Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1910-02-08
BREEZY Letter
FROM COLONEL
L0UNSbERRY
GIVES SOME ADVICE TO PROsPTC-
TIVE SEEKERS OF UNCLE
SANS LAND.
Mich IMPROVED IN HEALTH
MUCH IMPROVED IN Health
HAS BEEN TAKING CLOSE NOTICE
OF THE TREND OF AFFAIRS
IN NORTH DAKOTA.
Cites Several Cases Where Sheriff
and Deputies Took Advantage Of
Their Official Position to Secure
Land Without Much Trouble - One
Sheriff With II Deputies.
Bv Col. c. A. Lounsberry.

Washington, Feb. fl have seen
in the Forum, Bismarck Tribune and
Grand Forks Times, and it has no
doubt appeared in other papers of the
state, that the John T. Anderson de-
cision lays down new rule relative
to homestead proofs by office holders.
but this is not so. The only new
rule that has been made in the mat.
ter was by the Ed. jenkins and Anna
Kuhn decisions, under which construc-
tive residence cannot be allowed in
committing homestead entries, the
meat of these decisions being in the
following taken from the Anna v.
Kuhn decision 4 + "absence due
to Official duties will not be 'consid-
cred residence on the land in the
sense OF excusing the entryman for
any part OF the short period during
which communication proof may be ac-
cepted."
This language was quoted and again
affirmed by the department in the
case Of John i. Sherk, committed
homestead entry number O1137.
Chamberlain. s. D., in a decision at.
firmed BY the department Jan. "a,
1910, and may be accepted as the
law until congress provides other
wise.
The effect of the decision in the
John Anderson case was that having
established residence in good faith,
and two years thereafter having been
appointed postmaster, his absence on
official duties could be accepted as
constructive residence on five year
proof, especially in view of the fact
that there was upwards Of eighty
acres cultivated for a term Of five
years.
In the case of H. C. lHansbrough,
whose homestead was held up by
Sparks some years ago, it was held
that a postmaster could not hold a
claim outside the delivery of his post
Office, and as he claimed residence
some twenty miles from the postoffice
it was assumed that his claim was
fraudulant. 1t was investigated by a
special agent who found that all his
neighbors in the vicinity of his claim.
got their mail at Devils Lake, and
the rule was reversed and he got his
claim In Anderson's case he accept
ed a postoff1ce 200 mills from a
claim, and the land Office held that
he had not established residence in
good faith on his claim, and in this
the land Office was reversed. Anna
V. Kuhn, John l.. Sherk Or any one
of the long list whose claims have
been rejected on communication proofs,
could have made five year proof,
counting their absence on official du-
ties as constructive residence but not
for the purpose of committing, where
residence was actually established be-
fore taking Office.
The object of the government is
not to sell the land and get its mon
ey out of it, but to give homes to the
people. When it was found that the
privilege of committing after six
months was abused. the time was
extended to fourteen months: and
when it was found that the privilege
Of six months constructive resi-
dence was being abused the rule was
changed to require fourteen months
actual residence, and this rule now
holds good as to all entries made
since Nov, I, 1907.
Those of US who are handling
proofs all of the time, and correcting
errors of omission and commission,
become familiar with the abuses. It
seemed a reasonable thing to allow
the deputy sheriff the same privilege
that the sheriff had; it seemed reas-
enable to excuse him from actual ros-
idence upon the homestead when en-
gagged on Official duties at the county
seat: but one sheriff had seventeen
deputies, and each one claimed the