The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1898-10-12
JAMES REVERSED.
Court of Appeals Practically Reverses All
PravlOrs nocieynns

'Germania Iron company against
HOughtOn E. James and Charles w.
Hillard, involving lands in section 30,
will have important bearings in some
respects. In the first place it reverseS
the section 30 decisions Of every
branch of the land department and
Judge Lochren of the United States
circuit court. The decision will also
reverse the practice Of the govern
ment land Office in Duluth. This
decision holds that a decision at
Washington affecting lands IN any
district does not become effective till
that decision is received at the local
land Office and is there noted on the
tract book.
Up to the present If any person APP
peared at the local government land
office and announced that by some
decision at Washington certain
piece of land was made subject TO
entry by some decision or other ac-
tion on the part of the department
the applicant would be allowed to
file Immediately after making atfida-
Wit that such action had been taken
at Washington. The application
would be allowed to hold the land
subject to confirmation Of the report
ed decision. 1t is said to be possible
that the decision may affect other
lands on which filings have been
made under the impression that the
land was open for entry Immediately
after the decision declaring it so was
made in Washington.
The section 80 case is by long odds
the most celebrated land contest that
ever took place in this country. The
land is situated near Ely and is
described as the northwest quarter of
the southeast quarter OF 3O-63-l1.
This portion of the property is said
to be one of the most valuable OF that
which was in litigation. To refer to
the principal features Of the history
of the case Houghton E. James pro-
cured the right to enter the land in
the land department fight and filed a
homestead application. He subse-
quently relinquished his entry and
William Craig located PorCertield
scrip on the forty. The Germania
Iron company, plaintiffa appellant,
brought its bill in equity to have
Craig'S grantors declared trustees of
the title for its benefit on the ground
that the interior department erred in
constituting the law and in awarding
right of entry to James. To this bill
the defendants, who were the parties
claiming under the Crag title, demur-
red, alleging that the interior depart
ment was correct in its construction
of the law and very properly awarded
the right of entry to James On the
arguments Judge LOchren sustained
the demurrer and decreed dismiss al
of the bill, from which the Germania
Iron company appealed to the United
of ri rt nf
The main, if not the only point, in
the whole contention. was the legality
of the allowance by the interior de-
partment Of James entry, based on
his application, presented to the gov
eminent land Office in Duluth the day
after the secretary of the interior at
Washington cancelled the former
scrip entries on the land in question,
and several days before official notice
of the cancellation had arrived at the
Duluth land office. The Germania
Iron company asserted that no appli-
cation could be legally entertained at
the Duluth office till after the official
notice of the cancellation of a former
scrip entry had been received.
On the Craig side of the controversy
it was commended that an application
made any time after the decision of
cancellation has been made in Wash
ington would be the first legal appro-
priating of the land. This view was
taken of the matter by the interior
department and was sustained by
Judge Lochren of the United States
court. One of the interesting fea-
lures of the litigation has been regul-
arly with which the interior depart
ment has been sustained. The sue
cess of the Germania Iron company
therefore means the reversal OF not
only the trial judge but of the interior
department as well.
The litigation over section 30 has
been in progress since 1884. 1t is re-
garded as the most noted piece OF
interior department litigation on
record, with possibly one exception in
which an old Spanish grant was in
volved. The Craig forty is controlled
by the Bishop Iron company, one of
the corporations controlled by the
Minnesota Iron company. 1t is said
that the Germania Iron company and
its associates have expended a quarter
of a million dollars in litigating the
section 80 case, while the Minnesota
Iron company and people Identified
with that great corporation have eX-
Dended as much more. The Craig
forty was at one time estimated to be
worth from one to three million dol
lars, but that was in the boom days
of iron properties and before the
prices of ore declined to the extent
that independent miners were frozen
out. The only people that have any
definite idea OF what the section ~
property is worth are those that have
explored it since the Craig title was
made aud they are saying nothing
F., about it's value. The property has
never been developed. The freedom
with which money has been expended
in the litigation over the property
would seem TO indicate that it is very
valuable.
The attorneys for the appellants
were Walter Ayers and p. II. Sey-