Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1890-06-18
SETTLERS BEATEN.
Decision in the Des Moines
River Lana Cases.
THE SETTIERS HAVE TO EMIGRATE

Unless They Can Get +. eversal From the
United States Supreme Court-Evic-
tions to lie Postponed-Extract From
Judge Shiras' Decision-History OF
Celebrated Case In Which I09, 900 Acres
of Land Are Involved.
DUBUQUE, Ia, June 17-Judge Shiras
has decided against the Des Mones river
settlers, and great many men who came
to Iowa years ago and built up homes lose
Their labor. The case was that of the
United States VS. Des Moines River Nayi,
CATION company, Litchfield, ct al, the trial
of which on the issues and the evidence
was begun June 3. The attorney general of
Iowa, John Il. Stone, and W 5. Clark. of
Des Moines. appeared for complainant;
Benton j. Hall, of Chicago, on behalf of
the navigation company, and Catch &
Connor, of Des Moines, for Litchfleld ct
al. The case involved the ownership of
l09,051 acres, about one fourth of the grant
from the government
The Title Res Adjudicata.
In his decision Judge Shiras holds that
the court is powerless to grant relief to the
settlers. After reviewing the evidence and
the issues. Judge Shiras concludes:
Under the decisions of the supreme court
of the United States this court cannot re-
investigate the question of the title to the
lands held by the Des Moines River Navi-
CATION company and parties holding un-
der 1t. If there is to be any modification
OF the ruling of the supreme court as to
the effect of the act of 1862 such modifica-
tions, in view of the fact that the United
States is complainant in the present ac-
tion, must be sought in the supreme court
of the United States, his court considering
itself precluded from an examination of
the questions by the many rulings already
made by the supreme court.
The settlers in Despair.
A telegram from Fort Dodge says:
"The news of Judge Shiras' adverse de-
cision in the riverland case was great
blow to the settlers who will lose their
homes by it. Many of them still hope for
IA reversal by the United States supreme
court, while others have given hope
and talk of going to Dakota to begin the
work of home making all over again
There has been some fear that settlers
still IN possession of the lands would he
evicted mt once, but the Litchfields say
that nothing in this line will he done un-
TIL the supreme court confirms Judge
Shiras' decision
Origin of the Controversy.
The history of this famous case, briefly
stated is rs follows: In 1916 congress
granted to the territory of Iowa-which
became "A state that year, and before the
act took effect-every alternate section for
five miles back along the Des Moines
river from its mouth north on condition
that the river WIS made navigable by tha
state. After spending about $2s, 900 in the
attempt to render the river navigable,
the State in despair assigned its rights
in the land to the Des Moines
River Navigation company, which paid
the 81, 600 the state had expended and I'M
dertook the completion of the work A
controversy then arose as to whether the
grant extended only to Racoon Forks.
about the present city of Dies Moines. and
whether it continued along the branches
to the northern boundary of Iowa.
Legislation Makes 1t Worse.
The land commissioner of the depart
ment of the interior then withdrew the
land north of the forks from settlement,
pending the supreme courts decision of
the matter. Notwithstanding the COM
missioner's order, pre- emption was per-
mitted, final proofs of settlement made
and in some cases Datents issued In 1860
the supreme court of the United States de-
cided that the grant did not extend be
yond Raccoon Forks In 1862 to set the
matter right and to encourage the com
pany to furnish transportation facilities by
river or rail, congress confirmed its titles
to the lands north of the Raccoon Forks,
except those which the state of Iowa had
granted to settlers.
An Oversight i'm the Law.
BY an unfortunate inadvertence con-
gress failed to except also the lands held
by actual settlers under the government,
though this, il is believed was its purpose.
In the ensuing litigation the supreme
court finally decided that the company by
its railroad construction had complied
with the conditions of the grant, and
that the omission of congress in the act
of 1862 was fatal to the claims of the set
tiers under the United States In Feb
ruary, 1885, congress passed an act de-
signed to give the land in controversy to
the settlers
Veto Doesn't Help Matters.
1t was vetoed by President Cleveland on
the ground that the lands had been relin.
quished by the United States by the act of
lSt,2, and that cases of disputed title to
them by settlers were properly referable
to the tribunals of the state of Iowa He
held also that the duty Of the general gov
ernment had been fulfilled by the act of
1873 providing for commission to ascer-
tain the losses suffered by settlers on these
very lands and appropriating money to
compensate them therefor. The case was
finally brought before Judge Shiras and
The ah4ye dncisian sntt Ior II so fnr