The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1911-08-05
OF IMPORT
TANT DECISIONS

The following interesting and i'm
portant decisions have recently been
handed down by the secretary of the
interior:
/ Homesteads
| When an entryman had made a
former homestead entry of less than
100 acres for which he acquired title,
he was not qualified to make an entry
under the reclamation act
The act of March 2, 1889, (25 Stat
S54) has no application to entries
under the reclamation act, and the
additional right granted in said act
of March 2, 1889, cannot be exercised
| by entry within a reclamation project.
Citing instrctions, June 16, 1909. (38
L. ID. So
When a claimant made entry for a
technical quarter-section of land, and
after five years residence thereon OBJ
tanned title thereto, he exhausted his
right.
The fact that the land patented
lacked little more than two acres of
making 160 acres did not give him the
status of qualified homestead entry
man or the right to enter under the
Sh'oi SCu uohSotCou dSt, anu
800 acres.
Extenuating circumstances in favor
of entryman will not justify the de-
partment charged with the duty Of
disposing of the public lands in the
manner provided by law, to dispose of
them contrary to the express pro-
VISIONS of that law.
A homestead entry must be can
| aaIaH Of
and improvement where it is shown
that the entryman merely made oecas-
ional visits to the land, where he
merely had house furnished with
stove and dishes, 1t being shown that
the entryman was in partnership in
threshing machine and other farm
machinery
Desert Lands.
The act of March %, 1908, granting
extension in certain cases, is a re-
medal law. to be liberall- construed
and applied so as to relieve and assist
entrymen who have acted in good
faith in the arduous work of reclaim
ing desert lands. Citing Hoobler VS..
Treffry (39 L. D. 557).
A desert land entryman NAV make
proof of reclamation and receive
patent within four years from date
of entry. In order to obtain extension
of time in which to submit final proof
under provisions of section 3. of the
act of March %, 1908 (35 Stat. 52), it
must appear that failure to reclaim
was without fault on his part" and
due to "some unavoidable delay in the
construction of the irrigating works
intended to convey water to the said
lands.'
Desert land entrymen should not, in
general. depend upon cooperation with
adjoining land proprietors or entry
men for the necessary water to re-
claim land entred
Final Proof.
Where there are conflicting claims in
/, cases of final proof, a hearing before
the local office is the only means by
which all parties can present the re-
spective claims to the land and there
fore such hearing will be ordered by
the department in such cases.
The commissioner of the general
land office has full jurisdiction to
reverse the action of the local officers
in matters of final proof. Final proof
matters are ex parte cases, and no
proceedings as upon appeal are neces-
"a
land office with full jurisdiction.
Timber and Stone.
When a timber and stone applica-
tion has been filed describing certain
lands and it appears that a state se-
lection was made prior to approval and
certifcation. the state selection ope-
rates to segregate the land, and con-
stitutes pending matter at time en-
frxr do bse
Tt was therefore permissible to
allow the state to assign valid base
upon selection it has inadvertently
made upon invalid base. Until the ap-
plication of the state was finally dis
posed of, the land was not subject to
other appropriation.
1t is we'll settled that an order of
the land department withdrawing pub
lie lands for entry or other public dis
position. is operative, unless other
wise limited, from the time it is made.
The fact that the sworn statement was
record in the local land office will not
Zumwalt eco L. d. 32) and Hiram C.
Smith (33 l.. d. 677).
When timber and stone sworn
statement was filed in the local office
the same day the land was withdrawn
for forestry purposes, such withdrawal
took effect the day it was made and
the sworn statement made on that day
must be considered as having been
made subject to the withdrawal Cit
ing State of Utah (33 L. D. 510).
Mining.
When a mineral application has
been rejected for failure to properly
post the notice and plat on the claim
as expressly required by the statute,
the entry will not be held intact sub
iect to republication and reposting of
notice of the patent application, but
must be cancelled, with the privilege
of prosecuting patent proceedings de-
novo.
If a legal bona ide mineral loca.