Platt v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

Decision Date01 October 1878
PartiesPLATT v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska.

This was a bill in equity filed Sept. 28, 1878, by William H. Platt, to enjoin the Union Pacific Railroad Company from prosecuting an action of ejectment which it brought against him the twenty-third day of that month, for the recovery of a certain quarter-section of land situate in the county of Hall and State of Nebraska, whereof he was in possession, claiming the equitable title thereto. The company answered. The case was heard upon the pleadings, and the bill dismissed. Platt appealed here.

Platt entered upon the land in the year 1874, and thereafter remained in possession. He made improvements thereon, and performed all the conditions which entitled him, as a qualified pre-emptor, to a preference right of purchase, if the land were subject to pre-emption. He duly filed, Sept. 21, 1878, his declaratory statement, made the requisite proofs before the proper officers, paid the receiver of the local land-office $200, being at the rate of $1.25 per acre, and took a receipt therefor.

The land is part of an odd-numbered section, situate within ten miles of the road of the company, and is included in the grant made by the act to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, &c., approved July 1, 1862 (12 Stat. 489), and the amendatory act of July 2, 1864 (13 Stat. 356). The company accepted the grant, located the route of its road and filed a map thereof within the requisite time, and, in order to raise the means necessary to continue and complete the work on its road which was then constructing, issued, April 16, 1867, its coupon bonds to the amount of $10,400,000, payable twenty days after the date thereof, with semi-annual interest. To secure the payment of them it executed and duly acknowledged a certain indenture of that same date, covering the granted lands, which it caused to be recorded in said Hall County before July 1, 1872. The United States issued a patent, bearing date March 26, 1875, to the company for the granted lands not theretofore conveyed to it.

The company refused to accept the money so paid by Platt to the receiver of the land-office.

The bill and answer set up different dates when the road was completed; the first alleging it to be before July, 1869, and the latter Nov. 14, 1874, when it was finally accepted by the government.

The act of 1862 provides as follows:——

'SECT. 3. And be it further enacted, that there be and is hereby granted to the said company, for the purpose of aiding in the construction of said railroad and telegraph line, and to secure the safe and speedy transportation of the mails, troops, munitions of war, and public stores thereon, every alternate section of public land, designated by odd numbers, to the amount of five alternate sections per mile on each side of said railroad, on the line thereof, and within the limits of ten miles on each side of said road, not sold, reserved, or otherwise disposed of by the United States, and to which a pre-emption or homestead claim may not have attached, at the time the line of said road is definitely fixed: Provided, that all mineral lands shall be excepted from the operation of this act; but where the same shall contain timber, the timber thereon is hereby granted to said company. And all such lands so granted by this section which shall not be sold or disposed of by said company within three years after the entire road shall have been completed, shall be subject to settlement and pre-emption like other lands, at a price not exceeding $1.25 per acre to be paid to said company.

'SECT. 4. And be it further enacted, that whenever said company shall have completed forty consecutive miles of any portion of said railroad and telegraph line ready for the service contemplated by this act, and supplied with all necessary drains, culverts, viaducts, crossings, sidings, bridges, turnouts, watering-places, depots, equipments, furniture, and all other appurtenances of a first-class railroad,—the rails and all the other iron used in the construction and equipment of said road to be American manufacture of the best quality,—the President of the United States shall appoint three commissioners to examine the same and report to him in relation thereto; and if it shall appear to him that forty consecutive miles of said railroad and telegraph line have been completed and equipped in all respects as required by this act, then, upon certificate of said commissioners to that effect, patents shall issue conveying the right and title to said lands to said company, on each side of the road, as far as the same is completed, to the amount aforesaid; and patents shall in like manner issue as each forty miles of said railroad and telegraph line are completed upon certificate of said commissioners.' . . .

The amendatory act changes the number of sections per mile granted by the third section of the original act from 'five' to 'ten,' and the limits of the grant from 'ten' to 'twenty,' miles on each side of the road; and declares the company to be entitled to patents, upon the construction and acceptance of each 'twenty' consecutive miles of road.

The act of 1862 provides that upon the completion of forty consecutive miles (changed to twenty by the act of 1864) of said road, bonds of the United States of $1,000 each, bearing six per cent semi-annual interest, due due at thirty years from date, shall be issued by the Secretary of the Treasury to the company, to the amount of sixteen bonds per mile (a larger amount per mile being allowed between certain designated points); and that 'to secure the repayment to the United States, as hereinafter provided, of the amount of the said bonds so issued and delivered to said company, together with all interest thereon which shall have been paid by the United States, the issue of said bonds and delivery to the company shall ipso facto constitute a first mortgage on the whole line of the railroad and telegraph, together with the rolling-stock, fixtures, and property of every kind and description, and in consideration of which said bonds may be issued; and on the refusal or failure of said company to redeem said bonds or any part of them when required so to do by the Secretary of the Treasury, in accordance with the provisions of this act, the said road, with all the rights, functions, immunities, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, and also all lands granted to the said company by the United States which at the time of said default shall remain in the ownership of the said company, may be taken possession of by the Secretary of the Treasury for the use and benefit of the United States: Provided, this section shall not apply to that part of any road now constructed.'

The tenth section of the act of 1864 provides that sect. 5 of the act of 1862 'be so modified and amended that the Union Pacific Railroad Company, the Central Pacific Railroad Company, and any other company authorized to participate in the construction of said road, may, on the completion of each section of said road, as provided in this act and the act to which this act is an amendment, issue their first-mortgage bonds on their respective railroad and telegraph lines to an amount not exceeding the amount of the bonds of the United States, and of even tenor and date, time of maturity, rate and character of interest, with the bonds authorized to be issued to said railroad companies respectively. And the lien of the United States bonds shall be subordinate to that of the bonds of any or either of said companies hereby authorized to be issued on their respective roads, property, and equipments, except as to the provisions of the sixth section of the act to which this act is an amendment, relating to the transmission of despatches and the transportation of mails, troops, munitions of war, supplies, and public stores for the government of the United States. And said section is further amended by striking out the word 'forty' and inserting in lieu thereof the words 'on each and every section of not less than twenty."

