The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1905-04-13

4 ! NESOTA, THURSDAY, AP
malded settlement from the Akeley
Luz her company and did actually
co14ct SO, 233.65, which was practically
S2.a per M. or fifty per cent more
tha4 the cruisers or stumpage value.
Ater a careful consideration of the
eVlqence and records of the State land
Office and the collateral evidence in
the nearing, your committee is of the
opinion that while it is true that in
each and. every trespass case double
or treble stumpage value was not OBJ
tanned, it can nevertheless be truth
fully said that. and in our Judgment,
Dunn and Iverson made the best set
Element possible, the State actually
received much more than the value of
the timber, thus proving that the State
wassa gamer instead of a loser. Mr..
Johnson's testimony before the COM
mlttee sustains this view of the above
summary, inasmuch as he admitted in
his testimony that he did not claim the
State did not get full value for the
timber in trespass, but that the legal
penalty Of double and treble damages
were not obtained in every instance.
CASES SELECTED BY MIR. JOHN
SON.
One of the difficult problems that
CONFRONTED your committee was how to
arrlse at an equitable and just solu-
tionpf the consideration of the many
cases involved in Mr.. Johnson's re-
port To do justice to the State audi
torsa as we'll as to the public exam
lner3n his report, it would seem al
most an endless task to consider them
all. 4 A solution of this problem was
arrifed at by a member of the COM
mittee who suggested that Auditor
lverson and Mr.. johnson each pick
twenty cases and submit the same
for TIE committee IS consideration, these
twenty five cases being in addition to
the large number of cases investigated
by The committee. This agreement
was acquiesced in by Mr.. Johnson.
but.Air. Iverson declared that heghad
no select cases but would prefer hav-
ing eae committee pick at their pleas
ure Whatever cases they mi ht choose
IN the public examiners report.
Under this arrangement, Mr.. John
son Submitted the following cases:
Section % and %, T. 1876, r. 80
called the &C. Miller Trespass Case. !"
twas alleged by Mr.. Johnson that
no effort had been made by the audi
tor Ito institute legal proceedings
;agahkt Miller. The evidence and the
- efoa.es the canaapi ttee show,
that criminal proceedings were started
in justice court in Otter Tail county
and failed for want of evidence.
In case Is, AS, 30, Mr.. Johnson
claimed that all the dead and down
timber should be paid for at SO per
M. feet, permit price. The evidence
before the committee was that 2, 1923, 1870
feet was merchantable pine and $685.
OlO feet was dead and down, the latter
not being merchantable pine was set
tied for at S. per M. feet. The balance
settled for at permit price of SO. The
contention of the auditor being that
the permit was only for merchantable
timber, that SO per M. could not be
secured by the State for dead and
down timber. Your committee be-
lieves that had this sale not been made
for the dead and down timber at So
per NJ, little chance would have ex-
listed for the sale of such timber after
the merchantable timber had been cut
off.
While this permit was taken out in
the name of G. J. johnson, the actual
permit holder was C. A. Smith of Min
neapolis: who paid the State for the
timber when the same was cut.
BUCHANAN TRESPASS CASE.
This was a trespass of 2, 848, 094 feet
from five different sections in the
northern part of St. Louis and Itasca
counties.
The estimator IS value of the timber
was S., 351. O3. 1t was cut during the
logging season of 1898-99, at which
time Mr.. Buchanan was o State sena-
tor. Mr.. Buchanan himself first re-
ported the trespass to the State audi
tor. 1t was shown that Mr.. Buchanan
had purchased four forties of timber
land in section 16-69-2O from home
steader who squatted on the land be-
fore survey.
After a conference with the timber
board. it was agreed to accept 49,
35l.O3 in settlement. On January II,
1902, $4,000 was paid on account, and
on July !, 1902, another payment of
$1,000 is recorded as part payment.
(See auditors report 1902, pages 26
and % Tho now, ;n1or QS1 no