The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1891-12-13

IHE ID
the apoilation OF individuals In behalf o.
said railway companies on n scale 40 vas
that history affords few parallels thereto
and to the bringing OF actions 10 rouovcl
shs y nanss. OF wn Grss n sncasssfo pinned @s.t iron On
duce a large lumber Of our citizens TO wan,
and bog curry; md
Whereas, RI said construction OF il be-
comes the law of the land, IL will take vas,
regions of mineral land out of the market
either for future explorations or purchase,
to the manifest injury of the people.
Wherefore, ha ii
Resolved. That tho congress- protests
against any construction of tho statutes OF
the United States which will result in such
a system of Wholesale oontfscntion, and the
consequent enrichment of great combina-
tions already enjoying tho bounty ofsthe
government, and calls upon the representa-
tives Of the people. in congress assembled,
to take such prompt and immediate action
as may DO within their constitutional pre-
rogative to dest oy this threatened danger.
Copies of these resolutions have been sent
to each senator and member of the present
congress, and to each Justice of tho SUI
preme court. ,
Every senator and member of congress
that / met at these gatherings promised his
support to the proposed legislation, and l
have no doubt that tho representatives of
the west will be unanimously in favor of
the same.
Tho Courts.
OF course, after congressional and Other
action, these questions will receive their
final analysis and Interpretation in the SUI
preme court of the United States.
The case Of r. +. Barden ct al. va. the
Northern Pacific railway company involv-
ing land in section one, township ten north.
range four west. was argued and submitted
i'll the United States district court for the
state of Montana. Judges Sawyer and
Knowles occupied the bench. Judge Saw
yer's decision sustained the claim of the
railway ompany 1t was virtually TO the
effect hat no lands wore to be considered
as mineral lands within the meaning OF the
reservation of mineral lands from the
grant unless they were known TO be more
valuable for minerals than for agriculture
at the date of the final location OF the road.
Judge Knowles delivered a very complete
aud able dissenting opinion, of which | had
a large number of copies printed, partly for
the use of the press and people of the state.
and partly for future use before congress
and it's committees.
While the case was not ri entirely satls-
factory one, yet the points at issue We g
fairly we'll covered in it, and it seemed to
be the best case on which to appeal in Or
der to obtain n final decision on all tho
main points. Besides that, it was in a con-
dition to be taken directly to the supreme
court of the United States without having
to go to the new circuit court for the Pacific
circuit created by the recent acts of con-
gress. Therefore, after consultation with
the governor and the leading Trends of the
state in the mineral land controversy, it
,u,o on.S, %i-,& %l,n c%nkn plortl orrnot |
this and make a test case of it. 7 exacted a
pledge from Mr.. Borden and other parties
in interest, that they would carry on this
litigation; that they would under no cir
cumstances compromise the C ,se with the
railroad company. but that the controversy
should DO persisted in until a final decision
of the supreme court of the United States
was reached.
l retained Hon. L. w. Toole to prosecute
the case on the part of the state, and that
eminent lawyer is now preparing the briefs.
Other eminent counsel will assist him.
Hon. w. w. Dixon at once volunteered to
act as counsel on the part of the state and
to argue the case with such others as might
be associated with him. The Northern Pa
cific Railway company will undoubtedly be
represented by ths ablest counsel in the
land. Such lawyers az Mr.. Choate, of New
York, and Mr.. Bullitt. of PHILADELPHIA.
have already been at work on behalf of the
AtsAAloaSts bIAAA UhO " "a pAS pSOPiO ouRA
to be maintained by gentlemen of equal
talent and authority. Such
will be retained in this case with
the trust that the next Legislature will see
to it that they are properly compensated.
| am firmly of the opinion that in most
of the decision obtained from these minor
courts which have leaned towards the
claim of the railroads, have been cases
where but one side of the controversy was
fairly presented. The corporations, with
retained array of good legal talent, were
always represented. The other side was
not. The cases were often the cases of
men who could not and did not retain en-
counsel, and therefore the courts
have heretofore listened only to the rail
road side of the controversy. When it
comes to the final trial the side of the peo-
pie and of the states will be thoroughly
presented.
The attorneys for the Northern Pacific
his case advanced on the docket of this su-
oreme court. The friends of the state who
lave had this matter under consideration,
believe that our chances for a decision in
our favor and a thorough discussion and
analysis of this whole question. will be
greatly strengthened by discussion in con-
,ress, and the passage of such a law as we
outlined. Therefore, on consultation
With Mr.. Il. w. Toole, we have declined to
to such action, and prefer that this
'ase now under our control, should remain
q It's place on the docket. which will post
zone its consideration until after the action
# congress-.
l have caused to be prepared as required
" the statute above quoted, a number of
maps of all the mountainous mineral lands
within the grant of the Northern Pacific
company in Montana, and show
ng such of these lands as have already
'een selected by the railroad company.
he series consists of nine maps covering
ach county on the line of the railroad.
)ne copy of this series has been filed with
he secretary of state. and one with the
board of public lands. I will need
averal copies in my work in Washington,
one copy I have the honor to transmit
nth this report. Respectfully submitted,
MARTIN MAGINNIs,
Land Commissioner for the State
of Montana.
Appendix A..
List of cases on docket at United States
and Office, u%ndisposed of on June Is, 1891,
nd which there is a conflict between the
Pacific Railroad company and
applicants, with a brief statement
f what the docket shows:
1.-Leopold Dobler v. N. P. II. II, Co. d.