cannot be used to augment the specific appropriation contained in the later legislation for the support of reindeer stations and for the care and management of the reindeer industry. 53-71

The proceeds derived from the sale of male reindeer belonging to the United States in the Territory of Alaska are to be deposited in the Treasury of the United States. 53-71

XIX. TIDELANDS

Littoral owners in Alaska have a right of access to navigable water, which right is appurtenant to the upland but may be separated from it. Hence, the Secretary or the appropriate official of the National Park Service may, pursuant to the act of Aug. 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535; 16 U.S.C. 3), grant a revocable permit for a portion of the Katmai National Monument lands, together with the right of access to navigable water over intermediate tidelands, or may simply grant the said right of access. 59-360

Territorial tidelands may be administered by the Secretary, without disposition or depletion, under the general grant of jurisdiction over public lands contained in section 453, Revised Statutes (43 U.S.C. 2), in that the Secretary or the appropriate official of the Bureau of Land Management may issue a revocable permit for a clam-canning operation on tidelands adjoining the Katmai National Monument. 59-360

XX. TOWNSITES

Instructions of Mar. 25, 1927, survey and disposition of Indian and Eskimo possessions in trustee town sites, Alaska. 52-65 XXI. TRADE AND MANUFACTURING SITES

Allegations that a railway company had not complied with the terms of its rightof-way grant over the lands involved are not material in considering its application for a trade and manufacturing site for the same lands. 53-58

The question as to whether one claiming a trade and manufacturing site in the Territory of Alaska under section 10 of the act of May 14, 1898, or an adverse claimant has a better and prior right of possession is by the provisions of that section made determinable by the courts in an

action to quiet title, and any patent issued for the land by the Land Department must be in accordance with the final decree of the court. 53-58

Under the restriction in section 10 of the act of May 14, 1898 (30 Stat. 409, 413) limiting a person, association, or corporation, as the case may be, in the purchase of a trade and manufacturing site to one claim only for any such person, association, or corporation, an application by a corporation must be denied if a majority interest in it be owned by another corporation which had acquired a site under the act, or if the persons holding the majority interest in the stock of the corporation applying for a site are also the holders of the majority stock interest in another corporation which had exhausted its rights; and the applicant's status in this respect is to be adjudged as of the time of the filing of the application. 53-58

Actual possession and use for trade and manufacture of lands within an existing grant of right-of-way for terminal and station grounds by the grantee cannot upon relinquishment of the grant be considered as possession and use for a trade and manufacturing site under section 10 of the act of May 14, 1898 (30 Stat. 409). 53-65

Land within a right-of-way grant for terminal purposes that has not been relinquished or forfeited is not public land, and cannot, therefore, be selected as a trade and manufacturing site under section 10 of the act of May 14, 1898 (30 Stat. 409, 413). 53-65

Section 7 of the act of May 14, 1898 (30 Stat. 409), which makes the act inapplicable to lands within a military, park, Indian or other reservation in Alaska precludes the selection of lands within a national forest or other reservation for trade and manufacturing purposes under section 10 of that act. 53-65

When the question arises as to whether a public-land statute is sought to be circumvented by the legal fiction of separate entity between a corporation and the parties holding the substantial beneficial interest therein, the Land Department has the power to look through the web of the artificial corporate entity for the purpose of discovering the real parties in interest.

53-65

Instructions of Aug. 1, 1928, fees required with permit applications. Section 31, Cir. No. 672 (47 L.D. 437) construed; Cir. No. 1115 (52 L.D. 59) amended. (Cir. No. 1158.) 52-463

Lands presumptively passing under school-land grants are excluded from appropriation by individuals under other public-land laws, and the administrative rule that applications for tracts embraced in any entry of record give rise to no rights unless such entry has been canceled of record, is applicable thereto. 52-503

Section 7 of the act of Mar. 3, 1891 (26 Stat. 1095) presupposes that the entryman himself shall submit proof and pay the necessary fees and commissions, and that the receiver's receipt shall be issued to him, and there is no such privity of interest between the entryman and a mortgagee as will permit the latter to fulfill these conditions of the statute upon the failure of the entryman to do so. 52-514 Instructions of Nov. 16, 1929, evidence of citizenship. (Cir. No. 1202.) 52-728

An entry automatically confirmed under the proviso to section 7 of the act of Mar. 3, 1891 (26 Stat. 1095), which except for the confirmation would properly go to the Board of Equitable Adjudication for consideration, need not be submitted to that board inasmuch as the only jurisdiction over the matter remaining in the Land Department is that of issuance of patent.

Instructions of Aug. 12, 1930, citizenship of married women. (Cir. No. 857 (Oct. 11, 1922, 49 L.D. 316), revised.) 53-166

Instructions of Apr. 18, 1931, naturalization and citizenship of married women. Cir. Nos. 361 (Nov. 4, 1914, 43 L.D. 444), and 857 (Aug. 12, 1930, 53 I.D. 166), superseded so far as in conflict. (Cir. No. 1248.) 53-374

Where the proofs submitted in connection with an entry or selection show compliance with the applicable law and regulations, allowance of the entry or selection is not erroneous because of the existence of matters which would render it invalid but which do not then appear. 53-436

Regulations adopted Apr. 14, 1936, amending Cir. No. 1004, May 2, 1925 (51 L.D. 138), and Cir. No. 1251, May 7, 1931 (53 I.D. 379), governing fees to accompany applications for coal, sodium, potash, and other mineral licenses, permits and leases. (Cir. No. 1383.)

