United States v. St. Paul, M. & M. Ry. Co.

Decision Date27 May 1915
Docket Number2564.
Citation225 F. 27
PartiesUNITED STATES v. ST. PAUL, M. & M. RY. CO. et al.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Burton K. Wheeler, U.S. Atty., of Butte, Mont., Homer G. Murphy Asst. U.S. Atty., of Helena, Mont., and Frank, Woody, Jr Asst. U.S. Atty., of Butte, Mont., for the United States.

Veazey & Veazey, of Great Falls, Mont., for appellees.

Before GILBERT and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and RUDKIN, District Judge.

RUDKIN District Judge.

By Act March 3, 1857, c. 99, 11 Stat. 195, and Act March 3, 1865, c 105, 13 Stat. 526, there was granted to the territory of Minnesota certain public lands for the purpose of aiding in the construction of railroads in that territory. The appellee the St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Company has succeeded to all the rights and privileges of the territory of Minnesota under the provisions of these acts. At the time the grant was made the Missouri river formed the western boundary of the territory, but soon thereafter the state of Minnesota was admitted into the Union, with its western boundary fixed at a point considerably east of the western boundary of the former territory. In the administration of this land grant the land department held that it was the fixed policy of the government to limit grants in aid of railroads wholly within a state or territory to lands lying within the same state or territory, and the claim of the railroad company to lands within the limits of the grant, but without the limits of the state of Minnesota, was rejected.

In St. Paul, etc., Ry. Co. v. Phelps, 137 U.S. 528, 11 Sup.Ct. 168, 34 L.Ed. 767, it was held that the specific terms of the act of Congress could not be limited or controlled by any general governmental policy, and the title of the railway company to lands within the limits of the grant, but west of the western boundary of the state, was accordingly confirmed. To obviate the hardships to settlers resulting from this decision, Act Aug. 5, 1892, c. 382, 27 Stat. 390, entitled 'An act for the relief of settlers upon certain lands in the states of North Dakota and South Dakota,' was passed. The preamble to that act recites that:

'Whereas, under the rulings of the General Land Office the extension into Dakota Territory, now states of North Dakota and South Dakota, of the limits of the grants of land made by Congress to aid in the construction of the several lines of railroad now owned by the St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Company was denied, and in consequence of said rulings lands within the limits of the said grants in * * * said states have been claimed, settled upon, occupied, and improved by numerous persons in good faith under color of title or of right to do so derived from the various laws of the United States relating to the public domain, and are now claimed by them, their heirs, or assigns, and many of said lands have actually been patented to such occupants or to their grantors; and whereas, under recent construction of said grants the said occupants, improvers, or purchasers, are liable to be evicted from their holdings: Now, therefore, for the purpose of relieving the said occupants, improvers, and purchasers of the said granted lands from the hardship of being now deprived of the same under the circumstances aforesaid, be it enacted,' etc.

Section 1 then provides:

'That the Secretary of the Interior shall, as soon as conveniently may be done, cause to be prepared and delivered to the said railway company a list of the several tracts which have been purchased, claimed, occupied, and improved, as stated in section two of this act, and are now claimed by such purchasers or occupants, their heirs or assigns, according to the smallest government subdivisions. Within a reasonable time after the receipt by the said railway company of the said list, it shall execute under its corporate seal and deliver to the Secretary of the Interior its deed of conveyance releasing to the United States all its claims upon the lands described in said list, and shall also procure and cause to be released to the United States all liens and claims to said lands derived through or under said company, whereupon all right, title, and interest of the said railway company to each of such tracts shall revert to the United States, and such tracts shall be treated, under the laws thereof, in the same manner as if no rights thereto had ever vested in the said railway company. * * * '

Section 2 provides:

'That the said railway company is hereby permitted to select, in lieu of any lands forming odd-numbered sections or parts thereof situated in the state of North Dakota or in the state of South Dakota, within the ten-mile limits of a grant of lands made to the territory of Minnesota * * * opposite to and coterminous with such portion of said railroad as was constructed and completed within the time required by the said grant and the acts amendatory thereof for the construction and completion of the whole of said railroad which, prior to January first, anno Domini eighteen hundred and ninety-one, any person had purchased or occupied or improved, in good faith, under color of title or right to do so, derived from any law of the United States relating to the public domain, but not including any lands within the limits of the grant, to aid in the construction of the St. Vincent branch of said road, as located under the act of March third, eighteen hundred and seventy-one, upon which any person or persons had, in good faith, settled and made or acquired valuable improvements thereon prior to March, eighteen hundred and seventy-seven, an equal quantity of non mineral public lands, so classified as non mineral at the time of actual government survey which has been or shall be made, of the United States not reserved and to which no adverse right or claim shall have attached or have...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • State v. Fahey
    • United States
    • Court of General Sessions of Delaware
    • February 5, 1924
    ... ... See, ... also, Daniels v. State, 150 Ind. 348, 50 N.E. 74; ... U. S. v. St. Paul, M. & M. R. Co., 225 F. 27, 139 ... C. C. A. 301; Charles v. Thornburgh, 44 ... Okla. 379, 144 P ... within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation ... thereof from the United States and all territory subject to ... the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby ... ...
  • United States v. Booth-Kelly Lumber Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Oregon
    • November 26, 1917
    ... ... of such character as to conceal itself, to toll the statute ... As I read the case in the Circuit Court of Appeals, a like ... application is made to the present statute ... Nor ... does the later case of United States v. St. Paul, M. & M ... Ry. Co., 225 F. 27, 139 C.C.A. 301, in any way trench ... upon the holding in Linn & Lane Timber Co. v. United States ... The provision of the statute which was adjudged to be ... controlling was not a limitation statute at all, but ... constituted an exception to the limitation ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT