Ejectment depends upon, see "Ejectment."
Actual possession of mine, see "Mines and Minerals."
Sufficient to quiet title to mining claim, see "Quieting Title."
None in favor of judgment of probate court, see "Courts."
Presumptions favor jurisdiction, see "Courts.”
Subagency by custom, see "Brokers."
1. Agent may locate mines for himself.
An agent, however close his fiduciary relations are toward
his principal, may locate mines for himself, in his own name,
without his relationship is so fixed that it would be inequitable
and unjust for him to do so. In such latter case he becomes a
trustee for his principal.
-Copper River Min. Co. v. McClellan.....
Jurisdiction of, see "Executors and Administrators."
Collateral attack on judgment, see "Judgment."
1. Service of summons in Yukon Territory.
The statute of the Yukon Territory provides that service of
summons in civil actions against a nonresident shall be made as
follows: "In case any defendant is out of the Territories but has
an agent, managing clerk or other representative resident and
carrying on his business within the same, service of the writ of
summons may be made on such agent, managing clerk or other
representative." Defendant had previous to his leaving that
territory given his brother a power of attorney "to transact any
and all business relating to my interests in the Yukon Territory."
At the time of service of the summons on him as the agent, the
brother was not engaged in carrying on any business for the
defendant therein. Held, that the service on the agent was not
such service as the Yukon statute contemplated, and that a judg-
ment in personam against the defendant, based on such substi-
tuted service, was void for want of jurisdiction.
-Alaska Commercial Co. v. Debney.....
Dower interest in, see "Dower."
Occupied by Indians, see "Indians."
Mining claims on, see "Mines and Minerals."
Patent while adverse suit pending, see "Mines and Minerals."
Navigable streams on, see "Navigable Waters."
Railroad right of way over, see "Railroads."
Trespassing on, see "Trespass."
Locating, in trust for another, see "Trusts."
Water rights on, see "Waters and Water Courses."
1. The public domain in Alaska.
All the vacant and unappropriated lands in Alaska at the
date of the cession of 1867 by Russia became a part of the public
domain and public lands of the United States.
-United States v. Berrigan.....
2. Tide lands held in trust for future state.
The title and dominion of the tide waters and the lands under
them and the beds and banks of navigable streams in Alaska are
held by the United States in trust for the future states to be
erected there.
-United States v. Roth....
3. Fishery on tide lands.
The provision of Act May 17, 1884, c. 53, § 8, 23 Stat. 26,
establishing a civil government for Alaska, and creating a land
district therein, that "the Indians or other persons in said
district shall not be disturbed in the possession of any lands
actually in their use or occupation or now claimed by them, but
the terms under which such persons may acquire title to such
lands is reserved for future legislation by Congress," applies
to all lands, including tide lands, over which the federal govern
ment has exclusive jurisdiction and power of disposal, and pro-
tects possessory rights which were then exercised and claimed
for fishing or other purposes by occupants of adjoining uplands
against others who assert a common right to fish thereon.
-Heckman v. Sutter, 128 Fed. 393, 63 C. C. A. 135.
Under the provisions of Act May 17, 1884, c. 53, § 8 (23 Stat. 26),
providing a civil government for Alaska and creating a land dis-
trict therein, that "the Indians or other persons in said district
shall not be disturbed in the possession of any lands actually
in their use or occupation or now claimed by them, but the terms
under which such persons may acquire title to such lands is
reserved for future legislation by Congress," there having been
no subsequent legislation which impairs its force, persons who.
with their grantors, have since, prior to said act, occupied and
used public lands adjacent to the coast, including a small strip
of tide lands which they had cleared from stones and stumps,
to fit it for use in drawing seines for catching salmon, are en-
titled to be protected in the undisturbed use of such tide lands
as against others who assert a common right to fish thereon.
-Heckman v. Sutter, 119 Fed. 83, 55 C. C. A. 635.
A homestead entry perfected under the United States land
laws, where the land abuts upon the waters of a navigable
stream, gives to the qualified entryman the exclusive right to the
use and occupation of the shore land between high and low wa-
ter mark as against a mere trespasser.
-United States v. Roth...
4. Soldier's additional homestead certificates.
A soldier's additional homestead certificate may be sold and
assigned by the soldier, and the assignee may enter land with it
in Alaska.