55-483

A stock-raising homestead application to enter undesignated lands initiates in the applicant no present rights but only a prospect of future rights of uncertain existence and remains incomplete until susceptible of allowance. 56-347

The act of Oct. 14, 1940 (54 Stat. 1175) grants authority to administer oaths "whenever necessary in the performance of *** official duties." Since these duties are investigatory in nature, the authority to administer oaths is incidental to the investigatory function and therefore the act of Oct. 14, 1940, confers no authority to execute jurats attached to applications for public lands. 58-494

Applications for noncompetitive oil and gas leases under the Mineral Leasing Act, which were rejected for failure to comply with new requirements in regulations published in the Federal Register on the day the applications were filed, were entitled to reinstatement as of the date of filing where the applicants were unable reasonably to acquire actual notice of the new regulations and presumably would have complied with the new requirements, and the practice in other land offices was merely to suspend defective applications pending compliance. 59-235

An application filed while land is withdrawn from entry is invalid. The revoca

tion of a withdrawal during the pendency of an applicant's appeal from the rejection of his application does not validate the application. 60-182

Under the long-established rule of the Department, the quarter quarter section, or the fractional lot, is ordinarily the minimum unit of land for classification and disposal. Deviation from the rule is permitted only where no public interest is prejudiced and where it facilitates the administration of the public lands. 60-198

Where the conduct of an individual and of a corporation who seek public lands is such as to mislead the Department and third persons as to whether the individual and the corporation act as separate entities or whether they act in the relationship of principal and agent, disclosed or undisclosed, the Department will not seek to determine their relationship but will hold that they have acted independently or as principal and agent, as may be required in each transaction in order to avoid prejudice to third persons and to the United States. 60-227

of fraudulent and illegal conduct, and (2) the entries should not have been allowed because of defects apparent on the face of the papers filed. The entrymen then applied for repayment of the purchase price of the lands, pursuant to the statute (21 Stat. 287). Held: (1) The applications for repayment must be denied because one of the grounds for cancellation of the entries was the fraudulent conduct of the entrymen. (2) The statute is construed to mean that where one of the grounds for cancellation of an entry is fraud, repayment must be refused, even though in addition the entry has been erroneously allowed because of mistake or error on the part of the land officers. (3) The statute is based upon equitable principles and should be administered accordingly; hence, applicants for repayment, whose entries have been canceled partly because of their fraudulent conduct, should be denied relief; the "clean-hands" doctrine should be applied. 56-73

IV. FILING

A legal application to make entry of lands subject thereto, while pending, reserves the land applied for from disposition to another under any public land law until final action thereon; but the mere filing of an application for public lands, or rights in connection therewith, confers no absolute right where allowance is discretionary with the Secretary of the Interior, such as the privilege of making a grazing lease under section 15 of the Taylor Grazing Act. Accordingly, a lease application under this section, although prior in time to the inclusion of the land in a grazing district, does not segregate the land as against the United States and is not a bar to such inclusion. Case of Goodale v. Olney (12 L.D. 324), and cases there cited, distinguished. 55-580

A letter applying for a preference right to a new lease under the act of July 29, 1942 (56 Stat. 726; 30 U.S.C. 226b) (now sec. 226, 1952 ed.), which was received by the register on Jan. 3, 1944, but allegedly mailed and postmarked on Dec. 29, 1943, held not to have been filed on time in a case in which the old lease expired on Dec. 31, 1943. Under the statute, the holder of a lease was given a preference

right to a new lease "if he shall file an application therefor within ninety days prior to the date of the expiration of the lease." A paper is filed only at the time when actually delivered to and received by the office, not when it could have reached the office in the regular course of the mails. It is, therefore, immaterial whether or not there was unusual delay in the delivery of the letter. 59-41

Issuance of a potassium prospecting permit is discretionary, and the filing of an application therefor confers no right on the applicant. 59-289

Where an envelope containing a proper application for an oil and gas lease was tendered by the postal service to a land office subject to the payment of postage due on the envelope, and the personnel of the land office declined to pay the postage and the envelope was thereupon returned to the applicant, such tender did not constitute a filing of the application and did not establish any predicate for the issuance of an oil and gas lease on the application contained in the envelope.

