OCR Text |
Show 72 REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS. July 19,1893, the commissioners, through their chairman, submitted a request for further instructions upon the question whether- If the nation is to be given credit for the use of the larids are the intruders to be given credit for the cost of maintaining the improvements, suoh asreplacing and improving old fences and buildings9 This request was submitted to the Department July 28,1893, and August 17, 1893, the Department replied that the value of the use and occupancy of the land could not be satisfactorily determined with-out taking into consideration the cost of maintaining such improve-ments and making suah repairs as might have been necessary to the continuance of that use and occupation; that while it might not be proper iu every case to take into consideration the value of the use and occnpancy of the laud, that being a matter in which the appraisers should exercise a sound discretion, yet when it is takeniuto considera-tion, the cost of improvements anti repairs should also be considered. Instructions prepared for the commissioners in accord.ance with the above decision were submitted by this office August 17,1893, and sub-sequently reccived the approval of the Department. The commissioners again asked for further instructions upon the question- If an intruder occupying improvements made hefore August 11, 1886, made addi-tional improvements, suoh a8 erecting new buildings, clearing ssd making new fields and fenaing the same, must such additional improvementa,made subsequently to August 11, 1886, bespprilised with the old improvements9 This question was submitted to the Department-with report of August 25,1893, in which the office expressed the opinion that all improvements in the possession of .intruders who had commenced occu-pancy prior to Augnst 11,18S6, should be appraised, whether made before that date or subsequently. September 25, 1893, I submitter1 to the Department the following questions upon which the appraisers had, September 15, 1893, asked for further instructious,viz: Whether they should appraise theimprove-meuts of intruders speciiied in classes as follows: First. When two intrude18 who made their improvements before Allgllst 11, 1886, subseq~~es t ltyo that date exchanged them, each intruder now occupying the improvements whioh were oommenoed prior to August 11,1886, by the other, but. neither oan swear that he began the oooupilncy of the improv?ments now claimed and uooupied hg him prior to that date. Second. Wherein impro~,oluents made by an intruder before August 11,1886, have been by him subvequentlg sol11 to another intruder. Third. Wherein the intruder hadmade improvements p r i o r t o~u g n s1t 1,1886,b ut. subsequently to that date sold them, and with the proceeds of such aale purchased or made other improvements after that date. Fourth. Where upon invoatigation it i. aaoert;ained that intruders who have been oconpying improvements, which occupancy began prior to Angust 11, 1886, dis-claimed my ownerahip h such improvements, and claimed that tthes actually belonged to Cherokee citizens. Owing to the temporary suspension of the work of the commission-ers (hereinafter referred to), these last three office reports received no |