The Indianapolis journal., 1884-01-15
The Proceedings in Detail.

TO the Western Associated Press.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 14.-At the meeting of the
House committee on public lands, to-day, Chair
man Cobb submitted report declaring forfeited
the land grants to the Gulf & Ship Island, Tus
caloosa & Mobile, Mobile G. New Orleans. Elyton
4 Boards Bluff, Memphis & Charleston, Savan-
nah & Albany, New Orleans State-line, and the
Iron Mountain & Kansas railroad companies,
that have not complied with the terms of the
grants by building roads. The report was
adopted and ordered presented to the House
Mr.. Van Eaton read dissenting opinion in
the special case of the Gulf & Ship Island rail
road. Heheld that the condition of the Southern
States during the seven years from 1871 was
such that no railroad enterprise could be
carried on 1t was not an era of rail
road building and since the lapse
of the grant, the State of Mississippi Ito which
the grant was made) had, through its conven-
tions and Legislature, applied frequently for
renewal of the grant by Congress. The land IN
volved only amounted to about half a million
acres, but without that subsidy the road, which
will be one Of great importance and utility,
could not be built In that case therefore he
should oppose forfeiture. Mr.. Van Eaton's
paper will be considered minority report.
The question of the forfeiture of the Texas
Pacific territorial land grant was then taken up.
Mr.. Roger A, Pryor, on the part Of the South
ern Pacific Railroad Company, made argument
against the forfeiture. He contended as ques
ton of law, Congress had no right to declare the
proposed forfeiture THAT being a judicial pro
ceeding), and argued that a question of fact it
would be an act of injustice to do so.
The original grant to the Texas Pacific com
pany did not contain provision for the right OF
forfeiture, but provided that if the road was not
completed within the time and manner pre-
scribed by the act Congress shall have the
power to adopt such means as it deems proper to
secure the building of transcontinental road
from New Orleans to San Diego. The same act
made provision for the extension of the line of
the Southern Pacific from San Francisco to the
Colorado river. The Texas Pacific company, af
ter constructing the line far as El Paso west
ward, ceased further construction. The South
ern Pacific, when it reached the Colorado river,
found a gap of eight hundred miles between that
point and El Paso So, unless the gap were
filed. the money spent in extending the South
ern Pacific to Colorado had been thrown away,
and was dead loss. Then it
by the Texas Pacific to the Southern
Pacific, and the latter company went to work
and completed the line of railroad by the 1st of
May, '82. The object, therefore, which Congress
had in view, of making the land grant i'll express
term Ito the Texas Pacific Railroad Company
its successors and assigns" was thus attained
and the conditions of the act fully complied with
Mr.. Pryor argued that the Southern Pacific
company as assign of the Texas Pacific fairly
earned the lands, and was entitled to them. 1t
could certainly be argued that it would make no
difference to the Government whether the great
object contentemplated in the original grant
was accomplished by one company or the other.
Even if there had been no assignment at all and
if it were the original question, he argued that
in consonance with the policy of the gov
ernment since 1854, Congress should make this
grant He did not, however, put the claim of
the Southern Pacific company on any such
ground, but on the legal right assign and on
the faithful performance of the work for which
the land was granted.