The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-04-18
THE LAND-GRANT QUESTION
An Illinois Man Who Is Loaded Down
With Bills on the Subject.
Special to the Indianapolis Journal.


Special to the Indianapolis Journal
WASHINGTON, April 17.-Judge Payson, of
Illinois, has in course of preparation a dozen
or fifteen railroad land-grant bills, which he
will introduce into Congress at the begin
ming of next session, and press to action. In
an interview on this question Judge Payson
gave the Journal correspondent his views
briefly as follows:
II have given the matter a great deal of
patient, laborious study regarding it as of
great importance to the people, and one which
has had but little attention Cooking to practi-
cal results) from members of Congress.
'As to the status of the public lands which
have been granted by Congress in aid of rail-
way construction, the title to which is not
absolutely vested in the grantee it may be
briefly stated that there are two classes
of grants-one to the States to aid in
the construction of railroads, in which cases
the States, respectively, were treated as trus-
tees, and the duty of disposal of the lands to
the corporations entitled was left with the
State. All the earlier grants were of this
character, and the practice of the Interior
Department was, as soon as the line of the
road was established, so that the limits of
the grant could be fixed, to at once certify to
the State all the lands to which the road
would ultimately be entitled. In every in
stance to which my attention has
been called an excess of land has
been certified, owing, generally, to the
fact that certificate was always based on the
claim of the railroad company, and this for
the largest possible allowance.
The other class (the later grants were made
directly to the company. In all:of them was
the condition that the roads should be COM
pleted within a given period. Default has
been made in the performance of the condi-
ton by very large proportion of these COM
panies. l have the figures at hand as to the
different grants on this condition, showing
approximately that about $4,000, 900 acres
to which the companies are not legally en-
titled, and the title to which stands in abey-
ance, for these reasons, are tied up.
ACTION IN THE COURTS
When the bills passed making these grants
it was believed by Congress that unless the
roads were completed fully within the period
the lands granted would revert to the
United States, and that no subsisting right
would remain in the companies The ques-
ton got into the courts, and in Schulenberg
VS.. Hartman which is regarded as the
leading and decisive case on the
question, the Supreme Court held that
if the conditions be not enforced
by the United States the power to sell the
lands continued in the State as fully as before
the breach of condition, limited only by the
object of the grant.
$50 long as that decision stands and it's
logic is followed by the Interior Department
and by the Attorney general, unless formal
forfeiture is declared, or some act tanta-
mount thereto done by Congress- these lands
must continue to be not only Withdrawn
from the market and withheld from settle
ment, but by part performance by the COM
panies year by year they will be given pro
rata lands based on such partial perform
ance, and this, mind you, irrespective OF the
completion of the roads.
The doctrines announced by the court
in the case referred to, as
to the status OF the lands,
so granted, is mere dictum. 1t was not in
volved in the case at all, not necessary to be
decided to determine the real question in
volved in the litigation, and in the judgment
of very many of the best lawyers in the
country it will not be adhered to when, if
ever, a case shall arise presenting the pre-
else question. But so long as the matter
stands as it does, and Congress avoids action,
all of these grants are liable to go, as in the
case of the Gulf & Ship Island Railroad
Company. The grant was made in 1856, the
road to be completed in 1866 A
matter of 652, 500 acres of the
best timber land in the South was
granted in aid of its construction. Not
dollar of the work was done under the
charter; its right by the terms of the act were
forfeited seventeen years ago, and yet the
charter is being hawked about for sale and
syndicate of New York capitalists are to-
day considering the project of building the
road and claiming the grant as though the
time had not expired. 1t is estimated that
about 80, 900 acres are in a similar oondi-
ton.
I'm all these. cases the power should be
placed in the hands of the government,
and affirmative action be necessary
to divest it of the public domain,
instead of as now, resting in the corporation
interested, and liable to be wholly lost by in
action on the part of Congress Beyond de-
claring forfeiture in proper cases as l sug-
gested, nothing is proposed, to my knowl-
edge, excepting the Garland bill in the
Senate"
Judge Payson is opposed to the Garland
bill, which in his opinion simply perpetu-
ates the evil it pretends to cure. He
will introduce bills early next winter
covering each case, and see what can be done
to force a settlement of the land-grant
question Should Randall be elected Speaker
the Judiciary and railroad committees will
undoubtedly be framed to defeat just the
legislation Judge Payson and the people
need.