United States v. Colton Marble Lime Co Same v. Southern Pac Co

Citation13 S.Ct. 163,36 L.Ed. 1104,146 U.S. 615
Decision Date12 December 1892
Docket NumberNos. 862,863,s. 862
PartiesUNITED STATES v. COLTON MARBLE & LIME CO. et al. SAME v. SOUTHERN PAC. R. CO. et al
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

These were two suits brought by the United States,—in the one case against the Colton Marble & Lime Company, O. T. Dyer, _____ Archibald, and W. S. Wilson, and in the other against the Southern Pacific Railroad Company and others. Decrees were entered dismissing the bills, and the United States appealed. Reversed.

Statement by Mr. Justice BREWER:

These cases are similar in many respect, to those of U. S. v. Railroad Co., 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 152, just decided. The lands involved are within the granted limits of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company and the indemnity limits of the Atlantic & Pacific Railroad Company; and the contention on the part of the government is that, because they were within such indemnity limits, they were not of the lands granted, or intended to be granted, to the Southern Pacific Company. In the first, the defendants claim under the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, and are charged to be committing trespasses upon the lands, and the relief sought is, as in the two prior cases, to quiet the title of the plaintiff, and to restrain the trespasses. In the second, a patent has been issued, and the legal title conveyed to the railroad company, and the relief sought is the cancellation of that patent, and a decree establishing the title of the government. In this case there is a further contention on the part of the government, and that is that the lands were sub judice at the time of the definite location of the Southern Pacific Company's road, inasmuch as they were within the exterior boundaries of a Mexican land grant known as the- 'Rancho San Jose,' as those boundaries were marked on the surface of the ground by one of two official surveys, the accuracy of neither of which had then been determined. Decrees were entered below in favor of the defendants, dismissing the bills, from which decrees the government has appealed to this court. See 39 Fed. Rep. 132; 40 Fed. Rep. 611; 45 Fed. Rep. 596; 46 Fed. Rep. 683.

Mr. Justice Field and Mr. Justice Gray, dissenting.

Asst. Atty. Gen. Maury and Jos. H. Call, for appellant.

James C. Carter, G. Wiley Wells, J. A. Anderson, and Geo. W. Merrill, for appellees.

Mr. Justice BREWER, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the court.

The ordinary rule with respect to lands within indemnity limits is that no title passes until selection. Where, as here, the deficiency within the granted limits is so great that all the indemnity lands will not make good the loss, it has been held, in a contest between two railroad companies, that no formal selection was necessary to give them to the one having the older grant, as against the other company, (St. Paul & P. R. Co. v. Northern Pac. R. Co., 139 U. S. 1, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 389;) and, if the Atlantic & Pacific Company had constructed its road, it would be difficult, in the light of that decision, to avoid the conclusion that all the lands within the indemnity limits passed to that company. But this case does not rest upon that proposition. One thing which distinguishes the grant of 1871 to the Southern Pacific Railroad Company from most if not all other, land grants is the proviso somewhat considered in the opinion in the former cases, and which reads: 'Provided, however, that this section shall in no way affect or impair the rights, present or prospective, of the Atlantic & Pacific Railroad Company, or any other railroad company.'

What is the significance of this proviso? Without it, certainly, the Southern Pacific, its grant being of later date, would be postponed to the Atlantic & Pacific; and, on the filing by each company of a map of definite location, the title to the lands within the granted limits would vest in the Atlantic & Pacific Company, to the total and absolute exclusion of all claims on the part of the Southern Pacific. The proviso, therefore, was without significance in respect to such lands. It in no manner strengthened the title of the Atlantic & Pacific, and took nothing away from the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Santa Fe Pacific R. Co. v. Secretary of Interior
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • 9 Octubre 1987
    ...the grantee where the lands available for indemnity were not sufficient for the purpose"); United States v. Colton Marble & Lime Co., 146 U.S. 615, 616, 13 S.Ct. 163, 164, 36 L.Ed. 1104, 1105 (1892); St. Paul & Pac. R.R. v. Northern Pac. R.R., supra note 13, 139 U.S. at 19, 11 S.Ct. at 395,......
  • Frederick Weyerhaeuser v. Herbert Hoyt 27, 28 1910
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 19 Diciembre 1910
    ...must be nearest the tract lost and made the basis for the selection. In the case of United States v. Colton Marble & Lime Co. 146 U. S. 615, 618, 36 L. ed. 1104, 1105, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 163, it was said by the court: In respect to the portion of the said circular above quoted, in the manner ......
  • McHenry v. Nygaard
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • 22 Abril 1898
    ... ... claiming under the United States), the secretary of the ... interior fully ... U.S. v ... Colton, 146 U.S. 615; Sage v. Swenson, 64 Minn. 517 ... recognize and approve the selection. Southern v ... Wiggs, 43 F. 333; Minneapolis v ... same authority to withdraw lands from entry for the ... ...
  • United States v. Southern Pac. R. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • 9 Julio 1902
    ... ... section 23 of the of March 3, 1871, were made upon the same ... terms, conditions, restrictions, and limitations as the grant ... to ... Co., 146 U.S. 570, 13 ... Sup.Ct. 152, 36 L.Ed. 1001; U.S. v. Colton Marble & Lime ... Co., 146 U.S. 615, 13 Sup.Ct. 163, 36 L.Ed 1104; ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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