Devils Lake inter-ocean. (Devils Lake, N.D.) 1909-1915, 1911-08-25
KEOGH=REGAN
CONTEST CASE

Wednesday afternoon, Receiver F.
W. Cockburn of the U. S. land office,
handed down a decision in the fam.
Gus Regan-Keogh land contest case,
that has occupied the attention of PEG,
pie in the county the past fortnight
The decision reads as follows:
William Keogh VS.. Peter Regan-In.
volving H. E. No. 35S05 (03412) made
on August q, 1907, for the S. E. IA,
Sec. "a, T. 1856 n of R. 81 W., 5th P.
NJ
On August o. 1907, Peter Regain
made H. E. No. (03412) for the above
described land and on June 10, 1911,
William Keough filed his affidavit and
application to contest the entry, alleg.
ing:
That said Peter Regain had failed to
cultivate the above described land or
any part thereof at any time since
making said entry up to the present
time: that 140 acres of said land has
been fit for cultivation at all times
since Regain made said entry up to the
present time and is fit for cultivation
now and will be in the future.
The above stated application was al
lowed and notices issued on the same
date, June II, 1911.
Personal service appears to have
been made upon the contestee on June
10, 1911, proof of which appears with
the record.
On July II, 1911, the contestee, Pet
er Regan, filed his answer in this, Of
fee to the complaint denying the ale
CATION together with proof of personal
service upon contestant made July IS,
1911.
On July II hearing was ordered in
the matter before the register and re-
ceiver of this office on August 8, 1911,
at 10 O'Clock a. m.
Notice of said hearing was personal
ly served on McClory & McClory of
Devils Lake, who appeared in the case
in behalf of the contestee and also on
Silver Serumgard, of Devils Lake, who
appeared as attorney for the contes-
tant in the case, on July II, 1911, evil
dence of which appears with the rec
ords.
At the time and place designated in
the notices the contestant appeared IN
person and by his attorney, Silver Ser
umgard, and also the contestee in per-
son and by his attorney, P. J. McClory,
and testimony was submitted and cross
examined by both parties in interest
The testimony shows that within a
few months after making entry for the
land involved that the defendant, Pet
er Regain, established residence upon
the land and that he and his family
have resided there continuously ever
since, that he has placed valuable i'm
provements on the land, built a CON-
Portable house, barn, a shed, chick
en- house, dug a well, fenced the entire
tract and also some cross fencing,
made some bitches, and that a por-
ton of the land which was fenced off
separately was used for pasture and
the greater portion used for the grow
ing of wild hay each year; that he had
raised and kept stock upon the land
each year, including horses, cattle,
hogs, and poultry; that he had cult
Pt:d a small portion of the land and
r:ls'd potatoes and garden truck; but
that the cultivation of the land was
meagTe; these facts are not denied by
the contestnt and his Witnesses.
Noncompliance with the homestead
law in the matter of cultivation alone
is alleged in the affidavit of contest
and the testimony Of the contestant
and his witnesses is to the effect that
from the time that the defendant made
entry for the tract involved the greater
portion of the land has been dry and
that small grains could have beer
successfully raised upon the land dur
ing this period of years and that the
land is most valuable for this purpose
The testimony of the contestee anG
his witnesses is to the effect that dur
ing the years in which the land has
been occupied by the defendant thai
the greater portion of the land, if moi
all of it, had been too wet to cultivate
during the growing seasons; that il
is subject to the overflow of a coulee
the waters of which appear to spread
over the land involved in the spring Of
the year, for which reason it is valua
BILE only for hay and the raising Of
stock
The Department rulings in all suct
cases as the one at bar appear to have
given greater weight to the showing
of good faith made on the part of the
entryman than upon the character OF
the land involved. In a recent ruling
the Secretary of the Interior in the
case of George Hathaway (3S L. D. 33)
held:
mi