The Iola register., 1891-10-30
ruE1EAGrE QUESTION AGAIN.

w WASHINGTON, Ocl. -. -JuseOO
Harlan in the United States Supreme
court to-day, rendered an opinion re.
versing the Judgment Of the circuit
court for the district of Kansas III the
cases of the United States against he
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway
company. brought by the government
TO secure the cancellation of land pat
euts alleged to have been issued to
the railroad company without author
jtv of law, Part of the lands were
even numbered sections within the
place limits of a grant to the Leaven-
worth, Lawrence & Galveston railroad
company and part were within the
common indemnity limits of both
roads. The contention of the United
states was that the even numbered
sections within the Leavenworth,
Lawrence & Galveston grant had been
reserved to the United States, and
that, therefore, the deficiency OF the
Missouri, Kansas & Texas roads grant
could not be made up out ofthe lands.
The courts opinion holds that the
Governments contention Is correct as
to the lands within the original or
place limits, but not as to the lands
Within the indemnity limits of the
Ieavenworth, Lawrence d Galveston
railroad. As to these indemnity linn
its. however. it holds that the settlers
who occupied the lands before the Sc
lectfons were granted to the railroad
company have rights prior to and su-
perior to those of the railroad COM
pany.
The foregoing dispatch appeared in
the Tuesday morning papers. BY
noon it was all over the county. BY
night several hundred people were
wild with excitement. The Leaguers
were especially jubilant and got to-
gether in Moran and burnt a lot of
powder. Men who came into town
Wednesday morning said that the
prairies the night before Were illumin-
ated by lanterns carried by "home-
steaders" who were seeking "claims." +"
And when the train went north We'd
nesday it carried probably fifty men
who were going to Topeka to ''file." I"
All of these men will be disappoint-
ed.
They seem to think that the Su-
preme Court decision referred to in the
dispatch restores the land at one stroke
TO the public domain and opens it for
settlement.
It does nothing of the kind.
The even sections case was begun
by the United States i'm the circuit
court of Kansas. The railroad COM
panies entered a demurrer, and the
court sustained it, thus declaring that
the allegations set forth by the United
States did not state a cause of action.
The question was taken before the
Supreme Court and its decision is
simply reversal of the Circuit Court.
holding that there are sufficient
grounds for action on which a trial
may be had. So the whole question
stands now just where it stood before
it was brought before the Circuit
Court. At least that is the way it ap-
pears i'm the light of the scanty news
that has been received up to this
writing.
But even taking the most extreme
view of it from the other side, admit
ting that the Supreme Court has final
ly and irrevocably decided that the
railroad title is null and void: That
decision does not open the land to set
Element. The Supreme Court cannot
dispose of the public domain. If the
railroad title to these lands is void,
then they must be disposed of under
the operation of law. The law that
will govern the disposition of these
lands is already on the statute books.
1t is known as the Anderson bill.
This bill, which became a law dur
ing the second session of the 49th Con-
gress, was printed in the REGISTER
at the time of its passage and readers
of this paper will recall the fact that
it was regarded at the time as final
settlement of our land troubles, no
matter which way the question of
title should be ultimately decided. 1t
was so regarded because it expressly
provided that the lands purchased
from railroads, whose title was after
wards found to be void, should be
patented to the purchasers. Section 4
of this act reads as follows:
Sec. 1. That as to all lands, which
have been enormously certified or pat
ented, and which have been sold by
the grantee company to citizens of the
United States, the person or persons so
purchasing ia good faith, his heirs or
assigns, shall be entitled to the land so
purchased upon making proof of the
fact of such purchase at the proper
land office, and patents of
the United States shall issue therefor,
etc., etc.
We do not see how any intelligent
man can read the words which we
have put in italic and still maintain
that a squatter could go onto any
piece of this land, even after the rail-
road title is declared void, and hold it. |
No law was ever put in palmer lang
uage than the Anderson law, and ii |
expressly declares that the purchasers
of forfeited railroad lands shall hold |
them, no matter 1Chether they occupy |
them or not or hotU much land they may |
0tDn. The law makes no exception jn
these two particulars. 1t simply says
that the purchaser shall receive a
Government patent for all the land he
has purchased, upon making proof Of
purchase, not proof of residence.
So even admitting that the Supreme
Court has decided the railroad title in
valid, we don't see where there is any
possible show for the Leaguers to get
these lands. Mr.. Ard and Mr.. Starky
and the few others who settled on their
farms prior to the taking effect of the
grant and have remained on them ever
since, will of course get their land,
as the REGISTER has all along con-
tended that they should. But there
il not the remotest possibility that
any of those who settled upon the
land after it had been sold to innocent
purchasers will ever gain lawful pos
session of il. The Anderson law COW
ars this case exactly. 1t was made for
precisely such an emergency and it fits
il like a glove. If the grant is finally
declared void the land will be disposed
Df under this law and the purchasers