Hide Article Text (OCR)
IMPORTANT LAND OFff'lCB DECISION. |We *re indebted to T. C. McClarfe, om6DlthebinCOTactcmselup-qu:thjpriwitop|theDffroinsbrcThbci am see am 8 111 Th FttercoipaarcEsq., Register of the United States Ltncl Office at this place, for an inspection of several late decisions of tlon. Jos. WiLon, Commissioner of the General Land Office at Washington, having important bearings on contested portions of St. Cloud.— They are all of date June 9th.The first was with reference to the claim of Mr. Joseph Noel, which case was dismissed without argument as it appeared from the testimony that ho was at the time the owner of more than thr^e hundred and twenty acres of land, that being ia contrary to the pre-emption law.The oext was the case of Geo. F Brott vs. James Bowes, for the right to eater the N. E. J of 8. E. i of See 14, T. 124,It. 28 (situated on the western border of town.) Mr. Brott claimed the right to preempt this with other tracts under the act of March 3d, 1855, whereby it was provided that “each contractor engaged or to ho engaged in carrying the mails through a»»y of the Territories west of the Mississippi shall have the privilege of occupying stations at the rate of not more than one for every twenty miles of the route on which he carries the mail, and shall have a preemption right therein when the same shall be brought into market, to the extent of six hundred and forty acres to be taken contiguously.”On the 6th of September, 1855, Mr. Brott entered into a contract to carry the mail from Minneapolis to St. Cloud, the il's performance of the duties commencing on the 21st day of December, of the same year, and to continue until the 30th day 'of June, 1858, unless sooner annulled.—I This contract was annulled on the 2d day of September 1857, and from that date Mr. Brott ceased to be a contractor.Secretary of the Interior Thompson, in a decision of February 29th, 1860, in an analogous case, held that this act did not permit contractors to occupy stations any longer than while they were engaged in the active performance of their duties «is such j neither did it give them the right to enter lands unless these should be “brought into market” during the time they held their mail contract.. Now, as Mr. Brott’s contract was annulled on the 2d of September, 1857, the decision of the Commissioner is that he has no privilege to occupy these tracts as stations; and as the lands were not brought into market until November 7th, 1859, he has no right to pre-empt them under the provisions of the act above referred to.A special act “for the relief of Geo. F. Brott” was passed by Congress May 26th, 1860, authorizing him to euter this among other tracts of land, providing that said entry should *in no wise interfere with or embrace any land to which there is a val id subsisting title under the pre-emption laws of the United States.” As Mr. Bowes* claim dated back to Jan. 13th, 1859, being antecedent to the act in question, the deoisioQ of the office on this point is in favor of Mr. Bowes, and permission is given him to enter the land above described.nelt;Gaih«rci8 tilondaOCififisllieanenouhaFscelaithcoanthedastiT’vaviES3Otbe
Newspaper Details
Saint Cloud Democrat
Saint Cloud, Minnesota, US
Thu, Jun 25, 1863
Page 1
Full Page
Clipped by
Anonymous
IA, USA 16 Mar 2023
Other Publications Near Saint Cloud, Minnesota
Saint Cloud Visiter
Saint Cloud Democrat
The Saint Cloud Journal
Saint Cloud Der Nordstern
