The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1897-03-14

OF a Job.
Washington, March ia sensational
letter, regulating acts of the general
land office in the Chicago lake front
cases, and which may be followed i'm
taadiately by the preemptory dismissal
Of Silas ". Lamorcux OF Wisconsin,
Commissioned of the general land office,
vas 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 the
Mckee scrip on the lake front be re-
Cinded and annulled and it orders a
new trial before the new commissioner,
not yet appointed, within thirty days af-
ter notice to all parties.
The action is based on the purported
opinion Of Mr. Lamoreuxs given out by
IN TO one Of the parties in interest three
days before the time appointed by him
self for the formal announcement of the
decision and the notice TO the other in
terested parties.
The land on which it was proposed to
locate claims by means OF this scrip is
IN the heart Of the city of Chicago and
immensely valuable, estimates of its
worth ranging all the way from fifteen
to thirty million dollars
DEPARTMENTS STATEMENT.
The department today made the fol-
loving official statement on the Chicago
lake front matter.
''On the end day of February, Secre-
iary Francis directed that judgment in
the case be suspended until the further
order Of his 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 department and
none appears in the Ietter-press book,
where all decisions are required TO be
copied prior to PRONUNCIATION.
In response TO a telegram from the
assistant attorney general asking Com
missioner Lamoreux If he had given out
copy Of his opinion in the lake front
case, if SO, when and to whom, Mr..
LamoreuX replied:
- On the Goth l signed an opinion and
had q number of copies made the same
day To be given to the press on the sd,
which date I had announced that the
decision would be promulgated. One Of
the copies on the Goth l gave to party
with permission for him to use it after
the decision should be promulgated but
in TO case to be used until PRONUNCIATION.
This was done on the 10Th; on the 22nd
the secretary suspended PRONUNCIATION.
"'S. w. LAMOREUX.'
Although it does not appear TO whom
the copy was given. yet as Mr.. Lam
oreux did not disclose the name Of the
person, although requested to do so. and
reported merely that he gave II 10 "a
party il is TO be presumed that such
party WAS not without interest in the
controversy. Moreover, before this de-
par.ment was advised that any decision
had been signed, counsel for the scrip
holders requested that such an opinion
be promulgated. knowledge of the opin-
Ion is therefore traceable TO them
The improperly of giving out a
copy of an unrendered. unpromuIgated
decision TO one of the parties in con-
troversy in advance Of its formal an
nouncement is too obvious to require
comment. Mr.. LamoreuX states that he
gave a copy TO a party three days in adj
vance of the time appointed by himself
FOR its Dromulgation in the usual and
proper way, Neither faith nor credit
can attach to an opinion under such cir
,unfstances.
Since il was never properly filed, it
MAS deemed best to disregard il and di-
rect new trial; this was done. The
law which justifies the action of the de-
pariment may be found in the statutes
IF the United States and the decisions
Of IT'S supreme court. The leading case
m the subject, Knight VS.. Land Asso-
wherein Mr.. Justice Lamar says: The
Ration. is found in 142 r. s., page IS,
statutes, III placing the whole business
IF the department under the supervis-
lon of the secretary. invest him with ai-
thorTty to review, reverse, amend, an
nul or affirm all proceedings in the de- |
partment having for their ultimate OBJ |
ject to secure the alienation of any por-
ton Of the public land or adjustment of |
private claims TO lands with a just re- |
gard TO the rights of the public and of |
private parties. Such supervision may |
be exercised by direct orders or by re- |
Wow on appeals. When proceedings af- |
fec:ing titles to lands are before the de- |
p2rtnert the power Of supervision may |
be exercised by the secretary, whether /
the proceedings are called to his atten- |
ton by formal notice or by appeal The
rules prescribed are designed to facii- |
tate the department in the dispatch of |
business. not 10 defeat the supervision of
the secretary.
ORDER OF CANCELLATION.
I'll Y |