SERVICE NOTES FOR MAY. 



OFFICE OF THE FORESTER. 



LAW. 



Mr. A. C. Shaw will visit the offices of many of the supervisors during the 

 summer season, to instruct and assist them in the preparation of case for trial 

 and in other legal matters. He will be at Denver, Colo., May 11 ; at Cheyenne, 

 Wyo., May 13 ; at Deadwood, S. Dak., May 17 ; at Leadville, Colo., May 22 ; at 

 Moffatt, Colo., May 25; at Santa Fe, N. Mex., May 28; at Capitan, N. Mex., 

 .June 2 ; at Paradise, Ariz., June 8 ; at Susanville, Cal., after June 12, indefinitely. 



This programme may be varied by Mr. Shaw as necessity demands, but he 

 will notify the supervisors of any change. 



The Secretary of Agriculture has sustained the decision of the Forester, 

 dated August 2, which granted to the city of Manitou, Colo., the right to use 

 the bed of French Creek to carry the waters which had been legally appro- 

 priated for municipal uses. The Secretary's decision ended a long fight against 

 the city, and followed the decisions of the supreme court of the State of 

 Colorado, which recognized the right of appropriators of water to use every 

 convenience which nature has provided for transporting the water. 



The General Laud Office has, upon the recommendation of the Forester, 

 ordered a hearing upon the alleged illegal mineral land claims of H. H. Yard 

 in the Plumas National Forest. This hearing will take place at Susanville, 

 Cal., probably in May or early in June, and will involve a claim to 18,000 



acres of land. 



The Forester has held, in a letter to the supervisor of the Grand Canyon 

 National Forest, that the Forest Service can not legally recognize any lease 

 made by the Territorial authorities for unsurveyed lands which it is claimed 

 will, when surveyed, become sections 16 and 36. The decision follows the 

 decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Heydenfeldt v. Daney Gold Mining 

 Company (93 U. S., 634) ; the decision of the Secretary in Barnhust v. State of 

 Utah (30 L. D., 314), and the State of South Dakota v. Riley (34 L. D., 657) ; and 

 holds also that the Territory is fully compensated for its loss under section 

 2275, United States Revised Statutes, as amended by the act of Congress of 

 February 28, 1891. 



(27) 



