The Arizona champion., 1886-07-10

patents Tor lands earned by the con- struction of the various sections of the road, issue to the R. K. Co. and in all cases these reports and recom- mendations were approved by the President and returned to the Interior Department for appropriate action. The following extract from letter dated Jan. 3rd, 1882, written by Mr. Kirkwood, Secretary of the Interior, accompanying the submission of the Commissions report to the President, will more clearly explain tue status of the claim of the A. & P. R. K. Co. and the light in which it was then re- garded by the Government. "In ac- cordance to what 1 understand to be the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Unted States, tbe opinion of the Attorney General and the action of thls department heretofore, l recon mend that said sections of railroad and telegraph line be accepted, and that the lands earned by their con struction be patented to the Atlantic K Pacific Railroad Co. pursuant to law"
 We also call your attention to the following decisions of tEe Supreme Court of the United States, which has uniformly upheld the right of the various railroad companies to laads granted to them by the various Acls of Congress, where there has been no clear and positive act declaring for feiture thereof, and has declared all the conditions in the clauses in the various land grants which provide for in cases of default to be con ditions subsequent.
 U. s. V. (Repentigney.) 5 Wall a67, a6S.
 Schulenbergv (Harrimap. Wall. 63.
 Farnsworth V. R, R. Co. 9a U. s. 66.
 McMicker V. U. S. o7 U. 5. 2I7, 2IS.
 Van Wyck V. Kneyals. Io5 U, s. 36o.
 St, Louis & I. M. By. Co. vs. Me Gee, (Decided Nov. 25rd, lSo5.)
 See also the cases clled in the brief made by Col. Gray wllb regard 10 lhe Northern Pacific land grant, copy of which we enclose.
 The enclosed copy of the bill which has just passed the House will show you that 1t Is not at all the intention of Congress to forfeit land already earned by the copstructlJn oi the road.
 You can thus safely assume that the right of the Atlantic & Pacific Co. 10 the lands sold by It to the Aztec Co.,. is perfect, although the patents there to have not yet been lssued by the United States, and as the Aztec Co. paid for the lands in fuli and obtained possession thereof, II can claim them against anyone not showing a super for title and certainly against mere treSpassers who have Do tile or. claim whatsoever.
 It appears that the County of Apa- che is exempt from the provisions of tbe so-Called "Sheep Herding Act, !" Compiled Laws of Arzona, Ch. Go, but we think that Section Y of No. 30, Laws of 1885, applies to the case 5 of these ttesplsserS, and Tn the event of their driving any of the Aztec company's cattle off the ranch they would bring themselves under Section IS of the same Act,
 While the Aztec company does not dispute the right of any one to herd ms animals on the public land, yet It objects most strenuously to the entry upon its lands of any herds or droveS which must necessarily occur when they cross from section to section. Herders must prevent their flocks or droyes from wandering off from the public highway and grazing on the Aztec company's lands and are moi only guilty of a misdemeanor but aie also liable to the Aztec company for damages in case they allow or attenup such a trespass and when the offrnse is continuous, they may also be en- joined.
 However, as your knowledge of the territorial law, as we'll as of the man ners and customs of the country would make you the best judge O what is the proper remedy to be pur sued by the Aztec company in thesr cases, we shall leave it to your dlscre' ton, only urging you to act with the