Ripinsky

Since the decision was rendered in this cause, counsel for appellees have filed a petition for rehearing, based principally upon the ground that the court failed to take into account the Alaska statutes applicable to procedure in the determination of adverse claims to the purchase of public lands occupied for trade purposes within the territory. Counsel frankly state that they failed to call the court’s attention to the statutes, and no note was made of them in the opinion. The complaint, which is found in the record, is set out, in effect, in the opinion rendered, and appears to be the ordinary suit in equity for the determination of an adverse claim to real property — nothing more. It is now claimed by counsel that the súit was in reality instituted, under the Alaska statutes, for the determination of an adverse claim to application for purchase of land occupied for trade purposes, and for patent thereto, and in proof of that fact they have appended a copy of the original complaint filed in the cause. It is not shown when the complaint was filed, but it appears to have been verified on July 2, 1906.

The statutes referred to provide, in substance, that a citizen of the United…