115 



United States v. Ferris & Burden : Grazing trespass, civil, Beaver- 

 head National Forest. Case closed upon payment of $4, value of forage 

 consumed. 



United States v . Johnnie Gross, jr. : Occupancy trespass, civil, Sioux 

 National Forest. Letter written to trespasser calling for $59.75, sent 

 by district forester. 

 Law Cases in District 2 



United States v. George Korab : Timber trespass, Black Hills National 

 Forest. Case closed upon payment of $50. 2G, value of timber cut. 



United States v. J. F. Church : Grazing trespass, Arapahoe National 

 Forest. Case closed upon payment of $-41.27, value of forage consumed. 



United States r. O. P. Olson : Grazing trespass, Hayden National 

 Forest. Settled by payment of $45.57 actual and $100 punitive damages. 



United States v. Carbon Timber Co. : Timber trespass, Medicine Bow 

 National Forest. Compromise agreement entered into July 8, 1911, 

 involving the payment of $23,572.74, and building of a $20,000 fire line 

 by the company. All other conditions of the agreement of settlement 

 having been complied with by the company, the case was closed upon 

 final payment of $4,000 by the American Surety Co. 



United States v. Colorado Power Co. : Occupancy trespass, Holy Cross 

 National Forest. On January 11, 1910, the District Court for the Dis- 

 i trict of Colorado decided the case. The court held that such rights as 

 ! the defendant company has to occupy the complainant's lands are 

 dependent upon the terms of the act of February 15, 1901 (31 Stat., 

 790) ; that the United States has the right to impose reasonable restric- 

 tions and require payment of reasonable fees for the use and enjoyment 

 i of its lands under the provisions of such act ; that the fees imposed, 

 i which amounted to a charge of approximately $100 per month, were not 

 | excessive or unreasonable ; that the method or means by which the 

 Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture sought to ascertain the 

 amount of such fees, viz, by subjecting the defendant's business to public 

 surveillance, etc., was beyond the authority given by the act of 1901, 

 supra ; that the nonpayment of such fees did not, therefore, justify or 

 warrant a revocation of the permit ; that the attempted revocation of 

 the permit on March 3, 1909, was void ; that the original permit is, 

 therefore, valid and continues in effect ; that the defendant is required 

 to comply with such reasonable regulations as the Secretary of Agri- 

 culture may impose upon the maintenance and operation of the plant. 

 The court held also that the construction of a tunnel instead of a ditch 

 did not justify or warrant a revocation of the permit, nor did the 

 further fact that the line of the tunnel departed from the proposed line 

 of the ditch justify or warrant such revocation. Upon stipulation of 

 counsel for the United States and for the defendant company the date 

 for entering final decree has been continued until July 8, 1916. 



