Barney v. Winona St Co

Decision Date01 March 1886
Citation29 L.Ed. 858,6 S.Ct. 654,117 U.S. 228
PartiesBARNEY and others v. WINONA & ST. P. R. CO. 1 Filed
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Gordon E. Cole, for appellants.

Thos. Wilson, for appellees.

FIELD, J.

This case was before us at the October term, 1884. By an act of congress passed March 3, 1857, a grant of land was made to Minnesota, then a territory, to aid in the construction of certain railroads, including one from Winona, a town on the Mississippi river, to a point on the Big Sioux river, in the present territory of Dakota. 11 St. 195. The grant was of every alternate section, designated by odd numbers, for six sections in width on each side of the road, subject to certain exceptions, not important to be here mentioned, with a right to select indemnity lands within 15 miles from the line of the road. In May following, the legislature of the territory authorized a company, previously incorporated, to construct and operate this road; and, to aid in its construction, granted to the company the interest and estate, present and prospective, of the territory and future state, in the lands ceded by the act of congress, together with the rights, privileges, and immunities conferred by it.

In 18582 the territory became a state, and was admitted into the Union; and under proceedings for the foreclosure of a mortgage executed by the company, it became, before March, 1862, reinvested with the estate in the lands and the rights and privileges it had granted. In March, 1862, its legislature passed an act transferring the lands, property, franchises, and privileges, with which it had thus become reinvested, to the Winona & St. Peter Railroad Company, which soon afterwards commenced the construction of the road. By the act of congress of March 3, 1865, the quantity of land granted by the act of 1857 was increased to 10 sections per mile, with an enlargement of the limits within which indemnity lands might be selected, from 15 to 20 miles. 13 St. 562. The third section provided that any lands which had been granted to Minnesota for the purpose of aiding in the construction of any railroad which might be located within the limits of the extension should be deducted from the 'full quantity' granted by the act. The full quantity was the four additional sections, and we held that the reservation was merely a legislative declaration of that which the law would have pronounced independently of it, inasmuch as a prior grant of the same property must necessarily be deducted from a subsequent one in which it is included. In October, 1867, the company agreed with the plaintiffs, upon sufficient consideration, to convey to them as many acres of land, previously granted by congress to Minnesota, as it should receive from the state by reason of the construction of its road laready made, estimated to be 105 miles, but in fact only 102 miles and a fraction of a mile, This suit was brought to enforce the specific performance of this contract, and the only question between the parties was as to the quantity of land to be conveyed under it.

By the act of 1857, lands were also granted to Minnesota to aid in the construction of the road of the Minnesota, [Minneapolis] & Cedar Valley Railroad Company, afterwards of the Minnesota Central Railroad Company, (Laws Minn. Extra Sess. 1857, 20, and Sp. Laws 1863, 137,) and that road intersected the road of the defendant between Rochester and Waseca; and lands of that company, at the intersection, were located within the limits of the extension of four sections made by the act of 1865. The court below, however, held that, for the part of the defendant's road constructed after the act of 1865, the plaintiffs were entitled, under their contract, to 10 full sections per mile, without any deduction for the lands which were located at the intersection of the road with the road of the Minnesota Central Railroad Company, and within the grant for the construction of the latter. It was accordingly adjudged that the plaintiffs were entitled, in addition to what had been voluntarily conveyed to them, to a conveyance of 197,111 acres and a fraction of an acre, and a decree...

To continue reading

Request your trial
61 cases
  • Potter v. Ajax Mining Co.
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • 11 Julio 1900
    ... ... important in determining what was decided. Nixon v ... Devine , 80 Cal. 385, 22 P. 224; Elliott App. Proc ... Sec. 578; Barney v. R. R. Co. , 117 U.S ... 228, 29 L.Ed. 858, 6 S.Ct. 654; Brim v ... Jones , 13 Utah 440, 45 P. 46; Silva v ... Pickard , 14 Utah 245, ... ...
  • Hayes v. City of Wilmington
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 29 Febrero 1956
    ...433 and 434, 90 S.E. 441, 448; Rodwell v. Rowland, 137 N.C. 617, at pages 638 and 640, 50 S.E. 319, 327; Barney v. Winona & St. P. R. Co., 117 U.S. 228, 6 S.Ct. 654, 29 L.Ed. 858; In re Norton's Estate, 177 Or. 342, 162 P.2d 379, 161 A.L.R. 439; Chicago, S. F. & C. R. Co. v. Swan, 120 Mo. 3......
  • Mayflower Hotel Stock. P. Com. v. Mayflower Hotel Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • 25 Junio 1951
    ...121, 123, 42 L.Ed. 539. See, also, Clark v. Keith, 1882, 106 U.S. 464, 1 S.Ct. 568, 27 L.Ed. 302; Barney v. Winona & St. Peter R. Co., 1886, 117 U.S. 228, 231, 6 S.Ct. 654, 29 L.Ed. 858; In re Sanford Fork & Tool Co., 1895, 160 U.S. 247, 259, 16 S.Ct. 291, 40 L.Ed. 414. This court has, in t......
  • United States v. Winona & St. P.R. Co., 564.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 6 Mayo 1895
    ... ... entitling it to this relief ( St. Paul & S.C.R. Co. v ... Winona & St. P.R. Co., 112 U.S. 720, 5 Sup.Ct. 334); and ... the governor of the state thereupon conveyed these lands to ... the Winona Company. On October 31, 1867, D. N. Barney and ... eight other persons owned the stock of the Winona Company ... These persons had, at the request of the company, loaned to ... it large sums of money, and had constructed 105 miles of its ... railroad from Winona to Waseca, Minn. In payment of this loan ... and for the construction of ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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