V. PRIORITY

61-51

The pendency of an application to make homestead entry does not preclude like applications by others for the same land, and if the first application be withdrawn or rejected for any reason other pending applications will receive recognition in the order of time that they were filed. 52-693

Where a senior application, filed for 320 acres under the enlarged homestead act, was rejected because the land was not subject to entry under that act an allowable intervening junior application becomes the senior right and will prevail over a later settlement and claim for 160 acres under section 2289, Revised Statutes, by the original applicant. 53-23

The intervention of an adverse claim in the form of an application to make entry by a qualified applicant prior to the filing of an application to reinstate a properly canceled homestead entry where residence

was not of the character contemplated by section 2291, Revised Statutes, as amended by the act of June 6, 1912 (37 Stat. 123), prevents the application of the rule announced in Slette v. Hill (47 L.D. 108).

53-75

The rule that an application to make entry of land subject thereto by a qualified applicant is equivalent to an entry so far as the applicant is concerned, and while pending reserves the land from other disposition, cannot be invoked by a subsequent applicant to defeat a claim initiated before the prior application was rejected, as the rule is but an application of the doctrine of relation, which cannot be invoked by one not in privity with the first applicant.

55-605

An appeal to the Secretary of the Interior from a decision of the Director of the Bureau of Land Management will be dismissed when notice of appeal is not filed within 30 days from service upon the appellant of the decision from which an appeal is taken. 61-337

VI. REINSTATEMENT

An examination of the cases wherein the Department, following erroneous action in canceling entries, selections, and other filings, has later declined to reinstate them, discloses that there were commonly present in such cases elements of affirmative acquiescence in the decision sought to be vacated, laches in passively permitting the initiation of adverse rights, or other equitable bar. 54-113

VII. RELINQUISHMENT

Where an applicant for exchange of entry of lands within a Federal irrigation project has filed relinquishment prior to the determination of his application, another will not be permitted to enter the relinquished lands until his qualifications have been established by an examining board, and until he has filed a written statement that he has knowledge that the lands are classed as unproductive and insufficient to support a family after payment of water charges, a waiver of right to relief under the adjustment act of Dec. 5, 1924, and consent to pay construction

charges should the lands be subsequently embraced within a productive class.

52-222

Relinquishment of a homestead entry as to part of a forty-acre legal subdivision, on the ground that it is mineral in character, will not be accepted unless the mineral character of the tract sought to be relinquished is shown to have been established in accordance with the requirements of the General Mining Regulations.

54-228

A purchase of a relinquishment of public lands is a valid contract, conferring rights against the vendor but none against the United States, a relinquishment not being a quitclaim but a release running to the Government and to it surrendering all rights in the lands. 56-282

The filing of a relinquishment of a homestead entry operates eo instanti not only to restore its lands to the Government reservoir of public lands but to affect them with whatever burdens or status would previously have attached to them save for the life of the entry. Held, 1. That when the designation of lands including those of a stock-raising homestead entry is canceled during the life of said entry, the lands thereof assume the status of undesignated lands immediately upon their restoration to the Government through the filing of a relinquishment and are again subject to stock-raising homestead entry only in the event of redesignation. 2. That a purchaser of a relinquishment of such lands has no preferred status as against the Government but only that of an ordinary applicant. 56-282

APPROPRIATIONS

(See also Expenditures; Funds)

The general provision contained in prior appropriation acts authorizing the sale of surplus male reindeer belonging to the United States in the Territory of Alaska was not repealed by the mere failure to continue it in the latest appropriation acts, but the proceeds derived from such sales cannot be used to augment the specific appropriation contained in the later legislation for the support of reindeer stations and for the care and management of the reindeer industry. 53-71

Indian

irrigation projects are constructed pursuant to special acts of Congress and annual appropriations from the Treasury, and the moneys resulting from payment of construction charges, etc., are returned to the Treasury as general funds, whereas the Reclamation Act fund is in fact a revolving trust fund, money expended therefrom being returned thereto by the owners of the lands benefited, to be again expended in connection with Reclamation Act projects. 54-90

The act of June 30, 1932 (47 Stat. 446), which transferred to the Secretary of the Interior all of the authority theretofore conferred upon the Board of Road Commissioners in Alaska and the Secretary of War relating to the construction and maintenance of roads and trails in that Territory, carried with the transfer authority to anticipate the appropriations for the supervision of that activity to the extent and under the conditions stated in the act of Feb. 12, 1925 (43 Stat. 930). 54-125

A contract made in one fiscal year is a proper basis for payments out of funds appropriated for the following fiscal year (1) when it was entered into after the appropriation act for the second year was passed but before that year began; (2) when it contains an option to renew which, after appropriate inquiry to see that the price has not fallen out of line with competitors' prices, has been exercised; or (3) when, although not containing an option to renew, it appears that it will be more advantageous to the Government to continue under the old contract than to enter into a new one. 58-24

The proviso in H.R. 7505, 77th Cong., 2d sess., that no funds appropriated pursuant to the act shall become available at any time "during the service of the present Governor" of Puerto Rico is unconstitutional because (1) it constitutes an encroachment upon executive power, (2) it is a bill of attainder, and (3) it violates due process. 58-222

Funds appropriated for the construction of the Davis Dam project may be used to defray the cost of excavating archeological sites on lands owned by the Government in order to preserve from loss by flooding valuable relics belonging to the Government which would necessarily be