The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1854-12-02
THURSDAY MORNING, NOVEMBER 80, 1854
The Railroad Case.

The Railroad Case.
The Dubuque Express and Herald having
given the following statement concerning the
pending Railroad case, with the accompanying
synopsis of Chief Justice Welch's decision
thereon, we have been requested to copy the
same. with the correction of few verbal and
typographical errors which were apparent in
the columns of the Dubuque. paper. If the cd
itors of that or any other journal which may
feel an interest in the matter, wish to have
correct idea of the state of proceeding thus far,
We think they will find our reprint of the re-
port entirely correct. There are not correc-
tions necessary, howevcr,to render it proper to
withhold the customary credit from the sheet
in which it originally appeared:
From the Dubuque Express and Herald, Nov. ooh.
The Railroad hence to Lake Superior is not
dead yet, by many years. as the following pro-
ceedings had before Judge Welch in Terrific
rial Court of Minnesota, will show. 1t will be
seen from this report Of case between
the United States and the Minnesota and North
Western r. r. Company, that the act of Con-
grcss repeating the law by which donation of
land was made to Minnesota for Railroad con-
StEuCtiOil udS Dctt us IL DFOUdDIy Is,
unconstitutional and void.
This abstract of the case is the most intelli-
gible form in which We can present the infor-
nation it conveys to our readers.
The DISTRICT COURT. lsr JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
GooDHrE COUNTY.
The United States of America
against
The Minnesota and North Wcs-
tern Railroad Company.
Action of trespass for cutting and carrying
away trees, &c.
! The complaint alleges that on the 18th of
Oct. 1854, the defendants cut and carried away
500 trees, from the close of the plaintiff. being
section B. of town ll2 in Goodhue County.
The answer admits the cutting and carrying
away, &c, but justilies under the Act of the
Territorial Legislature of the 4th Of March,
1854, whereby the defendants were incorporat-
/ ed. &C., and any lands that might be granted
by Congress to aid in the construction of the
Railroad in question. "arc hereby conveyed
to said Company in fee simple absolute. with
out any further act or deed - also AYERS that
the Company have in all things complied with
the requirements of the charter; also sets up
the Act OF Congress Of the 10Th of June, 1854
and then AYERS that the supposed trespaSscs
were committed by defendants IN the necessa-
ry construction OF their road which they had
located upon and across said section 3. and
within and upon the track of SAID road as they
had lawful right to do.
The plaintiffs reply that the Act of Congress
of the 10Th ofJunc, was repealed by the Act OF
the 4th of August. 1854.
To this the defendants dcmur, and say that
the 2d section O. the last named Act. repeating
the former one, is void.
The case was argued on the I'd instant, be-
fore Chief Justice Welch. by Mr.. Rice and Mr..
Wilkinson, of counsel for the defendants. in
support OF the demurrer, and Mr.. Brisbin. as
sstant attorney for the L. S., in opposition
thereto.
On the 18th instant, the Chief Justice allowed
the demurrer. AMI gave Judgment for the de-
PENDANTS, and decided the following points:
1st By the Acs of Congress. approved June
10Th. 1854. granting certain lands to the Ter
ritory of Minnesota. to aid said Territory in
constructing Railroad, the Territory 60 in
stdnti, upon the passage Of the Act. acquired
an interest and property in the lands granted,
which the Territory could grant and convey.
I'd. by the Act of the Legislature of Mime
sofa, Incorporating the Minnesota and North
Western Railroad Company. the said Company
acquired an interest and property in all the
lands subsequently granted by Congress
to the Territory for the purposes of the road
which interest became vested in said Company
Immediately upon the passage of the Act of
Congress and the organization ofthe Company.
Sd. The second section of the Act of Con
Sress, passed Aug. Atm. 1881. repeating the first
mentioned Act Of Congress, is rcpugnant not
only to the Constitution of the United States
but also to great and fundamental principles
which have been recognized as binding from
time immemorial, wherever the common law
prevails.
We have only to add that the case goes to
the Supreme Court of the Territory which will
meet on the 9th of next month. There is eve
ry reason founded on law to believe that the
decision of the Court below will be sustained
by, not only the Supreme Court of Minnesota.
but also by the Supreme Court of the United
States.