Emmons v. United States

• Decision Date: 29 November 1909
• Docket Number: 1,655.
• Parties: EMMONS v. UNITED STATES.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Oregon

175 F. 514

EMMONS v. UNITED STATES.

No. 1,655.

United States Circuit Court, D. Oregon.

November 29, 1909

Snow &amp McCamant, for plaintiff.

John McCourt, U.S. Atty.

WOLVERTON District Judge.

This action was instituted to recover back from the United States certain moneys advanced by entrymen Graham, Jones, and Steinhardt for the purchase of timber lands under what is commonly known as the 'Timber and Stone Act' of Congress, approved June 3, 1878 (Act June 3, 1878, c. 151, 20 Stat. 89 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1545)). The entries were canceled by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, and in two instances, upon appeal to the Secretary of the Interior, the rulings of the Commissioner were affirmed. An answer was interposed, whereby it was alleged, in effect that the cancellations were made upon due hearings had and proofs touching the character of the lands, and the qualifications of the entrymen to make purchase thereof, and proceeded upon the grounds that the entries in each case were not made in good faith, but were fraudulent. Specific matters are stated showing wherein the fraud consisted, but it is unnecessary to set them out in detail. To the answer a demurrer has been interposed, and the question for consideration is whether, under such a state of facts, the plaintiff is entitled to recover.

The question was once passed upon by my predecessor, Hon. C. B Bellinger, and is now presented upon a rehearing. Incidentally, it is urged that the action does not lie against the government for recovery of the moneys involved. This question has been passed upon in deciding a demurrer to the complaint, and is not presented in any form of pleading at the present hearing.

I am of the opinion that the defense interposed by the answer is a good one. It has become well settled that the Land Department, in passing upon matters of fact, within the scope of its jurisdiction to hear and determine questions relating to the sale and disposal of the public lands, acts judicially, and that its findings and judgments become conclusive and binding, as the judgments and decrees of courts of general jurisdiction are conclusive and final, and are preclusive of the matters adjudicated in all other proceedings. I quote from Smelting Company v. Kemp, 104 U.S. 636, 640, 26 L.Ed. 875:

'In that respect they (the officers of the Land Department) exercise a judicial function, and, therefore, it has been held in various instances by this court that their judgment as to matters of fact, properly determinable by them, is conclusive when brought to notice in a collateral proceeding. Their judgment in such cases is, like that of other special tribunals upon matters within their exclusive jurisdiction, unassailable except by a direct proceeding for its correction or annulment.' The doctrine is again affirmed in its fullest import, in Noble v. Union River Logging Railroad, 147 U.S. 165, 13 Sup.Ct. 271, 37 L.Ed. 123, where numerous authorities are cited in its support. Now, if it be, as is alleged in the

...