Twine v. Carey
| Decision Date | 07 September 1894 |
| Citation | 37 P. 1096,2 Okla. 249,1894 OK 41 |
| Parties | TWINE v. CAREY. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. A rule of the secretary of the interior which requires a contestant before town-site trustees appointed under Act May 14, 1890, to deposit $32 with the treasurer of the board before a cause will be heard, is authorized by the law, is a reasonable rule, and a contestant or claimant failing to comply with the rule cannot invoke the a id of a court of equity.
2. Jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine the subject-matter in controversy between parties to a suit,--to adjust or exercise any judicial power over them.
3. A court of equity has no power to hear and determine any question affecting the title to public lands until the land department has determined the matter, and the title has passed from the government; but, after the title has passed to private parties, a court of equity will convert the holder of the legal title into a trustee to the true owner, if in equity and good conscience, and by the laws of congress and rules of the department thereunder, it ought to have gone to another.
4. One claiming the aid of a court of equity to set aside the finding of town-site trustees must allege every fact that it is necessary to prove to entitle him to a conveyance in the first instance, and must show that he was defeated by the misapplication of the law, or the fraud, mistake, or misconduct of his adversary; and he cannot plead his own laches, misfortune, or neglect as an excuse for failure to comply with the law.
5. Town-site trustees appointed under Act May 14, 1890, bear the same relation to the disposition of town lots that registers and receivers do to the disposal of public lands; and their decisions on questions of fact are conclusive, and will not be inquired into, except on appeal to the proper departmental officers. A court of equity will only interfere to prevent injustice from being done, after final judgment, by reason of fraud, accident, mistake, or misapplication of the law.
6. Objection to the jurisdiction of the court which goes to the power of the court over the subject-matter may be raised at any stage of the proceedings.
7. "A court of equity has no jurisdiction when it is apparent from the petition that the plaintiff had a remedy at law, and failed to avail himself of it, and shows no good excuse for such failure, and wherein it also appears that he was not entitled to the relief prayed for."
Appeal from district court, Logan county; before Justice Frank Dale.
Suit by Mollie Carey against W. H. Twine. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed.
Keaton & Cotteral, for appellant.
H. R Thurston, for appellee.
This was a suit in equity brought by Mollie Carey, the defendant in error, to charge W. H. Twine, the plaintiff in error, as trustee of certain real estate situated in East Guthrie Oklahoma, and to compel a conveyance to her. The district court found for the plaintiff, and directed that a conveyance of the legal title to the land in controversy be made to the plaintiff, Carey.
From this finding and decree the defendant appeals.
The petition alleges, in substance, that the plaintiff, Carey, is qualified to acquire title to town lots in Oklahoma, and that on December 1, 1891, she made settlement upon lots 10, 11 and 12, in block 86, in East Guthrie, and began improving them, and that she has plowed, planted, and cultivated said lots, and has resided thereon ever since said date; that, at the time she initiated her claim to said lots, they were vacant and unoccupied, and she took peaceable possession. It further appears from the petition that she made application to the town-site trustees for a deed to said lots in 1892, and that her case was set for hearing on a certain day by said trustees; that the defendant was an adverse claimant to said lots; that on the day of the hearing she was unable to make the deposit of $32 required by a rule of the secretary of the interior, and, by reason of her poverty, no trial was had, and the trustees have conveyed the lots to the defendant, Twine. There is no allegation that she asked the trustees for further time, or that she was denied a continuance, or that the defendant took any advantage of her or her situation.
The lands embraced in the town site of East Guthrie were proved up under the act of cong ress approved May 14, 1890 (26 Stat 109). This act provides that "so much of the public lands in the territory of Oklahoma as may be necessary to embrace all the legal subdivisions covered by actual occupancy for purposes of trade and business, not exceding twelve hundred and eighty acres in each case, may be entered as town sites, for the several use and benefit of the occupants thereof, by three trustees, to be appointed by the secretary of the interior for that purpose." The act further provides that the trustees shall have power to administer oaths, and to hear and determine all controversies arising in the execution of this act; and they were required to keep records of their proceedings, and file same in the general land office. These tribunals were by act of congress created a special tribunal to make entries for the occupants of such lands in Oklahoma as had already been set apart, occupied, and improved for purposes of trade and business and residence. These towns had been settled, laid out, and improved for over a year at the time the act passed. Congress had, through inadvertence or neglect, failed to provide any means whereby the town-site occupants could procure title to their lots; and, recognizing the existing conditions, the act of May 14, 1890, was passed, largely as a remedial statute to protect and reserve the rights already acquired under other laws, which had permitted lands in Oklahoma to be used for town-site purposes, but failed to furnish the machinery for obtaining title. It is a matter of public history that out of the imperfect and defective laws governing town sites in Oklahoma, and the confused state of society arising from the settlement of a new country, and from the further fact that, for more than a year after Oklahoma was actually settled and inhabited by an intelligent, enterprising, and thrifty people, no laws were in force for the government of the people except the constitution and the general laws of the United States, the rules of the common law, which have by consent become a part of our American jurisprudence, and the stern law of necessity, which a love for justice and right has implanted in the hearts of every patriotic American, there arose numerous adverse and conflicting claims to town lots in the various cities, which have now become marvels of growth, prosperity, and energy; and to meet this condition of affairs, and furnish to the uncontented claimants a means of speedily acquiring title, and to contestants a tribunal with power and authority to hear the facts and determine their rights, congress enacted the law under which the town site in question was entered. By the terms of the act itself, as well as the general powers conferred upon the interior department by the laws of the United States, the secretary of the interior was empowered to make all necessary rules and regulations for the government of the trustees in discharge of their duties. These rules, when promulgated, have...
To continue reading
Request your trial