Northern Lumber Co. v. O'Brien
| Decision Date | 19 August 1903 |
| Citation | 124 F. 819 |
| Parties | NORTHERN LUMBER CO. v. O'BRIEN et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota |
James B. Kerr and M. T. Sanders, for plaintiff.
J. N Searles, for answering defendants.
This cause came on for final hearing June 15, 1903, upon the bill the answer of defendants William O'Brien, Albert J Lammers, and George A. Lammers, and the stipulation of facts on file; the complainant appearing by James B. Kerr, its solicitor, and the answering defendants by J. N. Searles their solicitor. The defendant Mary E. Coffin, though duly served with the subpoena on the 3d day of January, 1903, has never appeared in the suit, and is in default.
From the admissions in the pleadings and the stipulated facts it appears that by an act of Congress of May 5, 1864 (13 Stat. 64, c. 79), there was granted to the state of Minnesota, to aid in the construction of a railroad from St. Paul to the head of Lake Superior, every alternate section of public land of the United States, not mineral, designated by odd numbers, to the amount of five alternate sections per mile on each side of said railroad on the line thereof within said state. Other provisions of the act, and affecting the terms of the grant, do not affect the issues in this case. Said grant of land became vested in the Lake Superior & Mississippi Railroad Company, which on May 7, 1864, filed in the office of the Commissioner of the General Land Office a map or diagram showing the projected general route of its railroad from St. Paul to a point on Lake Superior. On May 26, 1864, the said Commissioner transmitted a copy of said map or diagram to the register and receiver of the United States Land Office at Duluth, Minn.,with his letter informing them of the fact that the Secretary of the Interior had approved the withdrawal of the lands for the railroad, and directing them 'to suspend from pre-emption settlement and sale, a body of lands about twenty miles in width as indicated on the enclosed diagram 'A' marked Lake Superior and Mississippi Railroad. ' The land in dispute, the south half of the southeast quarter of section twenty-seven (27), township, fifty-two (52) north, of range fifteen (15) west, of the fourth principal meridian, was coterminous with and within 10 miles of the general route of said railroad, as shown by the said map or diagram. Afterwards, on the 25th day of September, 1866, said Lake Superior & Mississippi Railroad Company filed in the office of said Commissioner of the General Land Office its map of the definite location of its said railroad from St. Paul to Duluth on Lake Superior, whereby it appeared and became definitely settled that the land above described and here in dispute was and is beyond and outside of any lands which could pass to or be obtained by the said railroad company under any of the terms of said land grant.
The Northern Pacific Railroad Company was created by act of Congress of July 2, 1864 (13 Stat. 365, c. 217), and authorized to construct and operate a continuous railroad and telegraph line from a point on Lake Superior, in Minnesota or Wisconsin, westerly, within the United States and north of the forty-fifth parallel of latitude, to Puget Sound, with a branch by the valley of the Columbia river to Portland, Or. It was granted every alternate section of public land, nor mineral, designated by odd numbers, to the amount of 20 alternate sections per mile on each side of the railroad, whenever it passed through any state, 'whenever on the line thereof the United States, have full title, not reserved, sold granted or otherwise appropriated and free from pre-emption or other claims or rights, at the time the line of said road is definitely fixed and a plat thereof filed in the office of the Commissioner of the General Land Office.'
The Northern Pacific Railroad Company afterwards definitely located its entire line from Ashland, on Lake Superior, in Wisconsin, to Puget Sound, and constructed and completed thereon its railroad and telegraph lines. On doing this, on July 6, 1882, it duly filed in the office of the Commissioner of the General Land Office a map or plat, duly approved by the Secretary of the Interior, showing the line of definite location of its said railroad from Thompson...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Pyle
...110 F. 465, 195 U.S. 480, 502, 25 S.Ct. 123, 49 L.Ed. 286; Brown v. Hitchcock, 173 U.S. 473, 19 S.Ct. 485, 43 L.Ed. 772; Northern Lumber Co. v. O'Brien, 124 F. 819; French v. Fyan, 93 U.S. 169, 23 L.Ed. Wright v. Roseberry, 121 U.S. 488, 7 S.Ct. 985, 30 L.Ed. 1039; Barden v. N. P. R. R. Co.......
-
Little v. Williams
...102; 71 Mo. 127; 63 Mo. 129; See, also, 154 F. 425; 22 Ia. 579; 29 F. 837; 90 N.W. 842; 23 Cal. 431; 65 Mo. 233; 105 N.W. 233; 91 N.W. 294; 124 F. 819; 104 F. 118; 13 App. D. 279; 137 F. 516. 4. The act of 1893 donating lands to the Levee Board did not include unsurveyed lands. Statutes gra......
-
United States v. Devil's Den Consol. Oil Co.
... ... Department out of the court. Nor. Lumber v. O'Brien ... (C.C.) 124 F. 819; El Dora Oil Co. v. United ... States, 229 F. 946, 144 C.C.A ... ...