Case ID: us-ct-cl_54/html/0193-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Pitney", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE UNITED STATES v. ROBERT A. LAUGHLIN.
    [52 C. Cls., 292; 249 U. S., 440.]
    Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff in the court below. On appeal the judgment was affirmed, and the Supreme Court decided:
    The act of March 26, 1908, chapter 102, 35 Statutes, 48, providing for repayment in all cases where it shall appear to the satisfaction of the Secretary of the Interior that excessive payments have been made to the Unit; <1 States under the public land laws, gives the Secretary exclusive jurisdiction to determine questions of fact; but when the undisputed facts, shown to his satisfaction, call for repayment as a matter of law, his adverse decision is reviewable by the courts and may be reviewed by an action brought by the claimant under Judicial Code, section 145, in the Court of Claims.
    Under the Northern Pacific land grant act of July 2, 1864, chapter 217, 13 Statutes, 365, the filing of a map of general route, although followed by a withdrawal order, did not take the odd sections out of the public domain or exempt them from entry under the preemption and homestead' laws prior to the-filing and acceptance of the map of definite location. Nelson v. Northern Pacific Ry. Co., 188 U. S., 108.
    The act of 1864, supra, fixed no special price for odd-numbered sections within the limits of the Northern Pacific grant, and the right of a qualified person to preempt such a section prior to the acceptance of the railway’s map of definite location at the minimum price of $1.25 per acre (Rev. Stats., sections 2357, 2259), was a substantial right of which he could not be arbitrarily deprived by Government officials.
    Revised Statutes, section 2364, providing that the Commissioner of the General Land Office shall fix a price of not less than $1.25 per acre for the lands of any reservation when brought into market, has no application to withdrawn odd sections within the Northern Pacific grant limits, when preempted before definite location of the railroad.
    The act of June 22, 1874, chapter 400, 18 Statutes, 194, confers no authority upon officials of the United States to charge more for land relinquished by the Northern Pacific Company than otherwise might have been charged.
   Mr. Justice Pitney

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court April 14, 1919.