The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1911-08-25
Important Rublic Land Decisions
The following important law points
have recently been decided by the Sec
rotary of the Interior.

HOmesteads
Where a filing has been rejected
without notice because of failure to
comply with the regulations govern
ing declaratory statements, the Land
department has no authority to re-
instate any such application that may
have lapsed by failure of the appli-
cant through ignorance or want OF
notice on his part, provided the land
is still subject to the application and
there is no adverse claim and no val
i'd reason appears why it should not
be granted
A preference right granted to a
successful contestant is a privilege
over others to make some lawful en-
try but is not property or interest
in the land that he can assign or
transfer, citing Verinda Vinson (39
L. D., 449); Schelling VS.. Fuller (32
L. D., 466); Taylor VS.. Graves (36
l.. D., 800.
Under the provisions of Sections
2291-2292, providing for the order of
succession in case of the entryman' :
death, the Land department will not
attempt to determine questions of
heirship but will leave such questions
to the local courts. Any party claim
ing interest may make proof, which
inures to the benefit of all according
to their legal rights, and the certifi-
cate will issue to the heirs or lawful
successors to the right of the entry
man, thus discharging the full duty
of the Land department. Citing
Turner VS.. Wilcox Heirs (38 L. D.,
l521-4).
Sections 2291 R. S. provides for
succession in case of death of the ell
tryman and the person or persons en-
titled to complete the entry, in the
order or succession named in the stat
ute, takes such right and acquires
title direct from the government and
not by virtue of inheritance or be-
quest from the entryman. But where
there is no widow and there are no
heirs qualified to take, the devisee
to whom the entryman had bequeath-
ed all his right and interest in the
land, while not deriving title under
the will, is made by such bequest the
representative of the entryman and
may complete the entry under the
texpress, terms of the statute as the
next beneficiary in the order of sue
cession named therein. Citing Tobias
Beckner C L. D., 134.
An. entryman engaged in the bust
mss of carry the United States as
sub-contractor, does not entitle him
to have absences credited as resid-
|ence. Although working for the gov
eminent he is charged with the same
statutory requirements as if he were
working for a private individual Cit
ing unreported case of Burton VS..
Nix decided June s, 1909).
Rule SO, of the new rule of prac-
tice, subject rehearing, construed.
Act of June 6, 1900 (31 Stat. 6S3),
gives the rigt to married woman
to make entry, who has prior to mar
rage settled upon an unimpoved
tract. But the man she married mus.
not at the time be claiming separate
tract under the homestead law. The
marriage does not, per Sc, interfere
with the right of the wife to make
final proof.
An entryman under the Thinner and
Stone act, must show by affidavit that
he has made a prior personal inspec-
tion of the land, as provided in the
rules and regulations issued under
that act. Citing Mary S. Ness CT
L. d. 5S2) and U. S. VS.. Wood GO.
Fed. Rep. 4S5).
While the act itself does not speci-
fically require such regulation, the
same is not inconsistent in order to
carry out the purposes of the act.
The department will take notice
that title to property of the Catholic
church rests in the Bishop or Arch
Bishop as a corporation sole under
the polity of that church.
Desert Lands
The entryman must show clear
right to sufficient water to irrigate
the whole of the irrigable portion of
the entry. Citing case of Theodore
T. A. Iasigi (3s L. D., 1857.
A second application to enter lands
under the Desert Land law will be re-
jected when 1t appears that patent
issued under the first application. The
provisions of the second desert land
act of arch 26. 1908 (35 Stat, 49,,
permits a second application only |