The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-06-24
GOOD, FAT LEASE
WAS HANDED OUT
How Valuable Iron Lands Were
Leased Before State Secured
Patent.

Great credit is claimed by Mr..
Dunn and his press agents, for his
action in claiming the celebrated flat
iron" mineral tract near Virginia as
swamp land.
This is the celebrated lot /, section
6, township 587a, range u, still in con-
troversy between the interior depart
ment, being claimed by wisconsin.
lieved to be worth 100000 to the
state in royalties, tho it has not been
developed yet.
The question has now been raised.
whether the state or certain private
individuals close to Mr.. Dunn, will
eral rights to this tract. AS far as the
swamp land selection goes, that was
the merest routine proceeding by Mr..
Dunn. All surveys, are filed with the
auditor, and it is his duty, and the
practice Of the office, to put in
survey to be swamp. That was all
Mr.. Dunn had to do with the transac-
ton, except to grant the lease.
This lease is held by Mabel Evans
of Princeton. Miss Evans is a sis
ter of Isaac Patterson, who was as
sistant land clerk in the auditors
office until the close Of Mr.. Dunn's
administration, and is now in the land
business in partnership with George
Finn, who was head land clerk during
the same period. Mr.. Flinnn is acting
as Miss Evans attorney.
| Public Had No Chance.
| The original lease was issued Dec.
80, 1902, or about three days before
Mr.. Dunns term of office expired.
The tract had then been claimed as
swamp by the state, but, had not been
patented. No patent has been re-
ceived yet, but under the terms Of the
/ a onr Of q ma q
next year, which is now supposed to be
in force. The general public did not
know the tract was open for state
lease. If that fact had been adver-
| tised, there would no doubt have been
rival claimants for the lease, it would
have been sold at auction, and no one
knows how high it would have been
bid. 10
Action Of Dubious Legality.
The fact is, however, that the lease
and contract are issued contrary to
1 express provisions Of law as inter-
/ preted by the supreme court Of Min
i nesota. The auditor has no right to
Tissue a mineral lease for lands not
absolutely belonging to the state.
/ Section 4076, General Statutes of
7 1884, provides:
! 1.-THE commissioner of the landoffice
LOT the state of Minnesota is hereby
/ authorized to execute leases and con-
ltracts for the mining and shipping OF
liron ore from any lands now belong
i ing to the state, or from any lands to
(which the state may hereafter acquire
title, subject to the considerations
hereinafter provided"
In the case of Baker VS.. Jamison
81 Mimi, II, Of So N. W. Rep, 749
the supreme court says:
This act is applicable only to lano
i hQ1nnping to the state. and not to Anl1b-
l. lie lands Of the United States which
have been merely Selected by the state
{ to supply deficiencies. in the rschoo
81 land, which selections have not beer
y approved by the secretary of the int
3 rior; hence applications for lease!
filled with the land commissions
prior to the approval of the selection
z are premature, andsof no legal effect
tho recognized by the commissioner.
4 In spite Of this law and ruling O.
{ the court, the lease was issued TO-
| the sum Of $25, and the contract i
: now. held for the sum Of 500 a year
: If the contract were valid, or if tn,
, point was not raised and it was al
: lowed to become operative, then tn
holder could take out all Of the vas
deposit Of ore, and pay the state
royalty of 25 cents a ton. If tn
holder of the contract does not wan
;. Ito operate the mine, it can be turne'
. over to the steel trust or some othe
: operator, and the sublessee will the1
: pay the states royalty, and also I
: royalty to the holder Of the lease an
5 contract. Several such deals hav
! been made in the past.
4 It is claimed that the contract
held by Miss Evans solely in her oW:
9 interest, and her name is the onl
7 one appearing on the books, but tn
: interest taken in the claim by the firr
t of Finn & Patterson has aroused con
( siderable comment. jt< The question i
: also raised, how did the holder of tn
lease and contract learn of this splen
9 did opportunity for making man
= thousands at an expenditure of a fey
! hundred dollars?