we are not to be responsible for any loss or damage arising from the dangers of railroad, steam or river navigation, leakage, fire, or from any cause whatever, unless the same be proved to have occurred from the fraud or gross negligence of ourselves, our agents, or servants; and we in no event to be liable beyond our route, as herein receipted. Valued under fifty dollars, unless otherwise herein stated. Fish, game, fruit, live stock, and all perishable articles, glass, picture frames, guns, furniture not in boxes; statuary and contents of paper boxes taken at owner's risk. One parcel said to contain four hundred and Freight.-Paid $2 50. Mark. Article. seventy-seven dollars. For the company, MAGAURAN. No. 5. LAND OFFICE, PLATTSBURG, Mo., SIR: It is proper, in submitting the enclosed contest of Harden and Jackson, to state that under the system heretofore prevailing in this office, the original application of Harden was received and filed on the 1st day of September last, although, from the press of business, the application could not be renewed and the entry made until the 8th of September. We suppose no point will be made by the counsel for Jackson as to the true date from which the rights of Harden as a purchaser are to be estimated, the understanding having been general, and in no instance complained of, that the reception and filing of the original application should count against applications or pre-emptions made afterwards. It is in this point of view that, referring to your letter of the 15th of December last, (in Palmer's case,) we deduce the conclusion that a party who does nothing except "stick stakes" until after another party has entered the land, cannot count such work as the commencement of a pre-emption to defeat the entry made by another before anything was done looking to the commencement or erection of a house. If correct in this construction of your application of the Attorney General's opinion to that case, our opinion is, that the pre-emption of Jackson is invalid, as against Harden, who became entitled to enter the land by his application of the 1st of September, on file in this office, and which was carried into a new and formal application as soon as the then register could do so, and the original application consummated by entry on the 8th of September. We but add, that the system thus adopted, in our own opinion, works better and fairer, and less annoyingly, than any other plan would. Very respectfully, your obedient servants, THOS. A. HENDRICKS, Esq., JAMES H. BIRCH, Register. Commissioner General Land Office, Washington. GENERAL LAND OFFICE, April 21, 1857. GENTLEMEN: I have received yours of 3d of March, inclosing for the decision of this office the testimony in relation to the pre-emption claim of Jacob Jackson to the SE. of SE. of 20, 61, 30, contested by William A. Harden per private entry No. 22,214, and in reply have to state that this office concurs in your opinion adverse to the pre-emption, for the reason that it appears the foundation of his dwelling-house was not laid until the 6th of September, 1856, whereas the application to enter at private sale was made on the first of the same monta. The claim by pre-emption has therefore been rejected, and private entry released from suspension. Please note the rejection on your books and plats. Respectfully, &c., THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, Commissioner. REGISTER and RECEIVER, Plattsburg, Missouri. No. 6. REGISTER'S OFFICE, Plattsburg, Missouri, March 7, 1857. SIR: Not having had a regular Washington mail for about a month, your letter of the 6th ultimo, covering the warrants therein alluded to, was not received until this evening. This delay is the more vexatious, inasmuch as the greater portion of the land thereby to be located was covered and carried by the locations of mere speculators on the 2d instant. Mr. Thompson, the agent of the Pennsylvania parties, was here at the opening on the 2d, but being without either warrants or final directions from his principals, was enabled only (by his own means) to put himself in competition with others for a portion of the land. Being here again to-day, with a letter from his principals of the 13th, covering a copy of yours of the 6th ultimo, he is understood to be compromising, and doing otherwise all he can, for the benefit of his employers. It need not, of course, be added, that within the limits of personal and official propriety, his exertions in the direction alluded to will be cordially seconded by this office. The notice of the parties to the receiver, of having made the arrangement and transmitted the fees, reached that officer on the evening of the 3d instant. The money has not yet come to hand, but that would have been immaterial had we received your letter in time to locate the warrants as therein directed. Very respectfully, your obedient servants, THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, Esq., JAMES H. BIRCH, (Yet out of commission.) Commissioner General Land Office, Washington. Rep. No. 289-5 No. 7. GENERAL LAND OFFICE, SIR Upon examining your abstract of sales for the month of January last, and for several months prior thereto, it is discovered that you are in the habit of permitting military bounty land warrants, under the act of 1855, to be located on lands which are subject to sale at not less than $2 50 per acre, requiring the locator to make a cash payment for the excess in price over $1 25 per acre, which is contrary to the law. The 5th section of the act of 3d March, 1855, expressly declares "that no warrant issued under the provisions of this act shall be located on any public lands except such as shall at the time be subject to sale at either the minimum or lower graduated prices." Consequently all lands, the minimum price of which is more than $1 25 per acre, are excluded from location by said warrants; also, where a tract of land is put up between two parties who have made simultaneous application for the same, and sold to the highest bidder, such purchaser cannot locate a warrant on said land, paying the difference in price in cash, but the whole of the land so purchased must be paid for in cash. Your abstract for January last consists principally of excess payments on warrant locations of the character herein referred to, all of which are illegal, and will be cancelled by this office. You will make a careful examination and report to this office all such warrant locations which have been made at your office contrary to the provisions of the act of 3d March, 1855, and the circular instructions of this office of the 3d May, 1855, the observance of which, on your part, would have prevented such errors, which, aside from the great additional labor devolved upon this office in the adjustment of the same, must operate to the injury of innocent parties. