OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR, 479 



The case of United States v. Myron Naj^ was decitled in the United 

 States District Court at Salt Lake City on January 28, 1919, and 

 involved the nse of mineral claims merely for residence purposes. 

 xV permanent injunction was obtained and the defendant was re- 

 moved from the premises. The case is of importance in that it is 

 a judicial determination of the validity of a mineral claim without 

 preliminary proceedings in the Land Office for adjudication of the 

 character of the lands. 



Several cases arose on the Teton National Forest involving the 

 killing of elk in violation of the regulations of the Department of 

 Agriculture. A motion to dismiss, based on the ground that the 

 Secretary of Agi'iculture was without authority to promulgate such 

 regulations, was sustained. Appeals on behalf of the Government 

 are pending. 



The case of LTnited States -v. Kern River Co., decided February 

 10. 1919, involved the cancellation of an irrigation easement granted 

 under the act of March 3, 1891, for failure to use the grant for any 

 purpose contemplated by the act, it having been used for power pur- 

 poses alone. The District Court for the Southern District of 

 California dismissed the bill, holding that fraud or mistake in making 

 the grant had not been established and that the suit could not be 

 maintained and the grant canceled without special act of Congress 

 authorizing the suit and forfeiture of the grant. The Government's 

 appeal to the Circuit Court of xVppeals is pending. 



The case of United States v, Milwaukee Lumber Co. and Fidelity 

 & Deposit Co. of Maryland, decided in favor of the Government on 

 June 21. 1919, was an action to recover $.3,95-1.43, and involves a con- 

 tract bond given to the United States to cover payment for the timber 

 cut from the Elizabeth Davis homestead claim. The bond contained 

 a stipulation to the effect that in the event the entry was relinquished 

 or canceled by a proper officer of the Interior Department, the lumber 

 company would pa}^ to the United States the value of the timber. 

 The claim was canceled and demand made upon the lumber company 

 for the monev, which was refused, but finally the monev was de- 

 posited m the Federal court of Idaho, The homesteader intervened, 

 and while the matter was pending. Congress passed a bill authorizing 

 the Secretary of the Interior to issue a patent. The bill provided 

 that the issuance of patent should not relieve the lumber company 

 from its obligation to pay for the timber. 



IMPORTANT FORESTRY OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. 



In the case of Allen L. Newton, iuAolving a homestead entry within 

 a national forest, the Attorney General, by letter of July it, 1918, 

 to the Secretary of the Interior, expressed the opinion that the pro- 

 viso to section 7, act of March 3, 1891 (2G Stat., 1095), which directs 

 the issuance of patent where no protest or contest is pending at the 

 expiration of two years after the issuance of receiver's final receipt, 

 as such proviso was interpreted by the Supreme Court in Lane v. 

 Hoglund, 214 U. S., 174, does not require the Secretary of the Inte- 

 rior to issue patent Avhere fraud is involved, and that if the proof of 

 fraud was so clear, unequivocal, and convincing as to warrant a suit 

 to cancel the patent, a suit should be instituted to cancel the final 

 receipt and entry, and that pending the determination of such suit 

 the patent should be withheld. 



