until the expiration of that day the
land covered by Ames' presumption fling
Was not ''unappropriated land" What.
ever entry. therefore. Bales made on or
before July 70. is9t. was subject to the
rights of Aces as prior settler. The good
faith Of Ames in all his connections with
the case is proved. Being unable TO make
proof as required by the presumption law.
be determined to transmuts IL to home
stead and so secure title. This fact was
knosn 20 Bales, who took advantage of
his knowledge and sought To deprive
Arnss of his improvements uron and
rights to the land. Bales entry was made
while Ames Was living on the land. l find
no cases. decided by the department. on all
tours with the case at the bar. In view of the
facts that there are no express statutory
Provisions prohibiting the transmutation
eta presumption clam. after the statutory
lie OF the fling has expired, while steps
looking to atransmutation have been taken
before the ding expired. and the equities
ei the case as established by the evidence,
] think the conclusion reached by your
eihes vas correct. and the decision 10
affirmed.
The decision Of the local land Office in
The case of August Wilson W. Jenkins
Aorsans, involving the southeast quarter
OF the southwest quarter OF section - and
The northeast quarter of the northwest
quarter Of section So. township N north,
range west, rejecting Morsan's entry on
TIE ground OF lack of improvements and
residence. has been affirmed by the gem
sral land office
The application o. Henry Holden TO fiIs
on The southeAst quarter Of section 81. town
salp 3 north. range o east. which Was re-
leesed by the local land office on the ground
saai the lard was not surveyed, has been
apheld by the assistant land commissioner.
ne says that an investigation of the case
saess thar the line was not run owing to
rocky blufs. but witness posts were
marked