Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1901-01-23
DESERT LAND R~tOlRtMtNJS.
Review Of the Decisions Concerning Char
dCter Of Land, Irrigation and
Cultivation.

Review Of the Decisions Concerning Char
aCter Of Iand, Irrigation and
Cultivation.
The following excerpt Is taken from
the decision OF the register and re-
cciver OF the local land Office in he
case Of Lindsey vs.. Allan and the
points covered being applicable to all
deser. entries and somewhat novel,
we quote the findings in full:
The act of March 3, 1877, providing
for the sale OF desert lands, second
section, provides that all lands, ex-
elusive Of timber lands and mineral
lands. which will not without arti
fetal irrigation produce some agri-
cultural crop shall be deemed desert
lands within the meaning Of this act"
The third section provides that the
determination Of what may he con-
.idprcl desert land shall be subject to
the decision aud regulation ui the
commissioned al the general land
Office.
1t Is therefore prescribed:
First, lands bordering upon
streams, lakes or other natural bod
les ~ water, or through or upon
which there is any river, stream,
arroyo, lake, pond, body Of water.
or living spring, are not subject TO
entry under the desert land law until
the clearcst proofof their desert char
actcr Is furnished"
Second, lands which produce ma
tive GRASSES sufficient ia quantity il
unfcd by grazing animals to make an
ordinary crop ri hay in usual seasons
are not desert lands.
Third. Lands which will produce
an agricultural crop OF any kind in
amounts reasonably rcmuncratiye
are not desert.
Fourth. Lands containing suili-
cicnt moisture To produce Il natural
growth oi trees ore not to be classed
az desert lands.
The act Of March =, 1891, added five
sections thereto providing for the fill
ing OF maps, association of persons
to construct irrigating bitches, the
filing ui annual proofs of cXpendi-
lures aud submitting final prOofWith-
ia certain statutory periods.
1t therefore appears that in order
to effect the cancellation ui n desert
land entry one of the following facts
must be proven:
That the land Is not desert In char
acter.
That the necessary annualeXpcndi-
turc has not been performed.
That proof Of annual expenditure
has not been fled.
That final proof was not made
within the statutory periods.
That the land has not been re-
claimed il accordance with the desert
land laws.
Thatit was appropriated, occupied
and settled upon by anyone legally
qualified 10 appropriate lands under
the different land laws.
Illcgality ur fraud in the inception
OF the entry.
Claimant and his witnesses, when
cling upon the land Ia contest, swore
that said land has hitherto been I'M
appropriated, unoccupied and un-
settled upon, because it has been i'm
possible to cultivate il successfully
on account of its dry and arid condi-
ton"
The plat filed in connection with
this contest shows Coffee creek to
flow through the center Of the land,
and witnesses testify To part Oi the
land as being bottom land"
We are therefore oi the opinion,
after carefully reviewing the evidence
In this case, that the land embraced
in desert land entry 1904 comes with
in the first clause of departmental
regulations; that therefore the bur-
den of proof To show that the land IL
desert In character is upon the claim
ant, and that the clearest proof Of
its desert character has not been
shown,
That reasonably remuneratiye
crops have been raised thereon since
1887: that therefore the land is not
desert In character.
That the land contains sufficient
moisture to produce natural growth
Of trees, and therefore il not desertin
character.
That The unsurveyed portion has
been appropriated, occupied and set
tied upon by contestant and the wit
ness, Angus McGillivray, previous to
and ut the date OF claimants entry
Of the land.
That for the foregoing reasons des-
ert land entry No. 1904 should be can
celled. 1t is so decided.
Says lie Was Tortured.
~ suffered such pain from cOrns |