Hannibal & St. Joseph R.R. Co. v. Smith
Decision Date | 31 August 1867 |
Parties | THE HANNIBAL AND ST. JOSEPH RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. LEWIS SMITH, Respondent. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Macon Circuit Court.
Ejectment for the N. W. 1-4 of the N. W. 1-4, and the E. 1-2 of the N. W. 1-4, and the N. E. 1-4 of the S. W. 1-4 of section 20, in township 58, and range 16, situate in Macon county in the State of Missouri. Entry laid October 2, 1855.
The respondent in his answer denied that appellant was entitled to the possession of said premises at the time alleged, or at any time since or prior thereto; and denied that he unlawfully withheld the possession thereof.
At the February term, 1866, the case was tried by the court sitting as a jury.
The appellant, to show title in itself, read in evidence--
First. An act of Congress entitled “An Act granting the right of way to the State of Missouri, and a portion of the Public Lands, to aid in the construction of certain Railroads in said State,” approved June 10, 1852.
By the 1st section the right of way is “granted to the State of Missouri for the construction of railroads from the town of Hannibal to the town of St. Joseph in said State, and from the city of St. Louis to such point on the western boundary of said State as may be designated by the authority of said State;”“and a copy of the location of said roads, made under the direction of the Legislature, shall be forwarded to the proper local land offices respectively, and to the General Land Office at Washington City, within ninety days after the completion of the same to be recorded.”
Sec. 5 provides “that the lands thereby granted to the State shall be disposed of” only in a certain manner.
Second. An act of the General Assembly, approved September 20, 1852.
Third. A copy of the resolution of the board of directors of the Hannibal and St. Joseph Railroad Company, adopted on the 7th day of March, 1853, accepting the grant of land made to the State of Missouri by the Congress of the United States to aid in the construction of certain railroads in this State, and to apply a portion thereof to the Hannibal and St. Joseph railroad, as prescribed by the 4th section of the act of September 20, 1852, and filed in the office of the Secretary of State on the 17th March, 1853, duly certified by the Secretary of State.
Fourth. An exemplified copy of the map of the definite location and route of the Hannibal and St. Joseph railroad from the city of Hannibal to the city of St. Joseph, Missouri, with a line on the same denoting the line of said railroad, with lines and figures on the same denoting the sections, townships and ranges--filed in the General Land Office at Washington, June 10, 1853.
Fifth. Evidence showing that the Hannibal and St. Joseph railroad was completed in the latter part of February, 1859, and that the land in controversy lies between three and four miles from said railroad.
Sixth. A list of lands certified November 18, 1854, to the Hannibal and St. Joseph Railroad Company by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, to which is prefixed the following caption:
“Hannibal and St. Joseph Railroad.--A list of vacant lands situate in the Palmyra, Milan and Plattsburgh Districts, State of Missouri, in the sections bearing even numbers, within six miles of the route of the Hannibal and St. Joseph railroad, accruing to said State in virtue of the grant made by the act of Congress approved June 10, 1852, as more particularly set forth in the general certificate hereto appended, to-wit: The N. W. one quarter of the N. W. one quarter, and the E. one-half of the N. W. one quarter, and the N. E. one quarter of the S. W. one quarter, all in section 20, township 58, range 16.
No evidence was presented showing that the plaintiff had filed a map of the location of the road through Macon county in the office of the county recorder, as required by sec. 7 of act of September 20, 1852.
The respondent to show title in himself, read in evidence:
First. The act of Congress entitled “An Act to enable the State of Arkansas and other States to reclaim the ‘Swamp Lands' within their limits,” approved September 28, 1850.
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That to enable the State of Arkansas to construct the necessary levees and drains to reclaim the swamp and overflowed lands therein, the whole of those swamp and overflowed lands made unfit thereby for cultivation, which shall remain unsold at the passage of this act, shall be, and the same are hereby granted to said State.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Interior, as soon as may be practicable after the passage of this act, to make out an accurate list and plats of the lands described as aforesaid, and transmit the same to the Governor of the State of Arkansas, and, at the request of said Governor, cause a patent to be issued to the State therefor; and on that patent, the fee simple to said lands shall vest in the said State of Arkansas, subject to the disposal of the Legislature thereof; Provided, however, that the proceeds of said lands, whether from sale or by direct appropriation in kind, shall be applied exclusively, as far as necessary, to the purpose of reclaiming said lands by means of the levees and drains aforesaid.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That in making out a list and plats of the land aforesaid, all legal subdivisions, the greater part of which is “wet and unfit for cultivation,” shall be included in said list and plats; but when the greater part of a subdivision is not of that character, the whole of it shall be excluded therefrom.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the provisions of this act be extended to, and their benefits be conferred upon, each of the other States of the Union in which such swamp and overflowed lands, known and designated as aforesaid, may be situated.
Approved, September 28, 1850.”
[9 U. S. Stat. at Large, 519.]
Second. The 1st, 2d, 3d and 4th sections of the act of the General Assembly of the State of Missouri entitled “An Act donating certain swamp and overflowed lands to the Counties in which they lie,” approved December 13, 1855, the 1st and 2d sections of which are taken from the act of the General...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Stonum v. Davis
...Co. v. Pyle, 19 Idaho, 3; Francouer v. Newhouse, 43 Fed. 236; Abernathy v. Dennis, 49 Mo. 469; St. Jo. Railroad Co. v. Smith, 9 Wall. 95, 41 Mo. 310; Harvey v. Hollis, 160 Fed. 531; Hamilton v. Right, 30 Iowa, 480; Colvin v. McCune, 39 Iowa, 502; Leffingwell v. Warren, 2 Black, 599; Bicknel......
-
Stonum v. Davis
...Ry. Co. v. Pyle, 19 Idaho 3; Francouer v. Newhouse, 43 F. 236; Abernathy v. Dennis, 49 Mo. 469; St. Jo. Railroad Co. v. Smith, 9 Wall. 95, 41 Mo. 310; Harvey Hollis, 160 F. 531; Hamilton v. Right, 30 Iowa 480; Colvin v. McCune, 39 Iowa 502; Leffingwell v. Warren, 2 Black, 599; Bicknell v. C......
-
General American Life Ins. Co. v. Dunklin County
...defendant, Dunklin County, Missouri? Sec. 2, Act of Congress, Sept. 28, 1850; R. S. 1929, secs. 11156, 11157, 11158; Hann & St. Joseph Railroad Co. v. Smith, 41 Mo. 323. The above conveyances have not in any manner been nor does appellant contend that said patents are not valid and binding ......
-
General Am. Life Ins. Co. v. Dunklin County, 34756.
...p. 68; Secs. 11128, 11156, R.S. 1929; Laws 1869, p. 66; Kline v. Groeschner, 219 S.W. 648; Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad Co. v. Smith, 41 Mo. 310; French v. Spencer, 21 How. 228; Landes v. Brant, 10 How. 248; Ross v. Borland, 1 Pet. 664; Rutherford v. Green, 2 Wheat. 197; Gibson v. Choutea......