Amador ledger., 1907-11-29

~ anu III SOOQ IdlIu IHdu0 IOr Iu0
purpose of actual settlement and
cultivation. and not for the benefit
of any other person, persons, or COR
poration, and that l will faithfully
and honestly endeavor to comply
with all the requirements of law as to
settlement, residence, and cultivation
necessary to acquire title to the land
applied for.
This affidavit of good faith was
made in face of the following section
of United States statutes, which sec
tion is required to be read to home
stead claimants:
Sec. $780, Every person who. hav-
ing taken oath before a competent
tribunal, officer, or person, in any
case IN which law of the United
States authorizes an oath to be adj
ministered. that he will testify. de-
clare. depose. or certify truly, or that
any written testimony, declaration,
deposition. or certificate by him sub
scrIbed is true, willfully, and con-
trary to such oath, states or sub
scribes any material matter which he
does not believe to be true, is guilty
of perjury, and shall be punished by
Al0 VI AOG 1AOlO bWO
dollars, and by Imprisonment at hard
labor not more than five years, and
shall, moreover. thereafter be incapa-
BILE of giving testimony in any court
of the United States until such time
as the judgment against him is re-
versed.
1t is required of the homestead
settler that he reside and cultivate or
improve the land for period of five
years. At the end of that time be
can prove up, and is not required to
pay anything for the land, outside of
the fees of the land office and the
cost of publication. This is called
the regular five-year proof. The
settler, however, is given the option
of committing. That is at the expira-
tion of not less than fourteen months
actual residence, he is permitted to
make proof and pay for the land at
the rate of Sl.25 per acre. This
avoids the necessity of living the
three years and ten months on the
land. Ibis is what the district attor-
ney did with his claim. He preferred
to pay the 81. % per acre rather than
live the full five year term. In max
ing his committed proof be swore as
follows:
1, - -. claiming the right to
commute, under section 1901 of the
Revised Statutes of the United States,
my homestead entry, No. =, made
upon the - of section :, township
=, range =. do solemly swear that |
made settlement upon said land on
the day of -, 49,, and that since
such date, to wit, on the day of
| =, 49,, have built house on said
land, and have continued to reside
therein up to the present time; that l
have broken and cultivated - acres
of said land, and that no part of said
land has been alienated except as
provided IN section 22SS of the Re-
vised Statutes, but that | am the sole
bona tide owner as an actual settler.
Parties committing homestead en-
tries cannot be excused from lany
cause tor failure to live upon, i'm
prove. and cultivate the land for the
required period. They are not eblig-
ed to make proof in the short time in
which Communication is allowed, and
when such proof is made full COM
pliance with the law must be salts.
factorily shown.
A person committing homestead
entry by false swearing when he has
not actually resided upon the land
and improved and cultivated it, as
required by law, foIfeits all right to
the land and to the purchase money
IL Il ~
himself liable to criminal prosecu-
ton.
To entitle homestead claimant to
commute his entry he must prove his
actual residence, improvement and
cultivation for not less than fourteen
months from the date of entry.
such are the conditions surround
ing committed homestead entry, and
which the entry in question butted
up against. In face of these incon-
trovertible facts, political partisans,
who will not see, are claiming that
there was no fraud in connection with
this effort to gobble up a quarter
section of Uncle Sans domain.
As regards the statement that others
higher up than ViGini have done the
same thing in this and adjoining
counties, and that it smacks of un-
due severity to make an example of
Vicini, we may say that this instance
of land fraud is the most glaring and
audacious that has ever happened in
this section. 1t was just such a case
as demanded vigorous, decisive action.
There is absolutely no excuse and
no possible defense. The sworn
statements and the official position
in this county are conclusive OF the