The Black Hills union and western stock review. [volume] (Rapid City, S.D.) 1904-19??, 1907-12-13
MAKE DECISION
N S[|N CASE
HEIRS OF BUTTE COUNTY SET.
TIERS LOSE IN FAMOUS
CONTEST.
Decision of Local Land Officials Up-
held by the Washington Officials
Case May be Appealed.

BY the decision oy the commissions
er of the general land office, the Off
cials of the local Office are upheld in
their contention that the entry of
John Num- had priority over any
claims the heirs of Hans Seim might
have on the land involved in the ia
nous Seim contest case, said entry
having been the first one filed, the
original settler or his heirs having
failed to make the homestead entry
as required by law.
Owing to the unusual circumstan-
ces surrounding the case, it has re-
ceived considerable attention, especi-
ally in this section Of the state and
the decision just handed down will
undoubtedly be noted with more than
passing interest in many localities.
Following is a brief summary of
the facts connected with the case
Hans Seim, in the spring of 1898,
settled on the land in controversy
with the intention of later taking out
homestead papers. He used the land
for grazing purposes until early in
the fall of 1896, when his demise oc-
CURED, through an accident. Pre-
vious to this Mrs. Seim had died,
leaving seven children who continued
to make their home on the tract.
Under the direction of Bessie Seim,
the eldest of the family, improve
ments in the shape of a barn worth
$500 and the sinking of a we'll were
put in, the land still being used for
grazing purposes.
Bessie, who was school teacher,
determined to remove the children
to Spearfish in the fall of 1897, that
they might receive instruction at the
schools there, no schools having been
in the vicinity of the Seim
home. A tenant was found to whom
the land was rented until 1899, when
the family with the exception of An
ma returned and took up residence
again.
Four years later, Will Seim, the
eldest boy filed on claim some
distance south of the land in ques-
ton, and shortly after Bessie took
out papers on a tract about eight
miles north. However, improvements
on the land in controversy had been
added in the meantime, in the shape
of new $500 lumber barn and the
of an additional we'll, and un-
til 1903 or 1904, residence was
when in one of those
years, a failure in the feed supply
compelled the removal of their cat
tie (about 800 head) to Wills hold
ing and kept there during the sue
ceeding winters, returning to the old
home for the summers. A greater
part of the furniture was removed
to Willis place and the old residence
was practically unfurnished, according
to the testimony brought out in this
and was unoccupied ex-
cept in the summertime when the
stock was brought down for grazing,
however the land was retained for
purposes until late in the
year Of 1905. The buildings at that
time though considerably out of re-
pair were estimated as worth about
$1,000 and the house was considered
No fences with the ex-
ception Of few enclosing corralls
had been set up and the land was
used the same as the open range by
other stockmen in the district
Hans Seim having failed to file
on the land within the three month
settlers to make the proper
entry where the land had been set
tied upon prior to its plating and
the heirs also having been derelict
in setting up their claims before the
land officials, the plats for that sec
ton of Butte county showed the
land in question open and Num- pro-
ceeded to file thereon in December,
1905, and notified the heirs to re-
move the improvements instituted by
them, from the land. The demand
was complied with during the months
of January and February, 1906, the
wells being filled up and the build
ings removed.
A statement Of the heirs view of
the affair was made direct to Wash
ington, by Bessie Seim, in which she
declared the place had been main
tanned as the family home.
An answer was made by contestee
and the case was heard at the local
land office in December 1906, George
Williams and Tyler S. Overpeck ap-
pearing for the heirs and Charles
w. Brown for Num-. After carefully
weighing the evidence submitted
the local officials decided that Nunn's
entry should be sustained as he
could not be held responsible for the
neglect of the Seims in making the
proper filing. An appeal was taken
to the general land office, where the
first decision in the matter was sus-
tained as stated above. In the opin.
ion of the officials at Washington, 6
person may hold public domain
against others only by fling the prop
er entry, and Num- had tho priol
claim therefore.
The case will undoubtedly be TAX