United States v. Southern Pac. R. Co.
Decision Date | 09 July 1902 |
Docket Number | 878. |
Citation | 117 F. 544 |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of California |
Parties | UNITED STATES v. SOUTHER PAC. R. CO. et al. |
The Attorney General and J. H. Call, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty., for the United States.
Wm Singer, J., Wm. F. Herrin, T. M. Stewart, S. V. Landt, and R H. F. Variel, for defendants.
By its bill the complainant sets up, among other things, the grants made by congress to the Atlantic & Pacific Railroad Company and to the defendant Southern Pacific Railroad Company by the act of July 27, 1866 (14 Stat. 292), and the grant to the defendant railroad company made by the joint resolution of June 28, 1870 (16 Stat. 382), and by the act of March 3, 1871 (16 Stat. 573), and the subsequent act of congress of July 6 1886 (24 Stat. 123), declaring forfeited the grant to the Atlantic & Pacific Company of July 27, 1866, and restoring to the public domain all of the odd-numbered sections within 30 miles on each side of its line of road between the eastern boundary of California and the Pacific Ocean at San Buena Ventura. It is alleged that all of the lands described in Exhibit A, annexed to and made part of the bill, situated in California, and consisting of separate and distinct tracts of the public lands, and aggregating 30,067.79 acres, fell within the 30-mile limits of the Atlantic & Pacific Railroad grant; that, regardless of the rights of the complainant, the defendant railroad company, as well as the other defendants, claim some title and interest in the lands described in Exhibit A, annexed to the bill, under some or all of the aforesaid acts of congress granting lands to the defendant railroad company, the precise nature and extent of which claims are unknown to the complainant, which it alleges are unfounded; that subsequent to the passage of the aforesaid act of March 3, 1871, and prior to the year 1896, patents were erroneously issued by the department of the interior to the defendant railroad company in due form, purporting to convey to that company the lands described in the said Exhibit A. It is alleged that the grants made to the defendant railroad company by section 18 of the act of July 27, 1866, by the joint resolution of June 28, 1870, by section 23 of the of March 3, 1871, were made upon the same terms, conditions, restrictions, and limitations as the grant to the Atlantic & Pacific Railroad Company by the act of July 27, 1866, by section 20 of which latter act congress expressly reserved the right to alter, amend, or repeal that act. The bill also sets up the acts of congress of March 3, 1887 (24 Stat. 556), February 12, 1896 (29 Stat. 6), and March 2, 1896 (29 Stat. 42). By section 1 of the act of March 3, 1887, the secretary of the interior was authorized and directed 'to immediately adjust, in accordance with the decisions of the supreme court, each of the railroad land grants made by congress to aid in the construction of railroads, and heretofore unadjusted. ' Sections 2 and 4 of the act are as follows:
By the act of February 12, 1896, congress added the following proviso to section 4 of the act of March 3, 1887, just quoted:
'Provided further, that where such purchasers, their heirs or assigns, have paid only a portion of the purchase price to the company, which is less than the government price of similar lands, they shall be required, before the delivery of patent for their lands, to pay to the government a sum equal to the difference between the portion of the purchase price so paid and the government price, and in such case the amount demanded from the company shall be the amount paid to it by such purchaser.'
By the act of March 2, 1896, entitled 'An act to provide for the extension of time within which suits may be brought to vacate and annul land patents, and for other purposes,' congress declared, among other things, that 'no Patents to any lands held by a bona fide purchaser shall be vacated or annulled, but the right and title of such purchaser is hereby confirmed,' with a proviso not pertinent to the present case.
Sections 2 and 3 of the act of March 2, 1896, are as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
The State ex rel. Barker v. Chicago & Alton Railroad Co.
... ... Co., 60 Neb. 320; Thompson v. Reasoner, 122 ... Ind. 454; United States v. Rithstein, 187 F. 268; ... Brown v. Trust Co., 193 F. 672; ... 434; Heiserman v. Railroad, ... 63 Iowa 732; Southern Ry. v. Ala. R. R. Com., 196 ... Fed. l. c. 560; Bellamy v. Railroad, ... ...
- Southern Pac. R. Co. v. United States
- Southern Pac. Ry. Co. v. United States
-
SOUTHERN PACIFIC R. CO. V. UNITED STATES
...adjudged that the United States recover from the railroad company the value of those lands, a sum amounting in the aggregate to ,596.92. 117 F. 544. This decree was affirmed by the court of appeals, 133 F. 651, from whose decision the railroad company and the trustees appealed to this Court......