Chicago, Milwaukee St Paul Railway Company of Idaho v. United States
| Decision Date | 04 June 1917 |
| Docket Number | No. 176,176 |
| Citation | 37 S.Ct. 625,244 U.S. 351,61 L.Ed. 1184 |
| Parties | CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, & ST. PAUL RAILWAY COMPANY OF IDAHO, Appt., v. UNITED STATES |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. F. M. Dudley and H. H. Field for appellant.
Assistant Attorney General Kearful and Mr. W. W. Dyar for appellee.
This is a suit by the United States to enjoin a railroad company from constructing or operating its railroad through a national forest reserve in Idaho unless it executes and files with the Secretary of the Interior a stipulation required by that officer, and to obtain damages for timber cut and destroyed and injury done in the course of the construction and operation of such railroad. In the district court (207 Fed. 164) and in the circuit court of appeals (134 C. C. A. 84, 218 Fed. 288), the government prevailed. The railroad company prosecutes this appeal.
The forest reserve had its inception in an order by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, made March 21, 1905, temporarily withdrawing a large body of public lands from all disposal, save under the mineral land laws. The order was made by direction of the Secretary of the Interior with a view to the creation of a permanent forest reserve, under § 24 of the Act of March 3, 1891, chap. 561, 26 Stat. at L. 1095, Comp. Stat. 1916, § 5121, if, after further examination, that should receive the President's approval. The permanent reserve was created November 6, 1906, by a proclamation of the President. Between the temporary withdrawal and the President's proclamation the railroad company was incorporated under the laws of Idaho, and filed with the Secretary of the Interior a copy of its articles of incorporation and due proofs of its organization. During the same period it also filed in the local land office a map or profile of its proposed railroad through the reserve, and after the President's proclamation it filed in that office a second and then a third map. The line of the proposed road shown upon the second map differed widely from that upon the first, and the line shown upon the third differed materially from those upon the others. The first and second maps, neither of which had been approved, were returned to the company as superseded by the third. It was filed May 10, 1907. At that time, as also before any map was filed, the regulations governing applications for railroad rights of way in forest reserves required the applicant to enter into a stipulation respecting the use and enjoyment of the privilege, the prevention of forest fires, the compensation to be made for timber cut or destroyed, and the duty of the company to pay for any injury otherwise done to the reserve. 32 Land Dec. 481; 34 Land Dec. 583. One provision in the regulations said: 'No construction can be allowed on a reservation until an application for right of way has been regularly filed in accordance with the laws of the United States and has been approved by the Department, or has been considered by this office or the Department, and permission for such construction has been specifically given.' After filing the third map the company sought permission from the Forest Office to proceed with the construction of its railroad in advance of the approval of its map, and to that end its authorized representative, Mr. George R. Peck, in its behalf, signed and filed in the Forest Office the following memorandum:
'Whereas, the Chicago, Milwaukee, & St. Paul Railway Company of Idaho desires immediate permission from the Forest Service to begin construction of the company's railroad in the Coeur d'Alene National Forest, Idaho, I hereby promise and agree on behalf of the company that it will execute and abide by stipulation and conditions to be prescribed by the Forester in respect to said railroad; such stipulation and conditions to be as nearly as practicable like those executed by the company on January 18, 1907, in respect to its railroad within the Helena National Forest, Montana.'
The Forester wrote upon the memorandum, and signed, an indorsement, saying: 'Approved and advance permission given to construct, subject to ratification hereof by the company.' At the same time a telegram was sent to the supervisor of the reserve, saying:
There was no express ratification of the Peck memorandum, but shortly after it was made the company entered upon the reserve and actively proceeded with the construction of its road, which it would not have been per- mitted to do without the memorandum. Not until the work had proceeded for some months was there any indication that the memorandum was not satisfactory to the company. It then declined to execute the stipulation called for by the memorandum and assigned as a reason that Mr. Peck had acted upon the mistaken belief that the President's proclamation creating the permanent reserve preceded the filing of the first map, when in fact the map was filed before the proclamation was issued, and that the execution of such a stipulation as was called for by the memorandum was indispensable, when, as the company asserted, it was entitled, under the Act of March 3, 1875, infra, to a right of way through the reserve without entering into any stipulation or assenting to any conditions. But the officers of the Forest Service insisted, with the full sanction of the Secretary of the Interior and of the Secretary of Agriculture, that the stipulation be executed, and that without it the company was not entitled to proceed. This resulted in a conference at which the company particularly requested that its construction work be not disturbed, and assented to an arrangement for further negotiations, or, if need be, a 'friendly lawsuit.' Further negotiations failed and the present suit followed. When it was begun the road through the reserve was nearly completed and was in operation, the construction being on the line shown on the third map. Approval had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United Electric Coal Companies v. Rice
...C.C., 172 F. 639; Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. of Idaho v. United States, 9 Cir., 218 F. 288, affirmed by Supreme Court 244 U.S. 351, 37 S.Ct. 625, 61 L.Ed. 1184. The propriety of applying the principle stated in the preceding paragraph in a suit in equity for injunctive relief where plaint......
-
Wilderness Society v. Morton
...at 487. 27 16 Op. Att'y Gen. 152 (1878). 28 Page 871, supra; 21 Op. Att'y Gen. 537 (1897). 29 See Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. v. United States, 244 U.S. 351, 37 S.Ct. 625, 61 L.Ed. 1184 (1917); see Tr. 38-39, 30 Page 874, supra. 31 Final Environmental Impact Statement —Proposed Trans-Alaska Pi......
-
Weatherby v. Jackson
... ... Gallet, State Auditor, 51 Idaho ... 386, 6 P.2d 143; State ex rel. v. District ... United States and as being in violation of the due ... 316; 2 ... Am. Juris, p. 181; Chicago Railroad Co. v. U.S., 244 ... U.S. 351, 37 S.Ct ... ...
-
Prudential Lines, Inc. v. Exxon Corp.
...resemblances to that at bar, is a good illustration of the equitable elements in ratification. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. United States, 244 U.S. 351, 37 S.Ct. 625, 61 L.Ed. 1184 (1917). The government sued to enjoin the operation of a railroad in a national forest in Idaho. An agent o......
-
VIEWS FROM THE FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE HILL: FOREST SERVICE
...established prior to reservation of the land for national forest purposes. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. of Idaho v. U.S., 244 U.S. 351, 353 (1916); United States v. Mountain Home Highway District, CV 91-0419-S-LMB (D. Idaho 1993) (Right-of-way must be perfected prior to reserva......
-
CHAPTER 4 SURFACE USES RELATED TO OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT ON THE NATIONAL FORESTS
...purposes under the Creative Act of 1891 withdraws lands from all disposal. Chicago. Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. of Idaho v. U.S., 244 U.S. 351, 353 (1916). That reservation of Federal land for National Forest purposes acted as a complete withdrawal from entry and appropriation under th......