Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884-10-11

ssTuctioa Of railroads" This resolution
vas referred to Acting Commissioner
armstrong. In reply he, on Nav 18th.
lsosl, transmitted to the Senate a rspsrt
IN which over his own signature he takes
the most positive position in favor On
non-fotfelture, even Aoing so far as II
say that the Northern Pacific grant Is
moi .fogfeisa6le under any circumstances.
here are seme extracts fram that reporS:
Ine sniy power or right reserved go
the Government will be found in tie
eighth and ninth sections. The first af
these sections Imposes certain coudi
tions TO be performed, and the secoad
declares THAI IN case the company maEss
any breach thereof and allows the safs,e
10 continue for upwards of one ye4r.
the United States may do auy and iii
acts and things which may be neecSal
and necessary to insure a speedy cta-
pletion of the road
Further he says: q
These grants are anomalous in ciar-
acter. and though lapsed, so far as ae
failure OF the companies to perfoSm
the acts required and imposed by fsse
respective charters is concerned, are Eot
N~strNsSft0 Nc cftg(rtt ~ lDFTttFufC. an
other grants provision was made that 3n
case the roads were not completed VITA
IN certain specified times, the lands ua-
United States. But no suca.
provision is Incorporated in the act
granting lands to the Northern Paaific.a'
In addition to these rulings, Mr,
Armstrong went beyond the scope OF
the resolution of inquiry, and took ocs-
casIon TO deliver to the Senate a pitiful
appeal that it should not do anything to
lnjore the Northern Pacific Company.
Thus he expressed sentiments dia-
metrically opposite to those maintained
by all the leaders OF the Republican
party, and held by every Republican in
Washington Territory who is not in the
employ of the railroad.
Perhaps some may seek to excuse
this decision by claiming that it was
merely legal decision and in accord
ance with precedent that it was
lawyers view of a legal question. In
answer to this il may be said that Major
still Avows the sentiments
xpressed In that report, although even
the Northern Pacific Company itself
has long since been driven from the
position there taken.
Ia regard TO the decision as viewed
from
LEsAL STANDPOINT,
Note the review Of this very case pub |
lished in "Hill's Leading Land and |
Mining Cases" for July, 1880. Follow
DR are some extracts from that re-
view:
These inquiries were referred to the |
General Land Office, and ON the 18th of |
February the Secretary transmitted to |
The Senate the reply of the Acting Com
missioner of the Office
The last four grants in the list-those |
10 the Oregon Central. the Northern Pa
,ltic, Atlantic d Pacific and Southern |
Pacific Railroads are conditional like /
the rest, but, unlike them, we're not ac-
by express provisions for re-
version to the United States, and for |
that reason have not been considered |
by the Commissioner of the General /
Land Oifice as subject to forfeiture.
The last three are spoken of by Acting
Commi issioner Armstrong, in his reply |
10 theresolution above referred to, as
anomalous IL character" As to those /
grants he says: The only power or
right reserved to the Government will /
be found in the eighth and ninth SEQ
lions" of the granting acts. The first |
Of those eeotions'-we quote from the \
Acting COMMISSIONER letter." i'm. |
poses certain conditions required to be /
performed, and the second declares 4
that in case the conpanies make any |,
breach thereof, and allow the same to /
for upward of one year, then, |
in such case. at any time thereafter, the
UEsied States may do any and all acts |
and things which may be needful and |
10 insure speedy completion
Of the roads"
We cannot subscribe to the opinion that /
these graE.s are not subject To forfeit.
are merely escause there was no ex-
press provision that a breach of the 1
incur il, or because it |
was provided that in case such breach |
shoqld occur, and be allowed to remain /
ogks year. the United States might do |
.shatever might be necessary to the |
speedy completion of the road. 1t was |
provided as the condition of these /
grants that the Southern Pacific and |
d Pacific Railroad should be /
by July l, 1873, and that the |
Northern Pacific Railroad should be
by July I, 1879. Not enc of
them fulfilled the conditions, and even |
at the date of Acting Commissioner |
reply to the Senate resolu-
lion of January 22d. the Northern Pa
,ifio had built less than one third of its /
line, and that the cheapest and easiest |
portion to build /; the Southern Pacific |
had built less than 232 miles out of $50, |
and the Atlantic d Pacific had built
only 125 miles out of the entire distance /
from st. Loais to San Francisco. From
to sixteen years have elapsed
since the grants were made the condi-
lions under and in view of which they /
we're made have greatly changed
through the increase in tue population
Of the country, the rapid advance of
settlement aud the rise in the value of
Western lands; and yet, il We are TO
take our law from the General Land
Office, the United States can take no
note of these altered circumstances, but
must leave the companies in pos ession
of their grants until the forfeiture Of
the latter be necessary to the speedy
of the roads.
Ii this construction Of the Law be cor
rect, the statement of conditions IN the
,ranting acts amounted TO nothing
more than humble suggestion to the /
companies that they would
confer qualification on the Govern
lnent If they would have the goodness |
tb complete their respective roads by |
the times specified. TEey might wholly |
neglect to do so, might even fail to
make the slightest effort to that end
yet, when their attention was called 90 |
the matter. they could screen them
selves from all unpleasant consequences |
of their past negligence by simply |
pledging themselves to go on with |
their work and ENSURE the speedy COM |
pletioap of their roads. A construction |
which supposes Congress to have stuiti- |
fed itself by the insertion of unmean- |
ing and wholly Intellectual conditions IL |
clearly inadmissible. That body may |
contain a considerable percentage OF |
driveiers. but in law, at least. It Is net |
allowable 90 assume that it is made mp |
of that class Of persons. In order right |
ly to interpret the Law in this case We
must consider the purpose for which il !
was easeied. which clearly was to Sc
cure the construction Of certain rail- |
roads. apon the theory that the poblic
interrsts woald thereby Be advanced.