The Wenatchee daily world. [volume] (Wenatchee, Wash.) 1905-1971, 1909-01-05

JOIN In the REIMBURSEMENT to give II
effect. If she knew of her husbands
intention she could not prevent him
from carrying 1t out; and If she
didn't know of it the legal conse-
quences would be just the same.
Or. suppose again, the entryman
conveys a right of way over the
homestead for a railroad, or a canal,
or reservoir site, thus greatly dam
aging the land. The law authorizes
him to do this, and does not require
that the wife join in the deed or
give her consent.
It would seem that If congress had
understood or intended that the
wife should have a property right in
the land embraced within the home
stead entry Of her husband, it would
not have enacted laws authorizing
the destruction or impairment of
that right in the summary manner
above indicated, even after the land
had been earned" by full period
of residence and cultivation. 1t is
certain that by the mere act of max
ing the entry the husband acquires
rights that cannot be adjudicated
without notice to him; and the fact
that in no case does the law require
notice to the wife, even after she has
resided upon the land the full five
years required by law, raises strong
presumption that it was never in
tended by congress to confer upon
her any property interest in her hus-
bands homestead entry.
The foregoing illustrations are not
cited as conclusive of the question
at issue, but merely as straws to ind:-
cate the course of the wind. The
following, however, it seems to me,
has convincing power.
Section 244S, Revised Statutes Of
the United States, reads as follows:
When patents for public fands
have been or may be issued, in pur-
suance of any law of the United
States, to a person who had died, or
who hereafter dies, before the date
of such patent, the title to the land
designated therein shall inure to and
become vested in the heirs, devisees,
| or assignees of such deceased pat
entee as if the patent had issued to
the deceased person during life
Let us observe the operation of
this statute:
| Suppose that A and his wife and
their three children, settle upon a
/ tract of public land, and A makes
homestead entry thereof The family
reside upon and cultivate the land
for full five years, A offers final proof
which is accepted, and receivers final
certificate issues to him. Now then,
it has been held in numerous federal
cases, as we'll as state cases, that
after final proof and issuance of re-
ceivers receipt, the homestead set
tier is the equitable owner of the
land, and that thereafter the gov
eminent merely holds the naked le-
gal title in trust for him. The land
may now be alienated, may be en-
numbered, is subject to taxation, and
may be seized under an execution
If the wife ever had a community
property interest therein, it certainly
seems as though it has now assumed
definite and tangible form.
| Suppose, however, that after the
issuance of the receivers receipt, and
before the issuance of the patent, A
| dies. inter-ate. What happens? Why.
by operation of section 244S, r. S.
the title to the land "inures to and
becomes vested in the heirs. In the
oase supposed. the heirs would be
he three. children, and (under our
statute) the wife. In other words,
there would be four heirs, and by
force Of the. statute they would take
in equal proportions. Consequently,
the wife would take one-fourth as
an heir, and not one-half as the sur
viving spouse of the deceased entry
man. 1t is plain that the idea that
the wife has a community property
interest in the homestead land is
wholly incompatible with the opera
ton of the statute cited in the case
supposed.
Another circumstance showing
that the wife can have no property
right in the homestead land CROWN :
out of the fact that she is the sur
viving member of the community
formerly composed of herself and
her husband, is the fact that the
same statute ordains that il the
entryman dies after final proof AMI