An adverse suit brought to determine the respective rights of a
claimant under the law permitting soldier's additional home-
stead certificates to be located on the public land in Alaska, and
those who deny his right by adverse proceeding under section 10
of the act of Congress of May 14, 1898 (chapter 299, 30 Stat. 413
[U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1469]), may be maintained in the district
courts of Alaska; the practice and parties being controlled and
regulated solely by the Code of Alaska. Nome-Sinook Mining
Co. v. Simpson, 1 Alaska, 578.
Settlers upon public lands claimed under the laws permitting
soldier's additional homestead certificates to be located in Alaska
may intervene in an adverse suit brought to quiet title thereto.
though they have not filed an adverse in the land office pro-
ceedings.
5. Homestead entry in Alaska.
The courts have jurisdiction to inquire into and protect the
occupancy, possession, and property rights of a homestead entry-
man on public lands from the injurious trespasses of another.
and if, upon such inquiry, it appears that defendant is a mere
vexatious trespasser, it is the duty of the court to issue its
mandatory injunction restraining him from further unlawful
trespass.
-United States v. Roth.....
The possession of a homestead entryman under the public land
laws held to be co-extensive with the boundaries of his land, and
to extend over shore lands of navigable waters abutting thereon.
-United States v. Roth.......
..257
6. United States military reservations.
Public lands lying within the limits of a reservation for mili-
tary purposes are not subject to entry under the soldier's addi-
tional homestead laws.
Where a tract of public land is actually set apart by an order
of the War Department for military purposes, and government
appropriations expended in fitting it for such use, and the mili-
tary forces remain in possession thereof until its abandonment
by a formal notice posted by the military forces, held, that it was
a military reservation.
The military reservation at Valdez was formally abandoned
July 25, 1902. Plaintiff was then in possession of a stable there-
on but without any fixed boundaries or other claim of right to
any portion of the ground. The land was located by town-site
claimants. Plaintiff brought ejectment to recover possession.
Held, that he was limited to the land actually occupied by his
stable.
Plaintiff acquired peaceable possession of a small tract of land
for a horse lot and stable on the military cantonment or reserva-
tion at Valdez by permission of the commander of the post. Held
that, as against the government, he was a mere trespasser, liable
to be ejected without notice by the military authorities; he ini-
tiated no right to the ground by such possession.
7. Reservation for fish culture.
Appellant without authority settled on a tract of land on
Afognak Island, Alaska, prior to 1891, and erected a cannery.
After Act March 3, 1891, c. 561, 26 Stat. 1100 [U. S. Comp. St.
1901, p. 1468] it applied for a survey of the land occupied by
it and deposited the money therefor. The survey was made, ap-
proved, and forwarded to the Commissioner of the General
Land Office. On December 24, 1892, the President, under pro-
visions of the said act of March 3, 1891, by proclamation, de-
clared the whole island reserved for fish culture.
The survey
was rejected on that and other grounds, and appellant was
ordered to leave the island, which it did. Thereupon it sued
in the Court of Claims for value of its improvements and for
loss of business. The claim was disallowed except for cost of
survey. In affirming the judgment, held, that the mere settle-
ment upon public lands and making improvements thereon, with-
out taking some steps required by law to initiate the settler's
right thereto, is wholly inoperative as against the United States.
This rule is not affected, as to lands in Alaska, by any provi-
sions of Act May 17, 1884, c. 53, 23 Stat. 24, providing a civil
government for Alaska.
-Russian-American Packing Co. v. United States, 199
U. S. 570, 26 Sup. Ct. 157, 50 L. Ed. 314.
Although the occupation and cultivation of public lands with
a view to pre-emption confers a preference over others in the
purchase of such lands by the bona fide settler which will en-
able him to protect his possession against other individuals, it
does not confer any vested rights as against the United States.
-Russian-American Packing Co. v. United States, 199
U. S. 570, 26 Sup. Ct. 157, 50 L. Ed. 314.
Under the pre-emption laws, a purchaser availing of the pro-
visions of the act of March 3, 1891, to purchase land in Alaska,
acquires no vested rights by the mere deposit for the survey
or until the purchase price is paid to, and receipt given there-
for by, the proper land officer, and until this is done Congress
may withdraw the land from entry and sale although inchoate
rights of settlers may be defeated.
-Russian-American Packing Co. v. United States, 199
U. S. 570, 26 Sup. Ct. 157, 50 L. Ed. 314.
The provisions of Act March 3, 1891, c. 561, § 14, 26 Stat. 1100
[U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1468], authorized the reservation of
the land for fish culture, and the exercise of this reserved power
terminated all the rights of one who as a mere trespasser had
|