United States v. Stinson

From Wikisource
(Redirected from 197 U.S. 200)
Jump to navigation Jump to search


United States v. Stinson
by David Josiah Brewer
Syllabus
837733United States v. Stinson — SyllabusDavid Josiah Brewer
Court Documents

United States Supreme Court

197 U.S. 200

United States  v.  Stinson

 Argued: January 25, 26, 1905. --- Decided: March 13, 1905

This suit was commenced in the circuit court of the United States for the western district of Wisconsin, on February 25, 1895, to set aside the patents for fourteen quarter sections of land, charged to have been fraudulently acquired by the defendant James Stinson. The lands were entered under the pre-emption laws, in 1854-55, by different individuals, and immediately thereafter conveyed by them to James Stinson. The government, as admitted, received $1.25 per acre, the statutory price for lands so entered. The frauds charged are that the entrymen did not occupy and improve the lands as required by law, and did not enter them for their own benefit, but were employed by James Stinson to make the entries; that he paid the purchase price to the government, and also paid the entrymen for their services, and thus, in defiance of the provisions of the statutes, obtained title to the lands. James Stinson, in his answer, under oath, denied specifically the alleged frauds. Quite a volume of testimony was taken. Upon this the circuit court found that it was not true, as alleged, that James Stinson had been guilty of fraud in obtaining the title to the lands and dismissed the bill. This dismissal was affirmed by the circuit court of appeals (60 C. C. A. 615, 125 Fed. 907), from whose decree the United States appealed to this court.

Messrs. Marsden C. Burch, John B. [202]

Simmons, and Solicitor General Hoyt for appellant.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 202-203 intentionally omitted]

Messrs. R. M. Bashford, John O. Spooner, A. L. Sanborn,

[Argument of Counsel from Pages 203-204 intentionally omitted]

William E. Church, Robert McMurdy, and Roger Sherman for appellees.

Mr. Justice Brewer delivered the opinion of the court:

Notes[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse