The Saline County journal. [volume] (Salina, Kan.) 1871-1893, 1878-10-10
THE CENTRAL BRANCH LANDS,
Important ljresSsr Es~ Sbe Lsxa
G0ss1Sssj0ser.

Important t5resSsr frs~ sSe As.a
Comssssisser.
LAND DEPARTMENT
CENTRAL BRANCH {. P. r. r. Co.,
ATcHIsoN, KS, Sept. 25, 1873.
To all rhom 1t may concern:
The Central Branch Union Pacific Rail-
road Company desires to caution the pub
lie against giving to the recent decision OF
the Honorable Secretary Of the Interior,
In the case Of Dndymott vs.. The Kansas
Pacific Railway Company, respecting the
pre-emptiOn Of their lands, q construction
which would include the lands granted to
this Company. The titles Of the two CON-
panies are quite dissimilar. The main
points Of difference are the following:
l. The X. p. Z. W. Co. generally OBJ
tanned its patents only Us its lands were
sold. But this company obtained patents
July 26. 1872, aud October l, 1878. for all
its lands except those in contest. and to
which patents We're refused by tine Gov
eminent. The K. P. Z. W. lands are gen.
orally not patented. willis; the lands Of
this company are patented to it.
2. This policy Of the Z. p Il. W. Co. has
protected it from the payment Of taxes on
its lands. On the contrary, the lands Of
taxation since they were patented. But
owing TO the financial difficulties, COM
mencisg with the panic OF 1873. this COM
pany was unable to pay its land taxes
when due, and all the lands were sold at
tax sale, and some Of them were conveyed
by tax deed to individuals. This operated
10 divest the title OF the company, and
was a sale and disposition OF the lands
within the meaning OF the proviso Of Sec.
5 Of the Act Of Congress OF July /. 1862.
These lands have either been redeemed or
re-purchased by the company ut great ex-
pense. The title does not. therefore. de-
pend alone upon the patents issued inpur-
suance OF the land grand acts, but also
upon the tax laws OF the States Of Kansas
and Nebraska divesting the title and their
reinvesting it, as evinced by the redemp-
ton certificates and tax deeds.
5. The Government claims that the Kan
s;ls Pacific Railway was entirely compile
ted In 1872. The time given for tho sale
Of the land Is three years after the entire
road shall have been completed" Under
the original Pacific railroad acts, the road
now known as the Kansas Pacific was
calle1 "the road through Kansas" and
was to unite with the main line, or
Union Pacific, at Or near:the one hundredth
meridian, and the road now known as the
Central Branch Union Pacific was to
unite with the road through Kansas" It
was intended that the junction should be
about 100 miles west Of Atchison, and the
land grant was limited to that distance.
But in 1866 Congress passed an act allow
ing the road through Kansas" to swing
of to the south and make its connections
with the main line at point not more
than fifty miles from the meridian Of Dem
vcr." The road was built on that route;
and thus the Central Branch Union Pacific
was unable to unite with the road through
Kansas or any other Pacific railroad,
without building q line double the length
provided for In the original act. The road
has never been built to unite with the
road through Kansas. nor any other Pa
cific railroad, and therefore the entire
years limitation has not vet even COM
menced to run against this company.
4. The Kansas Pacific Railway COmpa-
ny mOrtgaged its lands, and the HonOra-
BILE Secretary OF the Interior holds that
this Is not sale or disposition Of them
within the meaning Of the act Of Congress.
This Company has never mOrtgaged the
lands granted to 1t by Congress; but has
heretofore absolutely disposed OF tho
same by deed OF conveyance in pawn mt
of its lawful debts. In the case Of the
Union Pacific Railroad Company VS.. Me-
Shane, Judge Dillon decided that after
three wears have elapsed the Conn ny
may still sell or dispose Of their lanes In
good faith" and that the right r. pre-
empt does not prevent the Company
from selling the lands In good faith ~ per-
sons who may not wish to pref mpt or oc-
cupv Them" (See Dillons Circuit Court
Reports, page 3lO) So there can be no
doubt that absolute sales Of lands by any
OF the Pacific Railroad Companies made
now or hereafter would be perfectly valid,
provided no adverse right had attached
prior to such sale.
These are the main points In which the
titles OF the two companies differ. But II
seems probable that the Honorable Secre-
tary Of the Interior errs In the same de-
gree In his decision respecting the Kansas
Pacific lands. In the case Of Schulen-
burg VI. Hartman (see Il Wallace's Su-
preme Court Reports. page 81, the Su-
preme Court Of the United States has de-
cided that where lands are granted to n
railroad company the title Is In the cOmpa-
ny, and the land cannot be taken for nOn-
performance Of conditions to which for
icitusc 10 ottACRcu uIth Tic 0OSefQmenI,
by some Legislative action, has decided to
take advantage OF the forfeiture. Con-
gress has taken no such action In the case
Of any Of the Pacific Railroads. Any rul-
Ing Of the Honorable Secretary OF the In
terror must be subject to the decision Of
the Supreme Court Of the United States;
and the right Of the companies to dispose
OF their lands will remain absolute until
Congress shall declare them open 10 pre-
emptiOn. As the Honorable Secretary,
although referring In his decision to nn-
merous cases, does not allude to this one
In the Supreme Court, which Is 50 direct
ly In point, We are led to believe that his
attention was not called % II.
We have stated our views nj some
length. hoping thereby TO keep ourselves
and others out OF trouble The title Of
this company and its grantees to these
lands will be asserted and defended, at
every step, from the local land Office To
the Supreme Court of the United States.
II necessary; and oil persons settling upon
the same without authority from this Com
pany or grantees will be treated as intru-
ders and trcspassers.
W. F. Downs,
Land Commissioner
WONDERFUL KANSAS.