The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1901-04-19
IMPORTANT
OKLAHOMA
DECISIONS
Acting Secretary Ryan Gives
Opinions in Land Contests.
IN KICKAPOO COUNTRY
Secretary Hitchcock Also
Gives an Opinion.

Guthrie o. T. April il.-Three import
ant decisions have been handed down by
authorities at Washington regarding land
contests in Oklahoma Washington cor
respondence says:
Acting Secretary Of the Interior Ryan
has handed down decision in the con
tested land case of Charles n. Leniger
Archie Canada and others versus Isaac
\. Richards. in which case the land office
with its letter OF March last transmit
ted e motion for review OF the depart
ment decision Of November Is, 1900. a mo-
ton for review was fled by Laniger in
the local land Office January last, but
was not transmitted TO the land Office IN.
til March 20.
The tract OF land IN question is a part
! Of the Kickapoo reservation which was
/ opened to settlement May %. 1885. and
thereafter James T. Richards made home
/ stead entry Of said tract This contro-
versy arose upon a contest brought by
Archie Canada against the entry alleging
priority OF settlement. Subsequently,
Leninger fled a second contest alleging
/ that he was prior settler and a hearing
was ordered to determine the rights of
the several claimants Before the hear
ing Richards relinquished his entry and
at the hearing Canada and Leninger were
the only claimants on record. The local
officers could not determine which was
the prior settler but they found IN favor
of Leninger because he had followed up
his settlement by establishing a residence
on the land and Immediately and that
he was not disqualified from making en-
try by reason Of any advantage gained by
his entering the territoryeduring the pro.
hibited period. They recommended that
Leniger be allowed to make entry of the
tract
Canada appealed and the land Office by
decision August !. 1900. reversed the ac-
ton Of the local Office and held that len
iger was disqualified from making ent-y
by reason Of the advantage gaind by him
by being in the territory during the pro-
hibited period. No decision was made as
allowing Canada TO enter the land. but it
was held that his right to max entry
would be subject to further investigation
should he offer to perfect his entry. Up
on appeal of Leuiger the department by
decision Of November 2S, affirmed the de-
ger was disqualified by reason Of the adj +
vantage gained by him by being in the /
territory during the prohibited period
After thoroughly reviewing the case, +
the acting secretary denies the motion
Acting Secretary Ryan has also handed .
down decision in the contesteland case
Of Ernest Q. MoOTes VS.. Jasper n. Baker. /
in which Moorcs has filed a motion for
review Of the department decision OF +
November 10, 1900. which affirmed the de-
cision Of the land Office Of February Il. +
1900, dismissing HIS contest against the
homestead entry OF Baker for lot OF
the east half Of the southeast quarter
and the southwest quarter OF the south
east quarter Of section twenty-five, own
ship twelve, north range. FIVE west, Ok
lahoma land district Oklahoma
All the matters set forth as a basis
FOR the motion were carefully considered
by the land Office and the department
when the case was before each on the
appeal OF Moores. The determination Of
the department OF said matters was an
nounced BY its formal afirmance OF the
decision Of the land Office.
Upon a fun consideration Of the mo-
ton for review and the specification OF
errors no good reason is seen for disturb
ing conclusions heretofore reached No
new mater being suggested the motion
for review is denied.
Secretary Hitchcock has handed down
a decision in the contested land case OF
Bertha c. Poole vs.. Christian ). Ber-
ger, involving the southeast quarter sec
ton four, township twenty-oae, range
mort 2 east Perry land district. Okla
homa. for which Berger made home
stead entry on September o. 1883. and
IN which case Poole has fled a motion
for a review or reheaving.
On September 90 1888. Bertha Chapman
initiated a contest against Berrer-s en-
Try on the ground OF prior settlement
haring was had. both parties appar-
ne and submitting testimony. The local
lfleers found in favor OF Berger. The {
contestant appealed 20 the land Office j
lquice where, on December p. 1895. a de- :
'ision Of the local officers ami on further
appeal, the Department or March 81 1877.
endered a decision Affirming the decision g
4 the land Office
The contestant FLED = motion for a Re-
Few Of the departmental decision. which Z
notion was denied ~ departmental de-
ision o. May >. l,el. The contestant
lied petition FOR a rehearine and on
April p. lse@. a Tehea-ing Vas ordered II z
Re department 70 determine which OF zoe r
4rtles was prior setter on the iand. The I
oc4l officers were unable % determine d,
witch party was prior settler and they -
therefore,, recommended that the land lr
uestion ~ divided between the parties 2
10th parties appealed 20 the land Office. q
7hefe. on November - fs9 p deeislon s
'as rendered in favor ~ Berger dssrnfs-
'ng the contest and holding hts entry fn- o.
ACT TIE contestant aesin appealed 20 ,
b. department where ~ December = 1
90 decision vas rendered affirming 2
be dec-si7n ~ the leud Office. IRE c1n- q
sstsut filed motion fcs rsvie1. Rhlch
'as denied bv departmental decision ~
anuarF a. 1901 she has roe fIed az
.teTustige motion for review or rehsar- 81
~, and The same o. before ths derzrr- =.
.e1r fQr cersifsraflc0.
Atter giTi-g the matter careful cerrle- Z
ration. the secretary fiErnisses IRE case =
5 lgGo#ss l
There Re no sufficient reason To- as ~
1rulrg The declEiaa alrtzEy rendered. rr n
" granting Fehssrirg - fhf case ans f-
De- motion IS Therefore dsniss-
Purity ths heed and inTizo-sfs the r.
asy ~ uanE De WIFE little Eas.v
lsera. re fssuoas hstlz r-1s scr c.szns-
9