Character of land.—About two-thirds of this claim has timber of medium density. The remainder is hghter. The western portion is rough, and the creek runs through a small canyon. One-half the claim would be fit for agriculture if cleared.
Character, extent and value of improvements.—Log house, about 14 × 16; another small building used as a henhouse, and stable about 10 × 12. Buildings were substantial when built, and evidently made to be permanent. A tract of about 2 acres had been cleared, which included a small garden, and the remainder sowed to grass. Another tract of about one acre had been cleared, but now overgrown with brush. The premises have not been occupied for some time, and have been somewhat neglected. It seems she made the improvements herself, and as everything had to be packed on horseback from Detroit to the claim, a distance of not less than 22 miles, these improvements must have cost not less than $200 or $250.
Residence of claimant.—The fact that the claimant, after being compelled to forego a continuous residence on the land, did use a part of her earnings in making improvements thereon, seems to show good faith on her part in maintaining a residence. The evidence is that she entered on the land in July, 1892, and resided there continuously until the Fall of 1894, when she was compelled to leave to obtain work elsewhere. She seems, however, to have spent her earnings when away in improving the land. She is not the head of a family. Was known in the neighborhood of the claim, and was qualified to make the entry.
The claimant seems to have acted in good faith throughout, and I think this entry might be sustained.
The affidavits of J. A. W. Heidecke and L. Jacobs, accompanying the foregoing report, are similar in character to those they made for Loomis.
The amusing feature of the two reports—wherein both Government agents describe the claimant as a hard-working girl—exists in the fact that she is, in reality, one of the most stylish and refined young women of the West, with hands and features to indicate that she never performed any drudgery in her life.
She assumed the name of "Nellie Backus" for the sake of convenience, and she appeared personally before Special Agent Loomis when she made the affidavit that told of her struggles in the backwoods to win a home from the forest. Any honest official could have seen at first glance that she was falsifying, but then Loomis is excusable on the plea that "suthin' got in his eyes."
The so-called "Nellie Backus" was never any nearer township 11-7 than Albany, Or., fully 100 miles distant, and neither of the Government agents were ever on her claim, or those of the other homesteaders. No efifort was ever made to erect improvements of any kind on the land, which, like all the fraudulent claims, was entirely unfit for cultivation, and heavily covered with a dense growth of timber, besides being- rough and mountainous.
Her real name was Nellie Gilbert at the time she filed her homestead entry as Nellie Backus, and she was then a resident of Portland. She afterward married Elbert K. Brown, the son of a wealthy Eugene hopgrower. In conjunction with Forest Superintendent Salmon B. Ormsby, Special Agent Clark E. Loomis, William H. Davis (Mayor of Albany, Ore.), Henry A. Young, George Sorenson, Binger Harmann, Horace G. McKinley, Emma L. Watson, Dan W. Tarpley, Frank H. Walgamot and myself. Brown and his wife were indicted by the Federal Grand Jury of Oregon on December 27, 1904, for the part they took in the 11-7 frauds, but the case has never been tried.
After George R. Ogden had been recalled for the purpose of identifying the Ormsby report, Mr. Heney then brought out the letter written by Senator Mitchell to Commissioner Hermann, in which were enclosed the affidavits of Emma L. Watson and myself, pertaining to the 12 fraudulent homestead claims.
Page 155
