Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1882-01-19
NUMBER 10.
THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAIL.
ROAD.

Tho logic by which the Interior De-
partment pretendsto justify theissuancs
Of patents to the Northern Pacific Rail-
road Company. for lands on account
of portions Of the road constructed long
after the time allowed by Congress. u
one Of the many peculiar things that
have in late years and in prior Ad.
ministration distinguished the methods
Of that Department in matters affecting
the interests Of powerful corposatioas
and especially the NortAsss Pastas
Railrsad Company.
Tho logic is this: All railroad granss
are present grants, and vest in the gran
toe the legal title to Ill the land con-
templated by the grant; and the title
does not revert 70 the United Statss
on breach Of condition without de-
claration Of forfeiture by Congress Al
though the Northern Pacific Company
failed to complete the road within the
time allowed, yet there has been no
declaration Of forfeiture BY Congress
on account Of this breach Of condition,
therefore tho Company still has title
to the land, and the Department may
lawfully issue patents 10 tho Company
for the land.
No one but railroad lawyer, Or :
partial Secretary Of tho Interior and
subservient subordinates, could have
perceived any relation between the
premises and the Last clause Of the con-
clusion. The acts of Congress author
ise patents to issue on account Of such
portions of the road a. were completed
before July 4, 1877; and not for such
lands as the Company may posscss the
legal title; for it .his were the case
and tho premises are correct, patents
might have issued immediately after
the passage Of the granting act. But
the premises arc false, the grant was
not present ono. Tho Department
knows that under similar grant, the
Union Pacific Railroad Go. svades the
payment Of taxes on millions Of acres
of land in Kansas and Nebraska fully
earned by tho construction Of tho read
years ago, but for which they do not
call for patent until the sans il sold
to a tax.paying farmer. The company
is sble to cvade the payment Of taxes
on the lands which It holds for higher
prices, because tbs Supreme Court Of
tho United States has thrce times de-
cided that the title did not pass by the
granting act; that the title and owner
ship is in the United States until pat
ents issue; that tho condition was :
condition precedent aud not subsequent
In every case whore it has besn held
necessary for declaration Of forfeiture
} to cause the title to revert to the
United States, it has been held that
the title had already passed from the
: United States and vested in the gran
| tee, and that the condition vas subse.
! quen. and not precedent.
Every reason assigned by the Court
for holding that title did not vest BY
tho grant to tho Union Pacific Com
pany, but vests only whom the patents
, issue. is equally applicable to the grant
to the Northern Pacific Company; and
several other valid reaeons exist, not
mentioned by the Court.
No Court has ever decided that .
declaration Of forfeiture u necessary
to terminate the rights Of the grantee
in case Of breach Of condition precsdsnt.
Whatever credit is due for making
such decision belongs to Secretary
Of the Interior who is now understood
70 be tho recipient Of portion Of ita
; logical results 1t is one of the achiev-
: mcnts of the Interior Departments,
which Department has solved the prob
lem of re-investing the United States
: with title of which it was never di.
vested. That Department has recent.
: ly, by its railroad decisions, made many
equally meritorious contributions "a
the science Of Jurisprudence.
The Northern Pacific Railroad Com.
f pany has no claim to patents on account
of portions of the road completed since
July 4, 1877, that is valid by the rules
Of law or equity. There are no acts oi