The Alaska daily empire., 1915-05-03
LYONS IS FOR LANE'S
 ALASKA PLANS

ALASKA PLANS
 -s-
 Former Federal Judge Thomas R.
 Lyons ot the First Judicial Division
 of Alaska. now pracucing law In Al
 asi,a in an address recently delivered
 belore thc Seattle Bar Association warmly defended Secretary of the In. terior Franklin K Lanes suggestion
 sor the organization Of a resident ad. minlsuatiye board for that Territory says ibe Seattle Times
 Judge Lyons, after reviewing exist
 ng conditions oi government n Alas. ka with lis muluciplicity of bureaus. said
 "lt must be obvious chat such diyls. ion ol authority and responsibility in an efior; Co direct investigations at long distance in compliance with gen. eral regulations designed for the Unit cd States. os well as for Alaska, can only result in long delays, confusion and inefficiency.
 Secretary Lane in his statement indorsus and approving q bll provid- iag t0r local administrative board as a substitute tor various bureaus at Washington cities many instances of delays and almost endless red tope in the administration Of the laws gov. erning private acquisition of public lands He states that the examples citca are moi exceptions
 An Instance of Delay
 .Amcue other instances he cites che ease Of Walter H Marrett, who built 8 houso and established a homestead near Haiacs. Alaska. in April 1902 on unsurveyed and unreserved public lands
 "!n is0S Aarrett applied to the sur veyor general for survey of his claim. The survoy was begun on September s. 1908. and completed on September 10 1908 on March % 1909. Marrett filed in che land office at Juneau an application to enter the lands embrace ed ia the survey. His application was aecomnanied by the prescribed afIi. dayit that the lands were nonmineral and by Che required notices and affi- dayits o publication and posting
 f0n November 19, 1909 Marrett went to the Land Office at Juneau with his witnesses and completed his ! final proof On November g. 1909 there was issued 70 tho cntryman 4. nal certificate for patent. in which it yves stated that on presentation of his . certificate Co the commissioner Of the general land office There is no rec ord of ans action on the papers in the land office in tine following year
 Suspicion of Coal Delays Patent
 Ion November n, 1910. Marrett then wrote letter to the commissioner O. the general land office asking why his patent had not been issued To this lotter inc received a reply from Asst saoi Commissioner informing him hat ae,.cn on the entry had been de- erre awaiting instructions from the Department mdcr the act of June Z5. l9lo providing for the withdrawal o1 iaads for coal classification. On December 22 1910, the commissioner 3i che general land office referred Che 'iaim Co che geologic survey asking information as to whether or not coal ir petroleum deposits were em5mc- n 'n this entry " "On March 9. 19l1 the director of he geological survey wrote to the commissioner informing him that the D urvey had made no examination of s his land and had mo data on the sub l' ect. but believed that no deposits of oai or petroleum occurred in that yi- N uity a
 5niiats Territorial Delegate a "n the meantime Marrett wrote to B 'c Delegate rom Alaska. asking his e ti in securing patent Co his claim e he Delegate wrote Co Che oommis- " 'oncr cn January 8. i9i1. inclosing a IT, .iarrett's letter and on January ll s i9ii the commissioner wrote to is .r. tia1rot informing him that the b md embraced m his entry had been pi ithdrawn for examination for coal ! ad petroleum. under the act Of June tr ,. l9i0 and that action would be Ca. a. an on the entry as soon as informa- ti on concerning the coal and peirol- o' im deposits was received from the m 'ologlcal survey Patent was finally sued on May 25. 1911. nearly three ga 'ars after Che entryman had made tr s application to the surveyor general vi r patent of his claim as "it will be observed that there was w' contest either by the government an any other party. against Marrett's ial sht Co patent. 1T there had been oe .y such contest it is reasonable Co al sumo tea. the inquiry as to the en- gu mans riGhts Co patent would not an cegciaded a this date. iol
 Another Instanoe Cited pe The confusion and uncertainty as Che jurisdiction of each department ci Alaskan affairs Is well illustrated
 the following.
 "A citizen of Alaska desired Go lease rn,