The L'Anse sentinel. (L'Anse, L.S., Mich.) 18??-current, 1890-12-27
Q. q B. r. Railroad vs.. Settlers.

ate brief in the cares he represents be-
fore the secretary of the interior, in
which the o. & II. II. ,ailroad company
is seeking to obtain lands AZ indemnity
in the forfeited six-miIes limits of the
nj. III. & O.. grant. The brief is too
lengthy for publication, so we give
below synotsis TO, the benefit Of such
as msy I've interested:
This matter arose originally under
the ruling of the secretary OF Aug. o,
1889, on the commiss toner's letter OF
Aug. Q, 1889, Transmitting the report OF
Mr.. Jones of his Investigation of the
construction of the twenty miles ofroad
alleged to have been built by this COM
pany, south from Ontonagon.
The commissioner was directed to call
upon tho company tn show cause "why
the grant opposite to, and coterminus
with, the last eight miles should not be
declared forfeited and the lands restor-
ed to entry under the act OF March 9,
1880"
In ira smitting the answer Of the
company to this rule. together with his
report and Recommendation thereon,
the commissioner also submits an ad-
iustment of the grant as curtailed by
said forfeiture act.
There are thus two questions present
ed by the commissioners report. viz:
1st. Where should the line dividing
the lands forfeited from those not for
fei cd be drawn?
End. How much land. il any, has this
company earned ond where shall it go
for its indemnity lands? As to the un-
forfeited limits the brief holds 1st, that
the railroad company has no interest
which the department can or should
recognize in the grant made by the act
Of June 3, 1856, and by the state legis-
lature conierre upon the Ontonagon &
State Line T. r. CO The state having
exercised the special power conferred
on it by the granting act was thereafter
ftftct,ts otic5O and could not confer the
grant upon the O. s. B. Il. company.
2nd. III the company can be held TO
have succeeded to the grant it could
acquire title to these lands only under
the provisions OF said act as farther
limited by the act OF June Z, 1881, Of
the Michigan legislature.
3rl. The forfeiture act made no new
grant to the state or any railroad COM
pany, nor did it enlarge the area OF any
former grant; but if said forfeiture act
operated to establi III new terminus
for the Old grant at the end of the con-
structed part of the road it effectually
vacated the former grant SO far rs the
| road was not constructed.
4th. This company did not built to
exceed twelve miles of road in bona
.fde manner and the department has
the right to so find, the certificate of
the governor not being conclusive, but
only primd Jdcid, evidence of the con-
struction of twenty miles. Said COM
papy, therefore, has not earned one acre
of land under the act of June 3, 1856,
the act expressly requiring the full COM
pletion Of twenty-mile section before
they could obtain lands for such section
or any portion thereof.
9th. If, however, the secretary should
find that the lands coterminus with the
first twelve miles of the road are not
affected by the forfeiture act, then it is
his duty to fix the terminal line defining
the forfeited lands at the end of the
twelfth mile of constructed road and at
right angles to the general course Of
the first twelve miles.
As to the claim for indemnity should
the secretary find that t,is com pany
has no interest in this grant, or that no
lands have been earned by the company
because of its failure TO construct twen-
ty miles of road, no discussion of the
question of indemnity is necessary.
Conceding for the sake of the argument
that the state of Michigan may be en-
titled to indemnity for lands lost in
place opposite the constructed part Of
this road, it remains to inquire as to the
extent OF its losses and as to where it
may go to seek indemnity lands. With
regard to these features of the case the
brief very ably sustains the following
propositions:
1st. The petition Of the 0. & B. Il.
railroad com pany for an adjustment is
not entitled TO consideration by the de-
partment for the reason that the grant
was to the state OF Michigan and the
department can Only deal with the
state officials.
2nd. This company, at most, has cnly
earned the lands in place cotermi nus
with its constructed road, and indemni-
ty for such lands actually in place as
- =