STATE LAND LAWS 89 



CONFLICTING APPLICATIONS. SEC. 93 



against his landlord, by making improvements thereon prior to March 26, 1890, 

 even though the landlord had never been in actual possession of the tide land, 

 if the lessee had no other claim of title than his possession under the lease : 

 Tullis v. Tacoma Land Co., 19 Wash. 140. 



The use by a mill company of contiguous tide land for storing lumber, etc., 

 does not constitute the lessee of the company an improver : McKenzie v. Woo- 

 din, 9 Wash. 414. 



A row of piles driven from a mill to deep water, for use in booming logs, does 

 not constitute such an improvement as to give a right of purchase : Globe Mill 

 Co. v. Bellingham Bay Impt. Co., 10 Wash. 458. 



And the fact that certain tide lands afford a passage for logs from deep 

 water to applicant's mill, and are thus convenient to the operation of the mill, 

 gives no right of purchase : id. 



The construction of two or three small buildings on tide lands, and their 

 use as temporary residences and for the storing of small quantities of goods, 

 does not constitute such improvement for "commerce, trade or business" as con- 

 templated by the statute : Barlow v. Gamicell, 12 Wash. 651. 



An office building, erected by one man in two or three days, and a small open 

 coke-shed are not such improvements as are contemplated by this section ; espe- 

 cially if they were built after the adoption of the constitution, asserting the 

 state's title to shore lands : Pac. Iron Wks. v. Bryant etc. Co., 60 Wash. 502. 



Only such tide lands as were actually improved for the purposes mentioned 

 prior to the approval of the act of March 26, 1890, are subject to the right of 

 purchase : Globe Mill Co. v. Bellingham Bay Impt. Co., 10 Wash. 458. 



SEC. 93. CONFLICTING APPLICATIONS HEARING. 



If at the expiration of sixty days from and after the filing 

 of final appraisal with the Commissioner of Public Lands there 

 being no conflicting applications filed the applicant shall be 

 deemed to have the right of purchase. If at the expiration of 

 said sixty days two or more applications shall have been filed 

 for any tract, conflicting with each other, the Harbor Line Com- 

 mission [Board of State Land Commissioners] shall forthwith 

 order a hearing to determine the rights of the parties applying 

 for said tract. They shall require each applicant, within a 

 time stated, to submit under oath a full statement of the facts 

 whereby he claims a preference right of purchase, and such 

 statement shall be the only pleading required and will be 

 deemed denied by all other applicants. In case any applicant 

 shall fail within the time limited to file such statement he shall, 

 unless good excuse be shown therefor, be deemed to have waived 

 his right of purchase of the tract under his application. At 

 the hearing which may be upon oral or written testimony, the 

 board shall determine who has the first right of purchase to the 

 whole or any portion of the lot or tract involved, and such 

 award shall be certified to the Commissioner of Public Lands, 



