Reagan v. Boyd
| Decision Date | 11 April 1921 |
| Docket Number | 4318. |
| Parties | REAGAN v. BOYD. |
| Court | Montana Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Ravalli County; R. Lee McCullach, Judge.
Action by Thomas B. Reagan against J. E. Boyd. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Wagner & Taylor, of Hamilton, for appellant.
O'Hara & Madeen, of Hamilton, for respondent.
This appeal is from a judgment entered in favor of the defendant in an action to quiet title to 154.26 acres of land in Ravalli county.
The plaintiff is the successor in interest of one Travers A Million, and defendant is the successor in interest of Elmer L. Darling. In May, 1908, Darling, a qualified entryman settled upon and improved the lands in controversy, and thereafter, on December 2 of the same year, made entry in the land office at Missoula, produced the required evidence, paid for the lands at the rate of $1.25 per acre, and received a receiver's certificate. On October 4, 1912, the Commissioner of the General Land Office canceled the entry solely on the ground that Darling refused to pay an additional amount equal to $1.25 per acre. Later Million was permitted to enter the lands, and upon payment of $2.50 per acre received a patent. At the time plaintiff purchased from Million, he had knowledge of the claim asserted by Darling and his successor. The trial court held that Million became vested with the legal title to the lands in trust for the use and benefit of defendant, and that the trust attached to the lands in the hands of plaintiff.
By the Hell Gate treaty of July 16, 1855 (12 U.S. Stat. 975), practically all of what is now Montana west of the main range of the Rocky Mountains--being then Indian country--was ceded to the United States by the confederated tribes of Flathead, Kootenay, and Upper Pend d'Oreille Indians. There was excepted from the grant, however, the territory included in, and by the treaty constituted, the Jocko reservation which was set apart for the use and benefit of the Indians. Article 11 of the treaty contains the following:
In his proclamation of November 14, 1871, President Grant announced his conclusion that the territory mentioned in article 11 was not better adapted to the wants of the Flathead Indians than was the general reservation, and direction was given for the removal of the Indians from the valley to the reservation, and for the opening of the valley lands to settlement as soon as the removal was completed. By the Act of Congress of June 5, 1872 (17 Stat. 226), the effect of the President's proclamation was modified and provision was made again for the removal of the Indians to the Jocko reservation, for a survey of the lands of the Bitter Root valley south of the mouth of the Lo-Lo fork of the Bitter Root river, and for the disposition of 15 townships of those lands to qualified entrymen "in quantities not exceeding 160 acres to each settler at the price of one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre payment to be made in cash," etc. The other terms of the act are not material here. Subsequent legislation has amended the statute in certain particulars, but the provision fixing the sale price at $1.25 per acre has not been changed.
The Act of Congress approved April 24, 1820 (3 Stat. 566), and later acts which fixed the sale price of public lands were compiled in section 2357, U.S. Rev. Statutes of 1873 and 1878 (U. S. Comp. St. § 4757). That section declares that the sale price generally shall be $1.25 per acre, but it also contains this proviso:
"That the price to be paid for alternate, reserved lands, along the line of railroads within the limits granted by any act of Congress, shall be two dollars and fifty cents per acre."
The Act of July 2, 1864 (13 Stat. 365), granted to the Northern Pacific Railroad Company (now Northern Pacific Railway Company) every alternate section of public land not mineral in character designated by odd numbers, to the amount of 20 alternate sections per mile on each side of the railroad line as adopted by the company through the territory (now state) of Montana, in so far as the United States had 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 road was definitely fixed and the map thereof filed with the Commissioner of the General Land Office.
The lands in controversy are in the Bitter Root valley above (south of) the Lo-Lo fork of the Bitter Root river, are included in the 15 townships mentioned in the Act of June 5, 1872 (Hinchman v. McClain, 12 Land Dec. 49), and are within less than 40 miles of the line of the Northern Pacific railway.
With these facts and matters before him, the Commissioner of the General Land Office held that the lands embraced in Darling's entry could not be sold for less than $2.50 per acre. In other words, he held that the sale price of these lands is controlled by the proviso to section 2357, and not by the Act of June 5, 1872.
The Land Department is a special tribunal created by law for the purpose of determining conflicting claims arising over public land, and its decision upon a question of fact, in the absence of fraud, is conclusive upon the courts (Thomas v. Horst, 54 Mont. 260, 169 P. 731; Quinby v. Conlan, 104 U.S. 420, 26 L.Ed. 800), but its construction of the law is not binding when called in question in a proper judicial proceeding (Shepley v. Cowan, 91 U.S. 330, 23 L.Ed. 424; Small v. Rakestraw, 28 Mont. 413, 72 P. 746, 104 Am. St. Rep. 691; Love v. Flahive, 33 Mont. 348, 83 P. 882).
The grant to the Northern Pacific was one in præsenti, though a survey of the lands and the definite location of the line of the road were necessary to give precision to it and attach it to any particular tract. Leavenworth, L. & G. R. Co. v. United States, 92 U.S. 733, 23 L.Ed. 634. At the time the grant was made, the lands in controversy were held, with others, by the general government in trust, reserved for the use and benefit of the Flathead Indians, if, in the judgment of the President thereafter rendered, they were found to be better adapted to the wants of those Indians than were the lands on the Jocko reservation. For this reason none of the lands in the Bitter Root valley south of the Lo-Lo fork passed to the railroad company by the grant (Northern P. Ry. Co. v. Hinchman (C. C.) 53 F. 523; Northern P. R. Co. v. Maclay, 61 F. 554, 9 C. C. A. 609; Bardon v. Northern P. Ry. Co., 145 U.S. 535, 12 S.Ct. 856, 36 L.Ed. 806), and this conclusion is not affected by the fact that the President thereafter determined that they should not be devoted to Indian purposes, but should be subject to entry and sale (Leavenworth, L. & G. Co. v. United States, above). And since the lands did not pass by the grant, and were not affected by it, there were not any alternate sections or alternate lands in that territory to which the proviso to section 2357 could apply.
But counsel for appellant relies with confidence upon the decision of the Land Department in Hollensteiner's Case 38 Land Dec. 319, wherein it was held that these lands were subject to sale at a price not less than $2.50 per acre. The effect of the decision in that case is that, although these lands did not pass to the railroad company by reason of the fact that they were comprised in reserved Indian country, they are within the granted limits; "that the fact of the nearness of the railroad to the even sections is what enhances their value"; that the proviso to section 2357 applies to all reserved lands within the territorial limits of a railroad grant; that the Act of June 5, 1872, had...
To continue reading
Request your trial