The Grange advance. [volume] (Red Wing, Minn.) 1873-1877, 1875-06-15
The st. .Croix Land .rr,nt.

ieA anu 0ouls IlosPeT, partners as Schulz
enberg, Boeckler & Co., plaintiffs in error
to the Circuit Court for the district Of
Minnesota. Mr.. Justice Field delivered
the opinion of the court, in substance.
thus:
On the Sd of June, 1856, Congress-
passed an act entitled San act orant;no
public land to the State of Wisconsin. to
aid in the construction of railroads in
said State That act grants to the
State, for the purpose of aiding in the
construction Of a railroad between certain
specified points, every alternate section Of
land designated by an odd number for six
sections in width on each side of the road
The language of the first section Of the
act is: ''That there be and is hereby
granted to the State of Wisconsin, tho
lands specified. The third section de-
clares that ''the said lands, hereby grant
ed to- said State, shall be subject to the
disposal Of the legislature thereof;;'' and
the fourth section provides in what man.
ner sales shall be made, and the lands un-
sold shall revert to the United States.
The State accepted the grant thus made.
and assumed the execution of the trust.
The route of the road was surveyed, and
map Of its location was filed in the land
Office at Washington. The adjoining ad-
ditional sections, within the present linn
its, were then withdrawn from sale by
the proper officers Of the government,
and certified lists thereof, approved by
the Secretary Of the Interior, were deliv-
cred to the State. Subsequently, on the
9Th Of May, 1864, Congress passsd an
other act on the same subject, entitled
AN act granting lands to aid in the con.
| struction Of certain railroads in the State
| of Wisconsin, BY it's first section adj
ditional land is granted to the State,
upon the same terms and conditions as
those contained in the previous act, for
the purpose of aiding in the construction
OF the road between certain of the points
designated IN the act of 1856; an! the
last act extends the time for completion
Of the road for five years. This road has
never been constructed, nor any part of
it, and the time for its construction has
not been extended since the act of 1864,
nor has Congress passed any act, nor
have any judicial proceedings been taken
to enforce forfeiture of the grants for
the failure to construct the road within
the period prescribed.
Held: That the act Of June 3. 1856,
and the first section Of the act of May 5,
1864, are grants IN present., and passed
the title to the odd sections designa-
ted, to be afterward located.
When the route was fixed, their
locations became certain, and the title
which was previously imperfect, acquired
precision, and became attached to the
land. The lands granted have not re-
verified to the United States. although the
road was not constructed within the period
prescribed, no action having been taken,
either by legislation or by judicial pro-
ccedings, to enforce a forfeiture Of the
grants. Unless there are clauses in a
statute restraining the operation of the
wards of present part, these must be
taken in their natural sense, to impart
an immediate transfer Of title, although
subsequent proceeding may be required
to give precision to that title, and attach
to specific tracts. No individual can call
in question the validity of the proceed.
ings, by which precision is thus given to
the title, where the United States are sat-
isfed with them. The provision in the
act Of 1856, that all lands remaining
unsold after ten years shall revert
to the Uuited States if the
road be not then completed is a
condition subsequent, being in effect
a provision that the grant, to the extent
of the lands unsold, shall be void, if the
work designated be not done within that
period. No one can take advantage of
the non-pcrformance Of a condition an
nexed to an estate fee. but the grantor or
his heirs Or successors; and if they DO
not see fit to assert their right to force
a forfeiture OH that ground, the title re-
mains unimpaired in the grantee. The
rule usually obtains where the grant upon
condition proceeds from the government.
The manner in which the reserved right
Of the grantor, for breach OF the condl-
ton, must be asserted so as to restore
the estate, depends on the chal ter. If
the grant be a private grant, that right
must be asserted by entry or its equ'va-
lent. If the grant be public one, the
right must be asserted by judicial pro-
ccedings authrized by law. or there must
be some legislative assertion of ownership
of the property, for breach Of the condl-
tons, such as an act directing the posses
sion and appropriation of the property
or that it be offered for sale or settlement.
When the title to land remains in the State
timber cut on the land belongs to the
State. 1t constitutes part Of tie realty.
Being severed from the soil, its character
is changed. 1t becomes personality, but
it's It'll, is not effected. 1t continues, as
previously, the property of the owner OF
the land, and can be pursued wherever 1t
is carried. All the remedies are open to
the owner, which the law offers in other
cases Of the wrong of person and person
al property. Where logs cut from the