Show PUBLIC hanoh amlo of sark of to settler commissioner has recently lucilo n ruling is probably bics tics lined to have nn important upon tho course of transactions in public lands iio lias decided in that tho commutation of n homestead is in carrot binl in law a turning of the entry into 1 arc coplion and as such is illegal when tho claimant had previously had tho of tho preemption law since the of tho homestead law it hns tho almost universal practice for settlers to accuro claims under bogli that preemption pre emption law in addition to which they have imn taken alic benefit of the timber culture law thus aggregating under tho three laws n maximum estate of four hundred and eighty acres to each II 11 has been customary to taku up tho preemption pre emption and arco claim at and after alic lapse of alic necessary interval to mortgage alic former for enough to pay alio llio government price cf it when having secured title the was at liberty to move awny und take tho benefit of tho homestead law tho ruling of tho commissioner is calculated to put an end to this practice it leaves alio settlor still alio right lo 10 secure cither a preemption pre emption or i homestead in addition to his arco claim and as far as alio ruling itself goes it leaves him alio right to accuro a preemption pre emption claim in alio usual way and then secure a homestead by living upon alic annd livo years but tho latter right general does not concede it lias bacu stated that ho lias inzeo n ruling to tho effect clial no person ii entitled to lie benefits of both preemption pre emption and the this is incorrect no such ruling having been made there is reason to believe that when aliis question comes before him in a way IQ demand n formal ruling on alio llio subject hu will bold that in passing alio homestead law congress in tended only to givan to settlers of limited means by them a method of obtaining dred and sixty acres of land other outlay than the payment of the customary fees in purchasing under the preemption pre emption law such u ruling lio sas would bo in concur ranco with the views chioli have air tho movement in congress to repeal alio preemption pre emption law outright and should the timber culture law bo rc would have alio of restricting alic area obtainable by n single claimant to one quarter tion general sparks holds that tho two laws alm homestead and pre emp tion standing together and interpreted as alicy have heretofore been oner temptation to fraud and place a premium on it alic of serving a second claim is licud out by alio law as an to make the settlement and improvements upon alio first claim of the most temporary and inexpensive character simply designed to mako a false show of goo d feitli and to swear by as immediately after final proof or commutation ns tho ciso may be they anro to bo abandoned and another ecsi danco on claim number two general sparks holds eliat it congress designed to give alio simo die benefit 0 both laws it would not have imposed upon him alio llio requirements to clab lii a temporary iiorio in one place only to bc for another iiii in v pvn ruling indicated as probable never bo made that already made prohibiting commutation of homestead claims by persons alio have previously been arc captora will still ho believes have an important in preventing to a considerable speculation in clun tho obligation to live livo years upon 11 claim n a lest of good faith to which only actual farmers alio desire the land for their own cultivation care to submit laller |