St. Paul daily globe., 1896-04-29
TELLS THE UNITED STATES
THIS Is THE ADJUSTMENT OF A
GRANT BETWEEN s'TWO SOW
EREIGNS.V
LAND DEPARTMENT "CZARsv
Are Treated With Respect, but Any
thing but ObsequiOusness In
VOlumin0us Document.

to the department OF the Interior, with ac-
companying oaths of allegiance in profusion,
within a few days.
The court name of the section 80 case is the
State of Minnesota VS.. William Craig, and it
involves the northwest Y of the southeast II
of section 80, town g. range II, west. The
case is now before the secretary of the in
terror on the states appeal from the ruling of
the general commissioner of the general land
Office denying the application for a hearing
the land is swamp and overfowed land, under
the acts Of 1850 and 1860. The states brief,
after reciting the acts under which it claims
title, calls attention to the charges of fraud
in government surveys which were made in
1850, and the Investigations made into these
charges, which delayed the consideration of
the states claim pending final adjustment of
the supposed frauds as follows:
During the summer Of 1885, reports reached
the general land Office from several sources
that gross frauds were being committed in
the Duluth land district, in the returning by
United States deputy surveyors of land as
swamp which were not, in fact, such, but
were high and dry and very valuable
for timber and iron. At this time W. P.
Jewett was acting as agent of the state In
the matter of adjusting the swamp land
grant, and on Oct. 1, 1885, the commissioner
Of the general land Office, Mr.. Sparks in
answer to an inquiry made by Mr.. Jewett,
regarding the issue of patents to the state
of lands embraced in what were known as
Lists 10 and 20, Duluth series land which
did not affect any lands in township 63-1D,
said:
81 have to state that, for reason of the
many allegations Of gross error and fraud,
in the returns made by the United States
surveyors Of swamp and overfowed lands in
Minnesota received by this Office, action in
this class of cases has been suspended until
these charges can be investigated"
Commissioners Letter K, Oct. 1, 1885.
From this action Mr.. Jewett, in behalf Of
the state, appealed to the secretary of the
interior, claiming that the lands embraced
in Lists 19 and 20, having been certified to
the state as swamp and overdowed, con-
sideration of the matter was beyond the 1u-
risdiction of the department.
On July 49, 1887, Acting Secretary Muldrow
sustained the commissioners decision; and
subsequently, upon receiving further evil
dence of fraud directed that an agent be as
signed to the work of making thorough
investigation Of the charges, and who should
make report thereon with the least possible
delay.
The effect of this decision was to suspend
lands in the Duluth district upon which
patents had not already been issued to the
state; and the townships thus affected have
ever since been known as the prescribed
townships" 6S-11 being one of them
In pursuance of this decision DR.. Levin ].
Woollen, then chief Of the swamp land di-
vision of the general land Office, was appoint
ed to make the investigation. and reported IN
1888 that the survey of six townships, IN
cluding 63-11 were clearly fraudulent; and
he recommended that in all townships III the
Duluth district where surveys nad Deen hndue
subsequent to 1889, the state be required 10
take her swamp lands by agents In the helo'
instead of by the field notes, as heretofore
had been the case.
Tn a letter to Secretary Villas the commls-
sioner concurred in the recommendations
and the secretary sustained them year later
as to the six townships in question. Subse-
ouently Dr. Wool1en and other special agents
continued the work OF examining lahos re-
turned by the surveyor as swamp IN various
townships in the Duluth district, but no IN
quiry was ever made by any Of these special
agents to ascertain what lands returned as
dry lands were in fact dry; but none of these
investigations reached township 63-n, in
which the land in dispute is situated.
Shortly after the filing OF the plat OF town.
ship 63-11 in the Duluth land Office as above
stated, which shows 1851 acres of swamp
land in the township, contests were entered
by various persons against the apparent claim
of the state to such lands, on the ground
that they were not, in fact, swamp lands;
and in nearly every one of these contests the
state has been defeated, but no effort has
been made by the department to ascertain
what lands in said township are, or were In
fact, wet and overhowed, within the mean
ing of the grant; and no list or plats of such
lands in that township has ever been fur
nished the state by the department.
The contestant, Craig, claims a patent to
the forty acres involved under an entry, or
alleged entry, thereof, made in his own name
on Sept. %, 1895, with, and as the assignee
of, Warrant No. IS, issued under the act of
congress of April IL, 1860 az Stat. S36), being
a certificate commonly known as "Porter-
field Scrip"
Although 1t Is admitted that the land In
question has, for eleven years, been in nti-
cation before the department. Mr.. Craig does
not attempt to claim any right or interest
under any of such litigants, or to connect
himself in any manner with any of them,
On the contrary, his contention is, that. at
the time he made his alleged entry with
Porterfeld scrip, last September, the land
was part of the public domain, with no ad-
verse claim thereto under any entry or set
tlement under the laws of the United States
and clearly open to location and entry. Mr..
Craig's contention Is, first, that the land is
not swamp land within the meaning Of the
granting act Of March II, 1860, and secondly,
that, whether or not It is of that character
the state has no standing in point of law to
assert It's title to the property at this time.
Sometime in the month of November 1ee5
it came to the attention Of the officers of the
state of Minnesota. for the first time. that
this "40' Is swamp and overfiowed land
within the terms Of the 1860 aot
The state auditor thereupon ordered q care
ful survey, which. although made in the win
ter, was forced by the fact that the case was
set for hearing In January. The brief con-
tinues:
The tract in question Is of very great value
by reason of natural deposit of iron ore
thereon. While estimates as to its value
must necessarily be conjectural It is safe tn
say that no one would place the estimate at
less than million dollars. 1t is probably
worth several times that sum, not only on
account of the quantity but the quality of
the iron deposit. Acting upon the assump-
uon that the tract is, in fact, swamp, and
with a view to securing so valuable a prop
erty to the people of Minnesota, the auditor
at once selected it for the benefit of one of
the state institutions, and under the law of
1889 relating to the leasing Of mineral lands.
certain persons represented by the late John
c. Judge. applied for lease on said tract.
No officer of the state had any prior informa-
ton that the said tract was otherwise than
high and dry land.
1t is true that the said tract, and other
tracts in the immediate vicinity, had been
the subject of protracted contest but that
was, however, a contest to which the state,
as already stated, was not party and in
which the character of the land was not in
any wise called in question. -
1t is therefore Somewhat surprising that
the hcndrabfe 1eSmi6issioner should employ
as matefia4 Stfs s9aseneat. The matter in
hapd. the following language:
The records Of this Office show no earlier or