Danforth v. Morrical

Citations

• 84 Ill. 456

Syllabus

<p>1. Pre-emption laws — decision of proper officers as to sufficiency of proof under, conclusive. The decision of the proper officers as to the aptness of time and sufficiency of proofs required in the several steps to perfect title to land from the government, under the pre-emption laws, in the absence of fraud, imposition or mistake shown by the party alleging it, is final and conclusive.</p> <p>2. Same—when patent under, takes effect. A patent upon a pre-emption settlement takes effect from the time of the settlement as disclosed in the declaratory statement and proofs of the settler to the register of the local land office.</p> <p>3. Same—attempted adjudication by land officer. Where a patent has been issued to a pre-emptor, and never recalled or vacated by the land department, an attempted adjudication by the register and receiver, and approval thereof by the commissioner of the general land office, can have no effect in a controversy in a court of equity between those claiming under the patent to the pre-emptor and a patent issued to another after the preemptor had made and filed his declaratory statement.</p> <p>4. Same—opinion of land officer not binding on courts. In a controversy between those claiming under a patent issued to a pre-emptor and one issued to a purchaser from the government after the declaratory statement of the pre-emptor is made and filed, and whilst the pre-emptor is in possession, the mere opinion of the register and receiver, or of the commissioner of the general land office, is not binding upon the court. In such cases, the courts, upon all the evidence adduced, should determine, from their own views of the law, the equities of the parties.</p> <p>5. Patent—in conflict with prior pen-amount patent, void,. Where a patent is issued for land which is held by another patentee under a paramount right., it is void, and may be set aside in a court of equity at the suit of the person having the paramount right.</p>