Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1897-03-17
TO GUST LAMOREUX.
Believed that the Commissioner
will be Sur1marily Dis


sational order repudiating acts of the
general land office in the Chicago lake
front case, and which probably will be
followed Immediately by the peremptory
dismissal of Silas w. LamoreuX of Wis
consin, commissioner Of the general land
office, was signed by Secretary Of the
Interior Bliss today.
The order directs that all proceedings
in the case subsequent to the filing of
the application TO locate Mckee scrip on
the lake front be rescinded and annulled,
and it orders a new trial before the new
commissioner not yet appointed within
thirty days after notice to all parties.
The action is based on the purported
opinion of Mr.. Lamoreux given out by
him to one of the parties in interest
three days before the time appointed by
himself for the formal announcement of
the decision and the notice to the other
interested parties. The land on which it
was proposed to locate claims by means
of this scrip is in the heart of the city CT
Chicago and immensely valuable, est
mates of its worth ranging all the way
from $15,000,0 900 to $30,OO0,0OO.
The department today made the follow
ing official statement on the Chicago lake
front matter:
On the ODD day of February Secretary
Francis directed that judgment in the case
department This order has been published.
The secretary WAS thereafter Informed that
no decision had been rendered; none was
found in the proper office OF the land de-
partment; none appears IN the letter press
book where all decisions are required 10 be
copied prior to rromulgation.
In response to q telegram from the as
SiStant encouragement asking Commission
err Lamoreux if he had given out A copy
of his opinion in the lake front case; if so,
when and to whom, Mr.. LamoreuX replied:
ION the Goth l signed opinion and had
number of copies made the same day to be
given to the press on the 23d, on which
date had announced that the decision
would be promulgated. One of the copies
of the Goth gave to n party with permits
should be promulgated. but in no case to be
used until PRONUNCIATION. This was done on
the goth: ON the 22d Secretary Francis sus-
rs. W. LAMoREUX."
Although it does not appear to whom the
copy vas given. yet as Mr.. Lamoreux did
though requested to do so, and reported
merely that he gave it to "a party" it is
to be presumed that such party was not
without interest in the controversy. More
over before this department was advised
that any decision had been signed counsel
for the scrip holders requested that such an
opinion be promulgated. knowledge Of the
opinion Is therefore traceable TO them.
Conduct was Gross Irnprorriety.
The propriety of giving out the copy of
an unrendered. unpromulga ted decision to
one. of the parties in controversy in advance
TO its formal announcement is too obvious
70 require comment. Mr.. Lamoreux states
that he gave 81 copy to Il party three days
IN advance of the time appointed by him
Tor It's PRONUNCIATION in the usual and
proper way Neither faith nor credit can
attach TO an opinion under such circum-
stances.
Since it was never properly filed it was
deemed best to disregard ii and direct
new trial: this was done. The law which
lustifies the action of the department may
States and the decisions of the United
States Supreme court. The leading case
on on the subject, Knight VS.; Land associa--
statutes, page lis, wherein Justice Lamar
says: The statutes in placing the whole
business OF the department under the super
authority to review. reverse: amend. annul
or affirm all proceedings In that department
having for their ultimate object to secure
the alienation Of any portion of the public
!anQ or adjustment of private claims to
lands with Just regard to the rights of
the public and of private parties
such supervision may be exercised by
direct orders or by review on appeals
When proceedings affecting titles to
lands are before the department., the power
OF supervision may be exercised by the sec
rotary whether these proceedings are called
to his attention by formal notice or by ap-
peal. The rules prescribed are designed n
facilitate the department in the dirrctio3
Of business, not to defeat the supervision
or the secretary.
Judge Lamoreux left here week or
more before the change Of administra-
ton, the statement being made that be
was III a critical condition from nervous
exhaustion. and before his departure he
rendered his resignation to the Presi-
dent. In view of today's Developments
it may be expected that he will be dis
missed.
The full text Of the order canceling
the proceedings, signed by the secretary
this morning, follows:
Fhe Commissioner of the General Land
oEnce-Sir: 1t having been made known
TO me that there Is in your Office What
purports to be an opinion signed in the
ma MAJ OF application of Matthias Benner
scrip on what is known as the lake front
OF Chicago, H., and that copy of said
paper mas been delivered to one of the
pdrucS TO the controversy before it's rem
dltlon and PRONUNCIATION, in fragrant disro-
gard or right and justice, in Violation of
t the cypress ORDER OF NY predecessor and
therefore, i'll the exercise Of the discretion
ana authority conferred upon me hv law
l diTecf you to order a rehearing of such
application at such time as you may desic-
nate not later than thirty days from the
date TIL hereof f and to mmediatey notify all
time fixed for the hearing.
All orders and acts of your 1epartmoDt
heretofore made or done in the matter of
such application arc hereby rescint;ed w.
Gated and annulled. to The end that said
application may be heard de novo and true
Justice done between the parties. Respect
fully, CORNELIUS y. BIISS
Secretary.
The decision formulated and promuI-
gated by Commissioner LamorpIIx and
which resulted in today's scathing re-
buke. it is said at the department., is
directly contrary to a decision rendered
By him August 81 last, involving the
same lands and identical except as to
parties with the present case. This de-
cision was rendered Oh an application by
Martin M. Cooncy and others to locate
Mckee scrip on identically the same
ground. and, it is said, under the same
circumstances as the present case The
application of Cooney ct al. was rejected,
while the application of Harvey M. La
Toilette and Matthias Benner was al
lowed by Commissioners Lamorcux in the
decision which has been reDudiated by
Secretary Bliss today.
A rehearing of the Chicago lake front
case has been set for April 5.