The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-07-28
THE SALT LAKE HERALD SATURDAY. July 2s 1906

iinsits OF said land to our knowledge any
p.cceT, cement, gravel, gilsonite. elaterite,
asphaltuni or other valuable mineral de-
positi that the land contains no SAT-
spring or deposits of salt in any form
sufficient to render II valuable therefor,
that no portion of said land IS claimed
for mining purposes under the local Gus
toms or rules of miners. or otherwise,
that no portion of said lands is worked
Tor minerals during any part OF the year
by any person or persons, that said land
is essentially nOn-mineral land, and that
our application therefor is not made for
the purpose of fraudulently obtaining III
tie to mineral land. but with the object
of securing said land for agricultural pur-
poses, and the above and foregoing state
ments as TO the character OF said land
apply to each and every legal subdivision
thereof. That the said selections and
those pending. together with those APP
proved do not exceed the total amount
granted to the state for the purpose
named
These so-caIIed affidavits were m each
instance subscribed by the president and
secretary as agents for the state board OF
land commissioners. and were sworn TO
by such officers before notary public.
Affidavits Declared False.
"Your orator AYERS and expressly
charges that to such portions OF SAID
printed sworn statements as are COLI
tanned in the following language, that
priated,. and are not inteTdicted, mineral
nor reserved lands, and are of the charac-
ter contemplated by the grant in said act,
the allegation that they were vacant and
unappropriated was correct, but the re-
mainder was false and without founda-
ton in fact; and. in truth, an impartial
and even superficial examination or that
portion of the land concerned IN this SUIT
would have so determined that as TO the
statement that we have caused the lards
mentioned to be carefully examined by
agents and employees of the state as 10
their mineral or agricultural character,
such statements were also false, IN that
no person was on had been employed 10
examine said lands, to ascertain Their
mineral or agricultural character, and no
agent of the stale had made such exam
nation, and there was no foundation for
such statement other than by the repre-
sentatives of the persons in the employ OF
the defendant and acting to procure SAID
lands by and through sthe state from COM
plainant for defendant; that as TO that
portion of said printed statement IN eacn
case that there is not to our knowledge
within the limits thereof (meanlng SAID
land) any vein or lode OF quartz or 0thef
rock in place bearing gold, silver. CHINA
bar lead, tin or copper or any deposit oil
coal any placer, cement, gravel, gilsonlte.
elaterite aSphaltum or other valuable
mineral deposit; that the land contains 40
salt springs or deposit of salt IN any FORM
sufficient to render it valuable therefor,
err said president nor secretary had per-
sonally or by and through any member OF
the said board or any emplOye OF Salu
state or aay agent of theirs, made any eX-
animation or investigation as to the pres
ence or absence in or from said lands or
the various miners or substances named
by them, il must be and hereby IS IuiIy
admitted that this portion of their afflda-
Wit setting forth that they had no knoWl-
edge is truthful and correct; that as 10
that part of said printed statesmen that
no portion of said land is claimed Tor min
ing purposes, under the local customs or
rules of miners or otherwise; tnat no puf-
ton is worked for minerals during any
part of the year by any person or per
sons your orator AYERS and charges that
said president and secretary mad no pei
sonal knowledge whether the same was
true or not for want of having mace eA-
animation of said hand, and that upon the
trial of this suit your orator Will produce
evidence in writing, signed by said secIe-
tary to an officer of complainant. dis
claiming any duty or ODlSatlOn upon tiie
part of said state board to make examlnd-
ton in like cases; that, as to the portion
of said statement which says, that salu
land is essentially non-mlneral lana, II
was untrue in so far as respects the landS
herein concerned. the same being at the
time known as coal lands; tnat, as 10 ina.
portion of said statement which says, tnai
our application therefor (meanlng Salu
IandS) is not made for the purpose OF
land, but with the object OF securing sdlu
lands for agricultural purposes, your ora
tor says that it may or may not nave
been true as to either sad presldehL Vi
cerned; that it is certainly true that
neither of said officials, for their OWL
possession or ownership, desired salo
lands or any portion thereof nor a.
agents of the board for the ownership and
benefit of the state Of Titan, because
when making such statements they nae
already bargalned SAID. iahds 10 4eLeHu-
ants agent, but your orator says lIlat lIt
WeIl-knCWn occupation Of SAID RoDerl
Forester as geOlogist for the defendant
the connection of said Forester with ths
other FOrresters and the relations sus-
tanned bv each of the other entrymen tC
defendant, was sufficeit TO put SAID presl-
dent and secretary upon inquiry ana &c
have satisfied them that SAID forfesterS
the several women making applcaloi's
and the other employees OF defenfant ma
no agricultural intentions. 1ous oIato5i
AYERS that, as to the part OF SAID printed
sworn statement and the above ana lore,
going statements as to the character OF
said land apply to each and every Iega
subdivision thereof, the same is nhe Illt vi,
other portions of said statement, without
foundation in fact or in the knowledge OF
said president and secretary
State Aided in Deceit.
~ Your orator further shows that the
!
land office at Salt Lake City, within
whose district the lands herein concerned
are situated, received from the sa1d staty
hoard the list containing descriptions OF
land involved herein, and forwarded THEM
as was their duty, to the commissioner OIL
complainant's general land ofIlce, VIII
Mutations thereon indOrsed by them, tht'
certain of said lands we're mineral II
character as appears from the pldts, pa
ners and books in their office, but SO Il
was as YOUR orator AYERS and charges
that the officials and employees OF sale
general land office were unduly Impressed
nv the fact that the state OF Utah was
applicant for such lands ana hao ne
| knowledge or suspicion that Saiu pTesI
dent and secretary, acting as agents o.
| tho state board had contracted TO sci
| said lands in advance, and did not know
! that no employe or agent OF the state "
| Utah had Investigated and examined SAT-
! lands. and that such eXamlnauon II any
ever was made had been entrusted TO th'
very nersonss who had been procured L
| defraud complainant of its lands IN TN
! interests of defendants, and tnat what
| ever action said persons did take was 10
| the purpose of defrauding and falsely rep
/ resenting to said state board the charac
| ter and conditions of said lands to enabl'
| said state board to have some foundatol
of fact upon which to base their d1fect
nositive and unequivocal assertions OF
oath and that the state or Utdh, Den1S 81
] IMPRESSIVE in it's functions as appllcan
| for portions of the land grant by congress
| for beneficial purposes to said state, TN
| officers and employees of said general ian'
| office were led to believe in the regular
| itv. honesty and good faith OF SAID state
/ and to overlook the fact that upon I'll
| face of each and every of said printed am
/ sworn statements it was made CERTAIN
! that the affiants had no personal knOWi
| edge of that which they positively assert
ed and no knowledge which gave 1orce L