The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-12-07
ST|MSON COMPANY LOSES.
Ever Brought In the Federal
Coart-In Lane With the Alger De-
eision In Cfrcuft Court Of Appeals.

The stinson Land Company has lost the
great sui. that It brought In the Federal
court several years ago. by which 1t sought
to recover possession Of timber land in the
vicinity Of Lake waatcom valued at
quarter OF million dollars.
In the Federal court yesterday afternoon
Judge c. II. Hanford decided the case
against the company. He c;d not render a
lengthy opinion. but simply made . few
remarks, and closed by announcing the
conclusions he had reached In the case.
There was q great crowd OF interested
lawyers IN the court room when Judge
Hanford made his decision They had
been notified by the court 70 be present.
The case is one Of the most important ever
brought In the Federal court Of this state
and was the hardes, fought land case In
the history OF the Northwest.
The land involved has been In litigation
for years. but IL the decision Of the court
stands and there II every reason to believe
that IL win. the vast timber tracts VIII be
In the legal possession OF q dozen or more
poor men Judge Hanford's decision In in
accordance with a decision of the circuit
court OF appeals rendered In the famous
Alger case, from this state, in which were
involved precisely the same points as in
the Stimson case. The story OF the Slim
son struggle for the possession OF the land
has been told many times, having been be-
fore the courts and before the Washington
authorities on many occasions. In 1887
about seventeen men entered upon the
timber lands, considered the best in the
state After these entrymen had made
their entries and before patents had issued
they transferred their interests to Thomas
6timson. OF Los Angeles and Hugh Park
OF Michigan, two OF the largest lumber men
In the country. Some time later Stimson
purchased Parks interest, and later trans
ferred his entire interest to the Stimson
Land Company
Reports that there had been frauds In
connection with the matter reached Wash
ington, and as q result a special land agent
was sent West TO investigate. He spent
some weeks on the Coast, and when he re-
turned East. II II said he made a report
In which he recommended that the entries
Of the original entrymen be cancelled. The
government acted On the advice Of the sps-
cial agent. and after some months the en-
tries were cancelled. II was charged that
the entrymen had obtained the land by
fraud against the government In that they
had gone upon the land not for the purpose
OF securing possession for themselves. but
as the representatives Of Stimson and
Parks. It was alleged that it was nothing
more nor less than scheme Of Parks
and Stimson to get possession OF the Inn
mense body Of timber land by practicing
fraud on the United States government.
After the land department had ruled
against the original entrymen the land
was again thrown open 20 settlers, and
Joseph B. Clark, Michael Cannon, John
Rae. z. L. Gaudetts, John Rice. Charles
Rice and others took possession Of 1t
under the entry laws Of the United States.
The stimson Land Company waited until
these men had secured their patents and
then went into the Federal court and
brought suits in equity. claimed the land
In dispute, and asked the court to declare
that Clark and tha others held possession
Of the land as trustees for them. 1t was
the legal contention Of thu company that
they were innocent purchasers OF the land.
Later the charge that Parks and Stimson
had sent the original entrymsn to take
possession OF the land for them was denied.
A great legal flght followed. Charles X.
Jenner. who is considered an authority on
land law. was retained BY the mill COM
pany TO fight the case. John +. Dore.
Richard SAKE Jones. Gorham & 0orham
and Kerr & McCord represented the de-
PENDANTS. During the summer and fall OF
1885 voluminous testimony was taken in
the case before Judge Eben Smith. United
States master in chanesry. Then came the
arguments before Judge Hanford. which
were made by Jenner and Dore, and which
consumed two or three days.
Judge Hanford took the cases under ad-
visement on January Q. 1897. He would
have rendered the decision long ere this.
but the great Alger case had been appealed
TO the circuit court Of appeals. and 90 the
questions involved were Identical with
those IN the Stimson cases the decision OF
the higher court was waited for. 1t came
down In October last. The circuit court
held that Alger was not entitled TO the land
involved.
Judge Hanford in deciding tho case yes
terday said be would hold In effect that q
party in order 10 be entitled to land taken
from the government must show the same
title 10 II when seeking possession before
the court as when seeking to get possession
IN the land Office. That the plaintiffs fall
ed TO do.