The Arizona champion., 1886-07-17

Interior with recommen- tons fhat patents for lands earned " zhe coo struction of the various ; ections of the road, issue to the R. K. Co. and in all cases these reports aud recon mendations were approved by the President and returned to the Interior Department for appropriate action, The following extract from letter 1 dated Jan. yrd, 1882, written by MT. Kirkwood, Secretary of ,he Interior. accompanying the submission ot the Commissiols report to the President, will more clearly explain tue status of the claim of the A. x P. k. K. Co. and the light in which It wls then re- garded by the G G)vernm.nt. 'ln ac- cordance 10 what l understand to be the ruling of the Supreme Court oi the Un,ted States, the opinion of the Attorney General and the action oi thls department heretofore, ] recon mend that said sections of railroad and telegraph lne he accepted. and that the lands elrned by their con struCtlon be patented to the Atlantic X Pacific Railroad C.. pursuant to law"
 We also call your attention to the following decislops of the Supreme Court ot tne United States, which has uniformly upheld the rlght of the various railroad complnles to la lds granted to them by the various Ac.s Of Congress, where there Ina, been no clear anu positive act declaring for telture thereof, and has declared all the condltionS in the clauses ln the various land grants which provide for forfeiture Tn cases ot default to be con | uitiohS SuDSequcnt.
 U. s. V. (Rep .ptjgney.) 5 Wall 267, 26S.
 Scbulenbergv. (Iarriman. ? Wall, 6.
 Farnsworth V. k, R Co. 9a U. s. | 66.
 McMicker V. U.S s. 97 U. s. a17, aI9.
 Van Wyck V, Kneyals. lo6 U. 5. 36o.
 st. Louis & ]. M. Ky. Co. vs. Mc- Gee, (Declded Nov. 25rd, ISo5.)
 Scc also the cases ciled h the Driei made by Col. Gray with regard to the Northern Pacltc land grant, a copy of when We enclose.
 The enclosed copy of the bill which has just passcd the House WI! show you that It ls not al all tlc lntsHt tlon VI SNpSiSoo to 'o'iSit ithu diiSs~u earned by the VnslIIcllon of tLl road.
 You can thus safely assume that the right of the Atianllc N plclic Co. to the lands sold by It to the Aztec Co. Is perfect, although the pateAls there to have not yet been issued by the United States, and as the Aztec Co, paid for the lands ju lull and obtained possession thereof, 1t can claim them against anyone not showing a super for title and certainly against mere trespassers who have nJ tile or Claim whatsoever,
 IL appears that the County of Apa- che Is exempt from the provisions of tbe so-called "Sheep Hcrding Act" Compiled Laws of Ar,zona, Ch. Go, but we think that Section I7 of No. 30, Llws of 1885, applies to the cases oi these t:eSpas,ers, and Tn tine event of their diving any of the Aztec company's cattle off the ranch they would bring themselve, under Section I5 of the same Act.
 White the Aztec company does no, 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 lo section. HerderS must prevent their hJCk, or droves. from wandering off from the public highway and grazing on the Aztec company's lands and are not only guilty of mlsdemeanor but gre also liable 10 the Aztec company for damages in case they allow or attempt such trespa>s and when the ofcnSe Is continuoRs, they may also be en-
 'ined.
 However. as your knowledg. of the territorial law, as we'll aS Of lhe man. ners and customs of the country, would make you the best judge ot wha, Is the proper remedy to ue pur.