Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1904-03-30
Register and Receiver Of the Land
Office Settle Long Standing
Land Quarrel,
UNsuRvEyEo LAND IN DISPUTE
Decision a Comprehensive One and
Covers Some Important Points
A. C. Logan the Loser.

land entry NUS. lZff ana lao, was
delivered by the register and receiver
last Saturday, the decision being in
favor of the claimant.
The land involved In the controyer-
sy was lots 2 and 3. sec 5. tp IL n,
|r IL e. On August 2S. the date set
for hearing the application for
Knapp's final proof, Logan appeared
and filed affidavit OF protest against
the allowance of final proof, alleging
priority of settlement. David NJ.
Mikelson also filed a protest against
Logan's d. l.. z. No. 1445, but later
ii was determined that Logan's en-.
try did not conflict with the land
claimed by Mikelson and the protest
was withdrawn and Logan submitted
final proof.
The protest of Logan rs. Knapp
was heard Nov. IL, 1903. Both par
ties claimed to have settled upon
and improved the land in conflict pre-
vious to filing, Knapp having made
improvements on the northern and
Logan on the southern portion. They
have been q%uarreling over the posses
sion for years, until finally an order
issued from the district court forbid
ding either to interfere with the 9th
er, pending proceedings In the land
office. r. Won Tobel appeared for Lo'
gan and Huntoon. Worden & Smith
for the claimant, Knapp. The decis.
ion in full, was as follows:
Settlement upon unsurveyed land
with the intention of eventually filing
upon it as a desert claim confers nc
right. The right to reclaim land un'
der the desert land act is initiated by
filing the declaratory statement and
the payment of twenty-five cents pei
acre. Knapp's filing was made May
81, 1900; Logan did not file until De
cember IL, 1900. Without reference
to the description of the unsurveyed
portion Of Knapp's entry, when tip II
n. r II e. is surveyed, he will have
the first right to adjust his entry to
the lines of survey, pending which, by
virtue of his priority of filing he is
entitled to the possession of the lands
he has located and reclaimed. what
ever may eventually be found to be
its legal subdivisions.
What land he has located and re
claimed we can only determine from
the plat filed in connection with
Knapp's final proof, and the testi
mony submitted.
From this 1t appears that part Of
the land he alleges to have located
and reclaimed joins the seh sell. see
81, and the sk seA, sec 80. tip 10 n
r II e, upon the south.
Claimant testifies that he owns and
controls and has a clear right to the
use of sufficient water to irrigate all
of the irrigable portions of his entry
and keep it permanently irrigated
That there are five bitches coming
from the various springs on the land
adjacent. and reservoirs of adequate
size to carry sufficient water to ir
rigate the land, and that the tota
cost of reclamation. including fenc
ing surrounding the land, cross
fences and cultivation. exceeds three
dollars per acre. This testimony Is
all c~orroborated by the witnesses
Mikkelson, Killman and Thelan
While it does not appear that much
cultivation has been done upon the
eighty acres in contest, yet It Is
shown that about forty acres in all
has cen plowed and cultivated upor
the entry. Neither does it appear
that the southern portion of the 81
acres in contest has been reclaimed
by claimant. This is explained by tn,
quarrels of these litigants as to pos
session, contestant appearing to have
held possession of the southern por
ton.
The water right filed with the fina
proof of claimant consists OF a water
right filed by claimant in 1895. Of
fifteen inches of the waters Of two
certain springs in the northeast quar-
ter of the northeast quarter of sec
tion six, tip IL n, r IL e, Mont. p. M.
for use on the swA swA, sec 30, par
of claimants presumption. and which
| lie ItSliutS was dltCt tAltuuta
to his desert entry. In addition, i
appears that he has used the waters
of four other springs to reclaim tn,
land.
The testimony of contestant and hi.
witnesses chiefly relates to the ex
tent and valuation of his improve
ments upon the land alleged TO be Ii
conflict and upon the balance of his
entry, and to his date of settlement
Both parties claim the fence on thu
south OF the land in conflict, the only
testimony controverting the amount
of water and size of bitches Is thai
of contestant. and refers to the re
clamation of the eighty acres in con
iict.
We are OF the opinion from the
testimony submitted that the eighty
acres adjoining the swA swh. sec 80
and the seA seA. sec 81, tip l3 n
+ II e, Mont. p. NJ. upon the south
is part OF desert entry No. 1244 o
Lauren B. Knapp, made May 81, 1900
and that any portion OF d. i. e. No
1445. of Albert C. Logan, made De
cember IL. 1900. conflicting there
with. should be Cancelled, and tina
the final proof Of Lauren b. Knapp
submitted upon ID. l.. E. No. 1914
should be approved upon his film
record evidence of his right to tn
use of sufficient waters Of the differ
ent springs testified to, to reclaim
the land.