The Rathdrum tribune. (Rathdrum, Idaho) 1903-1963, 1906-06-15

|
IL contestee was allowed to make the
purchase and that Is about ali there
Is to this case.
No adverse right to the land Ut
the water was asserted by protestant.
and no serious attempt was made u,
show that the forty acres has con.
siderable timber on 1t. The only
point made In that behalf is, that
the land Is SD steep that profit
could not be made out OF 1t at
present. 1t Is conceded that the
land has no value for agricultural
purposes, but IL is a desirable tract
because Of a spring OF water on 1t.
Upon the part Of the protestee It is
shuwt that the large timber could be
taken down the hill by means Of
chutes to saw mill On the next sec.
tion, that there Is a quantity OF
timber suitable for railroad ties and
at least 300 poles that can be sold
for telegraph and telephone poles at
from 81. 40 to $40 each aud ties for
s4c each and the cedar can be worked
up into shingle bUlts and shakes
valuable for covering buildings. Pro-
testee states that there are other
sources OF wuter supply and at one
time he tried to get the then WIN are
now complaining, to Join with him
In the construction of a general water
right, but they failed to do 80.
There was nU Testimony to prove
that protestee had leased the spring
to saw mill company, but that Is
immaterial as prUtestee Is not under
any obligation to supply his heighbors
with water.
You rendered decision finding
that the application to purchase was
! not made In good faith on account Of
the timber thereon, but on account
Of some supposed advantage the land
will give applicant on account OF
certain springs or small streams OF
water thereon.
An appeal from your decision fled
by protestee brings the case before
, me for consideration.
One of the charges is, In substance,
not that the land Is more valuable
for agricultural purposes than for Its
timber and stune, hut that the Appli-.
can't wants the land for the purpose
of controlling certain springs of water
on 1t. Such charge does not affect
the legality or validity OF an entry,
the character of the land, or the
qualifications of the entryman. Pro-
testant does not claim any right to
the use of the water. As matter of
fact, he and others paid an entryman
on an adjoining quarter on whose
land this water ran, for the use OF
the water he had stored in tank.
A spring or small stream of water
on a claim is always an inducement
in making the entry, and parties who
have no claim to the land cannot be
heard to complain because the entry
man makes use of the water for his
own domestic purposes. It Is mat
ter In which the government will not
interfere, as 1t Is not concerned as to
how u claimant gets his water, builds
his house, erects his fences or builds
his roads, SO long as he confined his
operations to his own claim; and II he
infringes on the property rights OF
Others, that is matter for the courts
to settle, but does not call for the re-
lection of his application to make
entry, or the cancellation thereof.
AS to this the protestant has mis-
taken his remedy, IL any he has.
1t appears that this land is timber
land, that the applicant had made
his proof and no other good reason
, appearing, he is entitled to complete
his purchase and you will therefore
allow him to do SO.
r This proceeding appears to be mere
ly a protest by party who sets up nc
. interest in himself and the protestant
r is, therefore, to be regarded as n,era
e objector or ANXIOUS curiea, pointing
: out defects. Such protestant is MOI
e in position to complain Of the nc
tion of the government on the fact
= alleged and is not entitled to appea
e from decision dismissing his protes
+ q l.. D., 5S4, L. d., 03, IL L. ID.
e 345.) unless he has paid the costs o
!. the proceeding, fact that does no
$ appear from the record. II, however
e he has paid the costs, you will motif:
e him of his right of appeal to the DE
i partment.
J. The protest is dismissed. So not
~ nm vonr recOrds and ad visa tho m ~ a