Am. Emigrant Co. v. Rogers Locomotive Machine-Works

• Decision Date: 22 October 1891
• Citation: Am. Emigrant Co. v. Rogers Locomotive Machine-Works, 83 Iowa 612, 50 N.W. 52 (Iowa 1891)
• Parties: AMERICAN EMIGRANT CO. v. ROGERS LOCOMOTIVE MACHINE-WORKS ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

83 Iowa 612

50 N.W. 52

AMERICAN EMIGRANT CO.

v.ROGERS LOCOMOTIVE MACHINE-WORKS ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 22, 1891.

Appeal from district court, Calhoun county; J. H. MACOMBER, Judge.

Action in equity to quiet the title to certain land situated in Calhoun county. On final hearing the district court granted to plaintiff the relief demanded as to a portion of the land. Defendants appeal.Chas. A. Clark, for appellants.

Seevers & Seevers and J. J. Davis, for appellee.

ROBINSON, J.

This action was brought to quiet the title to certain tracts of land claimed by plaintiff under the swampland grant made by the act of congress approved September 28, 1850. The defendants claim title under the act of congress approved May 15, 1856, which granted land to the state of Iowa to aid in the construction of a railway from Dubuque to Sioux City. Of the land in controversy, the district court found and adjudged that 2 lots and 15 40-acre tracts belonged to plaintiff, and that 31 such tracts belonged to defendants.

1. The chains of title under which the respective claims of the parties are made are the same as those considered in the case of Emigrant Co. v. Fuller, 50 N. W. Rep. 48, (decided at the present term of this court.) Numerous legal questions are presented in this case which were determined in that, and it is only necessary to say that as to such questions our rulings in that case are followed in this. Questions have been presented in regard to the sufficiency of the abstracts and of the certificate of the judge of the district court to identify and preserve the evidence which was introduced, and also that which was offered, in the case. Appellants have filed an amendment to their abstract, which is not denied, and which shows that by appropriate proceedings in the district court the certificate of the judge has been amended to meet the objection made by appellee. A stipulation to the effect that the judge had certified and duly made of record all the evidence offered or introduced in the case had been made and filed. We do not understand that appellee is now insisting upon its objections. However that may be, we are of the opinion that they were not well founded, upon the record submitted to us. The alleged defects in the certificate were cured by the nunc pro tunc order of the district court. The appellant has filed in this court transcripts and the original evidence, duly certified, and the case is in condition to be considered on its merits.

2. We are required to determine the character of each of the seventeen tracts of land which were adjudged by the district court to belong to plaintiff. Defendants have offered no evidence with respect to six of them, and admit that they are swamp land, within the meaning of the swamp-land act of 1850. The evidence shows without serious conflict that six of the remainder are of the same character. The controversy as to five of the tracts is more serious, but a careful consideration of the evidence leads us...