Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1897-05-27
SCRIP is NO GOOD.
So Far a. Chicago Lake From,
Land 10 Concerned.
LANoREAuV DE01s1oH REVERSED

And Holders Of Millions IN Chicago Real
Of Herman's Opinion-First Vote on the
Tariff Bill Gives Victory to the ssnate
Finance Committss-Lse Has Plenty Of
Money for Americans In Cuba.
Washington, May 27.-Chicago's ia
nous lake front land case, involving
property worth over SIS. o0o. 900. was yes
terday decided by Land Commissioner
Herman in favor Of the present holders
Of the land. Plaintiffs who sought (and
through the United States supreme court
doubtless will continue to seek) to OBJ
tain possession OF the land. are Harvey
N. La Toilette and Matthias Benner.
They endeavored to locate the so-called
Mckee scrip on the land. The commits
sioner's decision allows the patent rem.
dered to Robert A. Kinzie in 1921 to
stand.
Plat Included the Shore Line.
The decision covers twenty-five pages
OF typewriter matter. and is full Of
references and authorities. After recit-
ing at length a history Of the case, he
says:
Careful examination Of al the EVIL
dence before me fails to convince me CT
the correctness Of the scrip applicants
contention. TIE plat OF survey of the
land was made from the field notes made
pursuant to law, and these notes make
reference to the east line of the fraction
al section. and the meander on the lake.
The survey ordered has no authority
by law to establish any other line than
the shore or water line. This meander
. must therefore have represented the
boundary-the east boundary Of the
fractional section.
Omitted Mono OF tho Land
There could have been no Intervening
"trip or tract Of land between this boun-
dairy and the water line, since the sur
vey could extend no further. That the
meander line and the boundary line are
Identical is made doubly clear by the
plats OF survey, which make the con-
tour OF the lake correspond with the lam
suage Of the field notes. The meander
line shows the water line Of the lake.
Nor has any motive been suggested
why this should not have been shown.
There Is no apparent reason why the
United States should have omitted from
the survey twenty acres or any Of the
land reaching to the water line Had
1t done so IL would have disregarded
and violated the law.
Land Formed Later by Accretion.
1T thus appears to be well established
that the bank and the water are correla.
tive and that one cannot be owned with
out touching the other: that the bank is
the principal object. so that, when the
law once hxes the proprietorship of that.
the soil OF the river follows. AS to any
land which may have formed after the
entry and to the date of Kinzie's patent,
II must be held that such Injured to the
owner Of the main land, since the title
by patent related back and took effect
from his entry. Having found that said
lands are not public lands Of the United
states, 1t is unnecessary to determine
further as to the titles of the parties"
Lamoreaux's Decision Not Final
Herman, referring to the scrippers'
contention that Lamoreaux's decision
was final, said: 1.-The present honorable
secretary in directing a rehearing re-
scinded all previous rulings which might
be construed as approving the survey of
any other so far as it determined the
question whether the land was vacant
public lands Of the United States. Tohaye
determined go important a question by
q survey pending the order for a hear
Ing to determine the very question
would have been highly improper, not to
say so irregular as to render the approval
itself void