The Sun. [volume] (Price, Utah) 1915-1932, 1920-11-26

The stand taken BY the circuit court
Of appeals, he said, carried TO its logi-
cal conclusion, would mean that the
government would have to investigate
every entry before issuing patent.
proposition which he pronounced inn
practicable and one which would rem
der sworn statements by entrymen
useless. Summing up for the govern
ment, he said: "The appellee is be-
fore this court, seeking by a technical
plea 10 escape the consequences It its
admitted fraud. and endeavoring TO
retain the fruits of its unlawful acts,
secured through n conspiracy to cir
cumvent and defy the law, in which
for many years Il has been success
full. )"
Decisions Arc Cited.
Counsel for the coal company. like
counsel for the government. have cit
ed many decisions by the courts as
bearing on the point at issue, and rest
their case on four points. That no
facts are pleaded 10 show the defen-
dant 10 have been guilty of the alleged
frauds subsequent to the date of the
issuance of the patents. or Of any con-
duct which would toll the statute and
excuse the plaintiff from sooner in
shutting iis suit for the cancellation
Of said patents.
The bill of complaint fails 10 state
any facts, from which it can be deter
mined the time when the fraud charg-
| cd, or the conccnlmcnt thereof. was
discovered or what the discovery was.
and it is not alleged therein when the
discovery was made or what il was.
or how &c was made. or why il was not
made sooner, and the court is unable
TO say whether by ordinary diligence,
The discovery might not have been
made within reasonable time after
the preparation of the frauds com
planned of.
The facts stated in the complaint
clearly negative the legal conclusion
of conccalmcnt therein alleged, and Il
appears nffimatively thcrcfrom that
the discovery Of the alleged frauds
ought, with reasonable diligence, 10
have been made within the period Of
the statute of limitations, aud that
the government had sufficient notice
10 require action and investigation
upon is part, and failing therein. 10
bar iis cause for actions When the
government seeks 30 avoid the bar of
the statute of limitations 10 rights are
determined by the same rules as
would be the rights of a private lite
giant.
! Counsel for the coal company are
inclined 10 chido the government for
having failed 10 detect the fraud un-
al twenty ycnm after iis commission.
l"Ihc defendant was engaged in the
mining OF Goa" says the brief of the
company, "and owned lands adjacent
10 the several entries OF this the
government had due notice. Eighteen
private individuals, In rapid success
sion, made cash coal entries of land
adjacent 10 the lands of the dcien,
dnni At the time these entries were
made the government alleges the de-
PENDANT was Ia possession of the land
so entered. Possession of the lands
by the defendant was notice 10 all the
world that il had an interest in said
lands and conclusive notice of the
character of that interest, but in any
event, sufficient notice 10 put the gov
eminent upon inquiry as 10 the char
acter of the interest which IL claimed
Deeds Are Delivered.
j And, eoniemporaneously with the
eighteen entries, each of the entry
y men executed and delivered 10 the
! defendant deeds conveying absolute
title 90 the lands entered by them
] The record of these deeds was notice
D o. thc government that legal title had
been transferred TO the defendant
Aud, thenceforward the defendant ne,
manned In possession of the properly
, mining thereon and selling the coal
, thereir0m II seems perfectly clear
that under such circumstances the
| government was called upon 10 act
for the transaction from is inception
called for action il the government
, intended TO preserve its rights, and
who can doubt that il the government
had proceeded 10 protect itself by an
investigation the true situation would
have been disclosed, at least as readily
as it was in 1862
"During this entire period of time
J special agents of the interior depart
: ment were stationed in Wyoming ant
p attached TO the land offices in thai
2 state These lands lay within clos,
p proximity 10 the land office at Chey
3 enne. The manner of these entries
and their proximity 10 the coal prop
p critics Of the defendant were alOn,
! sufficient 10 create more or less sus
p picion in the minds of the officials Of
b the government Diligence called FOL
r AN investigation,
: "The entrymen, or at least a por
} ton Of them, were doubtless impecun
r ious. Otherwise they would have useC
their money in making these entries
e Doubtless they all lived in the i'm
I mediate vicinity, which was a small
d community. Never having been il
\ DosssasiOU Of this land M any time