The indenture executed by the company to secure its bonds conveys in fee to trustees, upon certain trusts, terms, and conditions, the lands granted to it by the acts of Congress. One condition is, 'that if the said party of the first part shall well and truly pay, or cause to be paid, to the holders of the said bonds, and every of them, the principal sums of money therein mentioned, according to the tenor thereof, with the interest thereon, at the times and in the manner hereinbefore provided, according to the true intent and meaning of these presents, then and from thenceforth this indenture and the estate hereby granted shall cease and determine, and all the right, title, and interest in any and all property hereby conveyed to the parties of the second part, not then disposed of under the powers hereby conferred, shall revert to and vest in the said party of the first part.'

It further provides that the lands shall be under the management and control of the company, to be by it sold or contracted to be sold for such prices and on such terms of payment as shall be mutually agreed upon by the company and the trustees; that the trustees shall, upon payment of the purchase-money of the several tracts which may be sold, receive and apply the same, and the proceeds of all sales made by them of lands so conveyed to them, to the sole and exclusive purpose of the payment of the said coupon bonds, until the same and the whole thereof shall be fully paid and satisfied, and thereafter to reconvey to the company the residue of said lands remaining unsold; that in default of the payment of either the interest or principal of the said coupon bonds, according to the tenor and effect thereof, for the period of six months after...

To continue reading

Request your trial
178 cases
  • The Extradition of Cheung
    • United States
    • United States District Courts
    • 23 Mayo 2000
    ...It is axiomatic that construction of a statute must give meaning to every word in the statute. SeePlatt v. Union Pacific R. Co., 99 US 48, 58 (1878) (Congress is not to be presumed to have used words for no purpose.); United States v. BlasiusUNK, 397 F. 2d 203, 207 n. 9 (2d Cir. 1968) (Ther......
  • Northern Securities Company v. United States
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 14 Marzo 1904
    ...v. Browder, 1 Wheat. 115, 121, 4 L. ed. 50, 51; United States v. Union P. R. Co. 91 U. S. 72, 79, 23 L. ed. 224, 228; Platt v. Union P. R. Co. 99 U. S. 48, 25 L. ed. 424; Chesapeake & P. Teleph. Co. v. Manning, 186 U. S. 238, 245, 46 L. ed. 1144, 1147, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. If Congress had meant......
  • United States v. Oregon & C.R. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Oregon
    • 24 Abril 1911
    ...... . . Counsel. for the defendant railroad companies and S.T. Gage make the. following points of ... '(1). Rights acquired by the East Side Company under the act of. 1866 deprived Congress of the power, by ... grants, here and by the Union Pacific act, as expressly. stated in each act, is the ... grant.' ( Platt v. Union Pacific R. Co. ) 99. U.S. 48-67 (25 L.Ed. 424). ......
  • Application of Bergy
    • United States
    • United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
    • 29 Marzo 1979
    ...enact such legislation, and there is a basic presumption that Congress does not legislate unnecessarily. See Platt v. Union Pacific Railroad, 99 U.S. 48, 58, 25 L.Ed. 424 (1878); In re Finch, 535 F.2d 70, 71, 190 USPQ 64, 65 (Cust. & Pat.App.1976); United States v. C. J. Tower & Sons, 44 CC......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • A New Batboy to Change the Outcome of the World Series: the Correct Application of United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, Llc and Treasury Regulation Section 301.6501(e)-1 to Future Overstatement of Basis Cases
    • United States
    • University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Law Review No. 92, 2021
    • Invalid date
    ...68. Id. 69. Id. at 1371. 70. I.R.C. § 6501(e)(1)(B)(i) (2006). 71. Salman, 573 F.3d at 1371. 72. Id. See also Platt v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 99 U.S. 48, 58 (1878) ("[A] legislature is presumed to have used no superfluous 73. Salman, 573 F.3d at 1371. 74. I.R.C. § 6501(e)(1)(A)(ii) (1954). 75......
  • The Mischief Rule
    • United States
    • Georgetown Law Journal No. 109-5, June 2021
    • 1 Junio 2021
    ...the meaning of the action itself.”143 That is relevant for the question of sources. 139. Id. at 495 (quoting Platt v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 99 U.S. 48, 64 (1878)). The quotation continues: “and discover its purpose from the language used in connection with the attending circumstances.” Id.; ......
  • Application of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to Intrastate Telemarketing Calls and Faxes.
    • United States
    • Federal Communications Law Journal Vol. 52 No. 3, May 2000
    • 1 Mayo 2000
    ...between Federal and State statutes." Id. (emphasis added). See discussion infra Part III.D. (49.) See Platt v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 99 U.S. 48, 58 (1878). "Congress is not to be presumed to have used words for no purpose.... [T]he admitted rules of statutory construction declare that a l......
  • Defining "use" of a firearm.
    • United States
    • Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Vol. 87 No. 3, March 1997
    • 22 Marzo 1997
    ...as keeping a gun hidden in defendant's clothing during a drug transaction). (132) Id. at 505. (133) Id. (134) Platt v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 99 U.S. 48, 58 (1879). See also Ratzlaf v. United States, 114 S. Ct. 655, 659 (1994) (stating that judges should hesitate "to treat [as surplusage] sta......

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