The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1879-04-29
TlIEPACIFIC RAILROAD
IA NDS.
Carl Schurz's Decision Reversed by
the u. =. supreme Court.

Carl Schurz's Decision Reversed by
the U. :. supreme Court.
WAsHrNeT n, April ~. "A decision o.
great Importance to persons who pro
p Sc to settle upon the public lands has
been rendered nv the Supreme Cour,
! Last summer Carl Schn reversed the
decision Of the c mmissioner of tn.
Lind Olfiae in what is known az the
+ Dudymolt case. The third section OF
| the act of 1852. TOR the cnnatruc ion OF
! the Pacific Railroads, provides that all
lands granted, which shall no, he sold or
disposed o. by the ,mp,nr within three
yeas after the entire road shall have
been completed, shall be snhjec. to pre-.
empiion and settlement. like ther lands
al = price not. xceeding 81 25 per acre.
The de factO Secretary uf the Interior
held thai Nelson Dilymott had he right
to preemp, in the ual manner any lands
originally contained in the grant to the
company, but rem aiming unsoli three
years after the completion OF the road.
When the decision was made, swarms
OF settlers dropprd down on the compa.
ny's liant. TIE Union Pacific Company
at once prepared - test the validity OF
Schu 1's decision in the courts. Will
liam h. Pitt preemptcd q q Iar,er sec.
tion of the com any's land in N,brask.
The c,mpany refused to receive the pa.
mint tcnderei, anil brought q action
against him in ejecsmens. Plsts fled q
bill in &c ,itv against the company to re-
strain them from prosecuting the action
OF ej -ctment.
The company 6led an answer, setting
forth that mortgages had beennmsde 70
secure their land grant binds, and that
the m ,rtagagss we're Al the disposal ci
the land. within the meaning OF the act
of1S63, incorporating the road. Tie
cause was a'gne,i in the U ,ited States
Circui, Curt in N ,braska, and Judge
Dnndy decided in favor of the company
Pistt appealed to the Supreme C ur.. The
case va. argued about tw weeks ago, and
to. 'av Judge Strong delivered an opin.
ion Affirming the decision OF the lower
court, Jus.ic.s B B'adley. Miller, and
Clifford dissenting. Justice Strong, In
his opinion, which is q very elaborate
one, recites d st the statutes giving the
land grants to the Union Pacific Railroad.
After citing the statutes, he proceeds to
dwell upon the circumstances under which
this aid was given. The country was
greatly interested in the completion OF q
railway across the continent. The dis
tance was so great, and the country
through which It was to pass was so ba--
ren ofsupport, that the construction of
the road wss clearly beyond reach OF
private enterprise. Itwas for this rea-
son that Congress was both willing and
anxious TO extend such aid to the comps.
ny ss would enable it to construct the
road. Tue lands we're to be "sold or
disposed OF" within a certain time, or
else the lands were to revert to the G,v-
ernmen'. Now, in consruing this sta ute,
the court desires to get at the exact
meaning Of Congress. II it had meant
that the lands must all be sold within a
prescribed time, in order to prevent their
reverting to the Government, then there
was M need for the additional words
''disposed o. In the opinion OF the
court the issuing OF mortgage bonds
hased upon this land was sufficient dis
p0sal to satisfy the statutes. and for the
reason that it fulfilled TIE express inter-
tioa OF c rgre.s. The lands we're civ.
en- to the roads to really aid their work.
and il the company had been able to
mortgage the lands only for a spr6H a
tma il wonli have been barren gift in
deed. L, England and in some of the
States mortgage pas .ed the title. while
all other authOri;lra hold that it cons i,e-
les lien uoon the land. that would forbid
its disposal not sulj-ct tp this lien. Ger
tam properties of railway company.
such as its charter aud chartered privi-
leges, could not b. sold or disposed Of
but it was not 80 with it's land. Th g.
we're given to help and aid in its con-
structi"n, and the means for raising moi.
oy upon such git should not be narrow
" circumscribed. 1t was for this reason
that the court held that the Circuit Court
below erred in deciding such lands sub
ject to entry, and its decision vas rever.
sed.
Aliunde Joe Bradley delivered the dis
senting opinion. In it he claimed thai
the execution OF the mortgage on the
lands was neither the sale nor the dispo.
sition Of them. The intention OF the aci
OF Congress mskiug the grant was to en-.
courage settlement after the G, mpany
had h+en given reasonable time in which
to dispose of the lsn-is. The object oil
the act was defea'ed by covering the
grants with mortgage. The mortgage
would prevent settlers from occupy ing
the lands at the ordinary price per acre
under the H 'me-tead laws. In answer
to the plea that the company could no,
have built its road without mortagaging
the lands. Mr.. Bradley said that, sccor.
ding to the provisions OF the act, the
lands we're not patented 10 the company
until after certain amount of track had
been laid. The com ,any hal control Of
the lands to that extent. ard il disposed
OF according to the intention Of the act
the lands shoul be thrown open t, SET
tlemens. Mortgages took their mort
cages subject to the provisions of the act
OF G ,ngress, and the mortga gees were
entitled to the proceeds Of the salts Of
the land to settlers.
shipwrecked and Dead.
SAN FRANCISCO, April ga Port
Townsend dispatch Gays the ship Otsqo
reports that few days ago, in latitude
42' lam. north, longitude 1899 37m.
west. she sighted schooner waterlogged