The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-11-22

stats IN regard 10 TIE non-mIH~Fal
character Of TIE elairn eoald not oe cozsid-
erred and EsGss be entirciy ruled cut 81 th@
case. because Mcbride and those coop
Grating with hisa were xc.giesS from access
20 and inspection Of the states working.
TaAs Is 70 saY, the obviously necessary
precautions used 70 prevent she states IN
yvsts<ssions iroga besag yisiated oy fsrs-
pering we're nzzse the reason :or excluding
the state 5 evidence wholly from consider
alton
Similarly. By order OF the secretary
allowing the reanvestigation OF she value
and extent Of The alleged deposits CT god.
the state was coRnned in us tes-
nmony 20 the Investigation made
under the superinten9ence OF the United
States inspector sent cut here for that pur-
pose. while the Claimant xas permitted %
put IN evidence not only the resaits Of the
Investigation andeT the superintenderce
Of this inspector, but 10 addition thereto
any further testimony he migbs have 10
sustain his ayer1Asnts IS 10 the mineral
qualities OF the land. In addition
thereto. IN spite Of the well-knosn ease
with which saItine can be accomplished
even at = considerable distance from the
Localities where mineral Investigations are
being conducted, the order allowing
the demonstration directed that Mcbride
and bis representatives should have OPP
portuniiy 70 inspect The workings OF
the state. This peculiar and mysterious
bias manifests itself ia = position
maintained by the claimant with
absurd tenscity, but echoed and
re-echoed in the opinions of the
United States land department. from top
10 bottom. that the state OF Washington Is
tremendously interested In finding as
little gold as possible on this claim.
while the Immaculate Mcbride Is
utterly without motive or opportunity TO
make this school section appear TO be
gold bearing. when II is not. and utterly
without capacity 10 yield to such a
motive. if it could possibly exist.
In other words. the officers and
employees conducting and making the in
investigation on behalf OF the state. who
can derive no personal benefit whatever
by reason OF the success OF the state, every
dollar of the proceeds of the school lands
being by the constitution of the
state placed in the permanent and ire
ducible school fund of the state. are
subjected 10 the irresistible temptation 10
secure fraudulert results, from which
they can derive no personal profit.
while the tremendous incentive 10
the claimant to perpetrate fraud (the land
being valued at from 5000 per acre up
wsrd) only serves to place the con-
duet of Mcbride and his confed-
crates wholly beyond the possibilities of
any suspicious of wrong-doing and estab-
fishes as perhaps the only absolutely con-
that McBside's virtue is unassailrd
and unassaiiable. This inversion
of all the rules OF evidence
and the ordinary tests of the value of the
testimony characterizss the entire review
by the local land officers in their opinion
of the testimony adduced ct the hearing.
''In the review of the testimony of
the witness for the state the evil
dence is CARRIED in some cases. and
the legitimate differences from the same
are deliberately ignored, while the results
of the claimant and his witnesses are set
forth in full aud the many features of
their unreliability are absolutely ignored
Blooms testimony as TO McBride's
proposition 10 him TO salt the claim is
rejected on account of Blooms alleged
Willingness to become party to
the fraud when the testimony
shows that Bloom had no in
tention whatever of becoming a party to
the fraud. while the undenied interview of
Bloom with Topliff in regard to McBride's
proposal, standing wholly undenied,
Toplif not even being called by
the claimant as witness. thus
conclusiveiy establishing this instance
of . proposition to salt is wholly ignored
by the officers rendering this decision.
The simultaneous test by the state that
served as a check on certain OF the states
tests that were tempered with aud that
demonstrated the actuality of the
tampering are utterly ignored by
the officers rendering this decision,
who reinforced their adverse opinion
TO the state by citing an assay of the
state the tampering OF which Is shown
conclusiyely by independent investigation
of the same material.
when il Is considered that out of the
hundreds aud thousands of sections of
land. bordering upon and in the vicinity
of Puget sound. and identical with this
school section in geological formation
and substance. this is the only sec
ton on which the thirst tor gold
has impelled anyone to open up gold
mine, and in this case the Developments
have never been prosecuted further than
20 submit evidence 10 government
officials, through the medium of whose
decisions the town lot yalne of this section
at S. 90 per acre is sought and expected
TO be obtained, IL is not strange that in
such decisions We see the fundamental
rules of evidence violated, the established
tests of the credib Utility of witnesses ignored
and the ordinary processes of human rea-
soning reversed.
Mr.. swinssord, the government agent
sent out from Washington CITY to see that
absolute fairness was accorded to both
sides in the investigation, has al
ways showed phenomenal interest in
the eiamont's case, and in some
way secured an order from the commits
sioner of the general land office re-
curing the state TO submit its ar
gument in three days after the
close of the case, and insisted upon
its enforcement Gov. McGraw then took
the matter IN hand and forwarded a tele-
gram To the commissioner of the general
land Office, earnestly protesting against this
order, aud asking that il be reversed on
the ground that the testimony, being still
in the hands of the stenographers could
not be Transcribed and there would be no
opportunity TO examine il before argu-
ment. Also that portions of the testimony
were not sworn to and could not be
until after the witnesses could have the
opportunity Of reading It. and the order 10
ex parte and made without prior notice or
any notice 20 the state. GOV. McGraS
also in his telegram states, in reference TO
Mr.. Swinford's effort:
Whatever influence he has been able to
exert in the local land Office and else here
in connection with the case. might be per.
mIssabie in paid attorney of the min
eral claimant. bat wholly Inconsistent
with his duty IS an impartial agent of the