Elmore County Republican. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1910-1915, 1913-06-28

John Goddard was the owner Of an
Iowa farm which he leased to James
dickson for the year Of 1890. On the
second day Of May in this year an
aerolite passed over Northern Iowa.
Peter Hoaghnd lived On . farm adj
joining the Goddard property and II
CHANGED that a member Of his family
watched the meteor and saw t.
plunge to earth on the adjoining pro-
perty. Being told Of this and direct
ed to the spot where 1t seemed to
fall Hoagland went onto the Goddard
farm the next day and discovered
the meteorite buried In the ground
to a depth OF three feet, Elickson,
the tenant, was present. but offered
no objection, and Hoagland dug up
the visitor from the heavens and
transported 1t to his house. claiming
LIT for his own-probably believing in
the doctrine Of finders keepers.
Three days later as opportunity Of
fered Hoagland sold the meteorite
to H. v. Winchell. then Professor Of
Geology at the University Of Wiscon-
I'm. When John Goddard heard Of
chis he Immediately felt that az the
aerolite had fallen on his property it
mad become his and that Hoagland
lad no rights therein. He decided
to enforce his rights against Profess
sor WinchelL Winchell having pur-
chased from Hoagland had NO better
rights than the man from whom he
bought. II Hoagland had no rights
20 the meteorite Winchell could not
retain 1t against the claims Of the
trlghtful owner.
The court which tried the case rui-
ed that the finder had no rights In
the fallen mass, but that 1t became
the property Of which 1t fell. Thus
when 1t fell upon Goddard's farm it
became part Of that farm, real pro-
perty belonging to Goddard. The
Ecourt viewed 1t as much part OF
the farm az the stones that might be
upon it. They insisted 1t was not
lost matter with no owner to which
any finder might lay claim.
In deciding the case the Judge
said:
Through the action of the ele-
ments, wind and water, the soil Of
one man is taken and deposited in
the field of another; and, thus all
over the country, we may say,
changes are constantly going On. BY
these natural causes the owners Of
the soil are giving and taking as the
wisdom Of the controlling forces shall
determine. BY these operations one
may be affected with a substantial
gain, and another by similar loss
These gains are Of accretion, and the
deposit becomes the property Of the
owner Of the soil on which it Is
made"
Thus we notice the rule Of law that
changes made by natural forces must
be allowed to stand. II q river
washes away a portion Of q persons
land, that soil cannot be pursued and
brought back. An owner may keep
1t at home, but once gone his title
has vanished. II by the action Of
the waters, or the winds, or any
other natural forces additions are
made to the body Of person 3 land
the additions become part and par
eel OF the land and the property Of
the owner Of that land. These ad-
ditions are what the law terms &C.
cretions.
John Deerfield owned q tract Of
land through which ran Buck Creek
He sold to Alison Arms farm Of
about sixty acres, one boundary be-
Ing Buck Creek, Buck Creek grad
ually shifted It's course. year by year.
depositing soil against Arms land.
In the course Of a few years several
acres had thus been added. Deer
field claimed that this property had
not been transferred to Arms but
that he still owned it and could use
or transfer 1t. He contended this
more strongly as he still owned the
property on the other aide Of the
stream upon which the stream had
encroached thus leaving additional
land upon the other side. He insist
ed that the property lines should re-
main 40 they we're when he granted
the land and that the soil left by the
stream when shifting across proper
ly belonged to him. The court refus-
ed to adopt his view and ruled that
the added soil which had come to-
Arms gradually; year by year. was
his. and that Deerfield could not fol-
low what had been lost to him by
the forces Of nature.
John Halsey and Warren McCor-
mick owned farms on opposite sides
0f Mad River the stroam forming n =