St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-03-03


No part of the Duluth & Iron Range
road was built, located or surveyed,
nor was any map of it filed with the
secretary of state within the time
allowed therefor by said act of Feb. II,
1876; and consequently, the grant made,
to aid construction of that road became
forfeited on Feb. Is, 1879. That forfeit
ure constituted the contingency upon
the happening of which the second
grant, the one to the Duluth & Win
nlpeg Railway company, was to take
effect: and, accordingly, this second
grant did take effect and become veSteds
in the Duluth d Winnipeg Railway
company OH Feb. Is, 1879, subject, how
ever, to forfeiture in like manner by
that company in case it failed to per-
form the conditions annexed thereto on
or before March 9, 1889.
Under these circumstances the Du-,
luth & Winnipeg Railway company set
about execution Of its enterprise and
| placed it before Eastern capitalists. FL
| nancial arrangements were made in the
| spring of 1881, such as were then sup
posed would prove effectual. A mort
| gage OF the road and swamp land grant
was made in May, 1881, to the Central
| Trust company of New York CITY and
| the road was placed under contract.
| Terminals Oh Rice's point at Duluth
| were purchased and partly paid for;
and the road was partially graded from
| that point for several miles westerly,
| during that season. Meanwhile it was
found that the mortgage bonds could
| not be disposed of, and for that reason
| and other, foreign to the matter in
hand, the work was suspended in the
winter of 1881 and 1882, and was not re-
| sumed until the fall of 1888, when
the work of construction was resumed
and more than twenty miles was COM
pleted from Cloquet westerly along the
st. Louis river. The section of the road
so completed has been inspected by
commissioners appointed by the gov
ernOr as provided in said land grant, and
it has been reported upon as tirst-class
in every respect. The work of con-
struction from the st. Louis to the Mis-
SiSSippi has not been suspended during
the present winter for two reasons:
One, because that region is so wet that
such work cannot be done economically
after frost is out of the ground; the
other, because those concerned in pros
ecutiOn of that enterprise have conf
dence that the legislature will deal
justly by them with respect to their ap-
plication for an extension of time with
in which TO complete their road and earn
their grant.
While this work was suspended, as
before stated, the original projectors of
the road and their associates did every
thing in their power, year after year, to
induce Eastern capitalists to advance
the money required to complete the
road; and the enterprise was also again
and again placed before capitalists of
England, but all without success. The
fact is, that capitalists abroad have be-
come less willing than formerly to in
vest their money in the building of rail-
roads in this state, and for reasons Suf-
ficiently obvious; but this enterprise is
now in the hands of citizens of the
Northwest, who have more confidence
i'll our people.
After this second grant had taken
effect and become vested in the Duluth
IL Winnipeg Railway company, as be-
fore stated, and after it had been;
formally accepted by that company.
and the resolution expressing such ac5
ceptance had been filed with the secre3
tary of state, and Oh Nov. s. 1881. an
amendment to our state constitution;
was adopted, which reads as follows: q!
'All swamp lands now held by the
state, or that may hereafter accrue I'd
the state, shall be appraised and sold in
the same manner and by the same off,
GERS, and the minimum price shall be-
the same, less One-third 90, & S is proS
vided by law for the appraisement and
sale of the school lands under the prOA
visions of title one ~ of chapter thirty
eight (3Sl of the General Statutes. The.
principal of all funds derived from sales
of swamp lands as aforesaid shall fOras
ever be preserved inyiolate and undf,@
minished. One-haif %. of said princi:.,
school fund of the state; the remaining:
One-half % shall be apprOpr lated to
the educational and, charitable institu-
lions of the state in the relative ratio of
cost to support said institutions.
Adopted Nov, s. 1881"
1t will be observed that this second
grant became forfeited on March 9, 1879.
through failure to complete the Duluth d
Winnipeg railroad on or before that
date. Under these circum stances two
bills have been introduced in the house;
other waving it and extending the time
for completion of the road at the rate of
not less than 100 miles per year.
In view of all these facts, what ought
to be done by the legislature with these
two bills? They have been considered
at great length by the house committee
On public lands, and that committee has
recommended that the former be in
definitely postponed and that the latter
with two amendments be passed. Has
that committee acted for the best inter-
ests of the state, or has it not?
We will now accurately state and
answer every argument heretofore adj
duced by parties who do not want a
railroad built from Red river valley
direct to the head of Lake Superior.
First-It has been contended that the
failure of the Duluth Il Winnipeg Rail-
way company. to complete its road
within the time limited therefor by
act or March 9, 1878, has operated ipsO
facto to dIvest and eXtinguish the title
of that company to the swamp lands
that in virtue of the forfeiture so in
Cured, the granted lands have already
actually reverted to the state. and. there
fore, can nOt-be disposed of otherwise
than according to the constitutional
amendment of Nov. 8, 1881, above men
toned.
Answer-Their argument or objee-
ton proceeds upon a miSapprehenSlOn
of law. When grant is made upon
condition Subsequent-that is, upon
terms that it shall lapse in case the
specified thing-Such failure does not,
per Sc, divest The grantee of title, and
the lands do not in virtue of such for
fixture alone revert to the grantor.
The law is, and from time immemorial
has been, that in such cases the title,
though forfeited, remains vested in the
grantee until such forfeiture has been
enforced by certain prescribed proceed
ings by. or on part of. the grantor; and.
in the case of a statutory grant, the title
of the grantee does not become divested5
and the state does not again become the
owner of the granted lands unless, and
until, the forfeiture is enforced by JUS
dicial proceeding or by an act of the legs
statute ON the subject of redemptions