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, REGISTER OF THE LAND OFFICE, THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, Plattsburg, Missouri. Commissioner. me. The letter to the late register, of 19th March last, was written by At the time it was written, I was ignorant of the fact that he had been removed from office, or that his removal was even contemplated. That letter, therefore, could have had no bearing in the case, and the offensive light in which the register has thought proper to view it is altogether imaginary on his part. The gentleman in this division, whose duty in part is to register the returns of sales, perceiving that the register's abstracts for several months were composed principally of excess payments for lands located with military`land warrants, the price of which in many instances was $2 50 and up wards per acre, concluded that the register had permitted the warrants, under act of 1855, to be located on lands the minimum price of which was restricted to $2 50 per acre, which conclusion was very natural, as the register failed to state the fact that there were "two bidders," or to make any explanatory note on his abstract, as he should have done; and the letter of which the register complains was intended simply to call his attention to the fact, in order that, if true, the practice should be discontinued immediately. The letter of 13th July, 1853, from which the register quotes as his authority for permitting warrant locations on lands sold to the highest bidder between two or more simultaneous applicants for the same, was written soon after I took charge of the division, by Mr. Boardman, who was then in office, and without my knowledge. In all such cases that I am aware of, we have uniformly maintained the position laid down in the letter to register of 19th March last. Besides, there is no evidence that the cases referred to in said letter would fall within the rule laid down in the letter of 13th July, 1853, from which the register quotes, for there is nothing to show whether the adverse parties applied to locate with warrants or to enter with cash. In some instances I find that the register permitted one and the same individual, in one and the same day, to make some 20 or 30 locations, where in each case there was one or more other applicants for the land, and put up between the parties, (see his abstract for January, 1857,) which proceedings are in conflict with the instructions to him of August 19, 1856. I find that several of the warrant locations are stated on his abstract of sales as being warrants under "ACT OF 1855," which, however, is a mistake, as they were issued under other acts than that of 1855. The mistake, however, is one of his own, and calculated to mislead us. It is not a sound argument to say, because a wrong act may have once escaped our observation, that when it shall be brought home to us it should either be countenanced or overlooked. WM. V. H. BROWN. No. 8. GENERAL LAND OFFICE, April 1, 1857. GENTLEMEN: I am in the receipt of your letter of the 7th ultimo, in which you state that the instructions from this office of the 6th of February last, in relation to the location of 152 military bounty land warrants on certain specified tracts of land in Nodaway county, Missouri, was not received by you until the evening of the 7th of March, 1857. Other communications on the subject of the location of these warrants have also been received from M. Jeff. Thompson and H. F. Felix, and are now before me. From these communications it appears that Messrs. McLaughlin and Felix, to whom the above named 152 warrants were assigned, and their associates, appointed a committee to select and enter in the names of McLaughlin and Felix a large number of tracts constituting a body of land, with the view to the establishment of a business community or colony thereon, and that said committee, after much labor and expense, fixed upon the lands in Nodaway county, Missouri, as a suitable place for the purpose, and applied to the land officers at Plattsburg, Missouri, on the 27th of November. 1856, to locate these land warrants which were then in their possession thereon, and were refused permission to do so, upon the allegation that the office had been closed on the 15th of that month, (which alleged closing appears to have been without authority,) and that they could not tell when it would be again open for business. From the period of time thus fixed when McLaughlin and Felix made their first application, it is shown, in continuation of their purpose to secure the lands, they applied in person for the aid of the General Land Office to secure their rights, by causing said land warrants to be located upon specified tracts, thus showing they did all in their power to perfect their right in virtue of their first application. It is further represented that the instructions from this office for the location of these warrants were promptly issued and mailed to your address, but it is alleged that, from some unknown cause, they failed to reach you until, as before stated, the evening of the 7th of March last, more than a month after their issue; and what by the way is remarkable, that five days prior to the reception of these instructions. you again opened your office for business, overlooked the early and previous steps that had been taken by prior applicants who had shown due diligence, and permitted other persons to enter or locate the tracts applied for by McLaughlin and Felix on the 27th of November, 1856. Under these circumstances I have to state that if, as it is alleged, it shall be found, after full investigation and hearing, that McLaughlin and Felix were the first who applied to locate the lands in question, at a time they were legally subject to enter at private sale, and were refused because the land officers, to suit their own convenience, chose to close the office without instructions, their right is not to be prejudiced by the irregular and subsequent proceedings of permitting others to step in with the assent of the register. They hold the same relation to the lands that a locator in error without fraud does, which is a right to re-enter within a reasonable time. Messrs. McLaughlin and Felix will therefore be called upon by this office for a full statement of their case under oath, a copy of which will be forwarded to you, in order that a thorough and careful investigation of the matter may be had by you after due notice to all adverse claimants. The necessary instructions for giving the proper notice and for conducting the investigation will form the subject of a further communication at the proper time. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, REGISTER and RECEIVER, Plattsburgh, Missouri. THOS. A. HENDRICKS, Commissioner. |
