354 ANNUAL REPORTS OF DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



relate back, as contended by the defendant, so as to defeat the power 

 of Congress to dispose of the land while unsurveyed, that a disposi- 

 tion by the President under authority of an act of Congress is a dis- 

 position b}' Congress, and that the power to establish the Forest in- 

 cluded the power to make the temporary withdrawal. 



Several important cases have arisen in connection with the admin- 

 istration of the Grand Canyon National Monument within the 

 Tusayan National Forest. Numerous mining locations have been 

 made along the rim of the canyon and at other points of vantage. 

 These locations interfere seriously with the proper administration of 

 the land as a Monument and Forest and also prevent the full and free 

 enjoyment of the beauties of the canyon by the many tourists who 

 visit it annually. In Cameron v. Weedin and Birdno (226 Fed., 44), 

 involving 17 of these mining locations, the court denied the plaintiff's 

 application for a temporary injunction to enjoin the defendants 

 (the register and receiver of the United States land office at Phcenix, 

 Ariz.), from proceeding with a hearing ordered by the Commissioner 

 of the General Land Office to determine the validity of the locations. 

 The plaintiff contended that the Department of the Interior was 

 without jurisdiction in the absence of an application for patent, and 

 that in this circumstance the validity of the locations could be deter- 

 mined only by the appropriate court. In dismissing the complaint, 

 the court held that it was without jurisdiction to interfere with the 

 proceedings, since the legal title to the land is in the United States 

 and the defendants were acting under the orders of their superior 

 officers. It also held that if the defendants were without jurisdiction 

 the proceedings were void and no injunction was necessary. An 

 amended complaint was filed, joining the Commissioner of the Gen- 

 eral Land Office, service being made upon him while temporarily in 

 Arizona. Motions to quash service on the Commissioner and dismiss 

 the amended complaint were granted, and the plaintiff then per- 

 fected an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, where 

 the case is now pending. The register and receiver proceeded with 

 the hearing and upon completion of the Government's case the claim- 

 ant refused to introduce any evidence. No decision has been ren- 

 dered by the register and receiver, since the claimant obtained an 

 injunction against the Secretary of the Interior and the Commis- 

 sioner of the General Land Office in the Supreme Court of the Dis- 

 trict of Columbia. An appeal from this decision has been prosecuted 

 to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. 



A suit has been filed by the Government in the United States court 

 for Arizona (Prescott E-1G), for an injunction to prevent Cameron, 

 the plaintiff in the above-mentioned case, and his tenants from occu- 

 pying and maintaining numerous buildings on the rim of the canyon 

 and at the head of the Bright Angel Trail, the principal means of 

 access to the bottom of the canyon. Cameron claims the land under 

 a mining location designated as the Cape Horn lode, which was de- 

 clared null and void by the Secretary of the Interior when he rejected 

 an application for patent therefor. The defendant's motion to dis- 

 miss and transfer to the law side of the court was denied, and the right 

 of the Government to proceed in equity for an injunction sustained. 

 The case was set down for final hearing on August 1. 1916. 



In Cnmeron v. Bass, mentioned in my last report, involving the 

 Cape Horn claim, the Superior Court of Coconino County, Ariz., re- 



