The Meeker herald. [volume] (Meeker, Colo.) 1885-current, 1903-09-26
The Other Viewpoint.


E. w. Senior of the law firm of
Higgins 4 senior of Salt Lake City,
spent couple Of days In Meeker this
week attending to legal matters.
This firm has been engaged to look
after the interests of the Wells,
Fargo company in connection with
the Lily park controversy.
AS this is a matter Of much interest
to u large number of our readers,
The HERALD asked Mr.. Senior for
some facts in the case rs viewed from
his side of the controversy. This he
kindly consented to give substantially
az follows:
II do not know that either side to
this controversy differs materially ~
to any of the real facts in the case"
1.-THE present occupants of the lands
in question claim that these lands
are not the lands described In the
patents under which your company
claim title?' was asked Mr.. Senior.
'Do you mean to say that you admit
rs much?'
''To be candid with you will say
that our surveyors have been unable
to find any official government corner
that would enable us to say that our
patents correctly describe the lands
referred to-"
do you believe that the lands filed
upon by the present occupants and so
described in their papers respectively
correctly describes the premises in
question:?
81 believe they think SO; they may
be right In their conclusions"
$50 you expect your clients will be
able to recover these lands?"
II do" =
"Upon what theory do you expect
your clients to recover?"
"Upon the theory that under the
supervisory power Of the secretary Of
the interior as head of the land de-
partment, he has all the powers for
protection Of equities arising from
fraud, accident, mistake, past per-
formance, or other head of equitable
Jurisdiction, that u court of chancery
would have"
"But strictly speaking, as matter
Of law, II the Wells, Fargo Company's
patents describe lands other than the
lands in question, do you believe they
will be able to hold the Lily park
lands a. against the present occYr
Fpants.'' ~
"Yes, irrespective Of whether
the description in the patents
is right or wrong. There seems
to be no question that these lands for
the past twenty years have been
claimed and occupied by those who
believed their title to be good, per-
haps under the mistaken belief that
the descriptions Of the lands were
correctly set forth in the patents, but
under the law no rights are acquired
under the settlement laws by an un-
lawful trespass on the undisputed
and known possessions Of another,
who believes his title to be good.
Not alone in Routt county but all
over the west the government surveys
made In early days have been the
source of trouble and contention.
However the law aims to do justice to
all claimants and preserve the rights
Of the people Of the United States.
The rule Of law is that a settlement
cannot be made upon public land al
ready occupied, and the reasoning of
the supreme court of the United
States in all such cases forbids the
invasion of the actual possession of
another maintained under claim and
color of title"
The case will come up for hearing
at the Glenwood land Office on De-
cember IA, 1903, and Mr.. Senior thinks
it will be settled one way or the
other within the coming year.