The herald., 1894-10-21
THE OVERLAPPING LAND GRANTS
The Government Suits Against
the Southern Pacific.
Seven Million Acres Which the
Railway Wrongly Holds.
Three Suits Now Pending-A Review Of
Past Litigation-Importaut Facts
to Consider just at
This Time.

puDiic In the great hght now going on
between the government and the
Southern Pacific Railroad company
over the overlapping land grants in this
state and the sweeping decisions lately
rendered by the United States supreme
court and by Judge Ross in favor OF the
government, representative OF this
paper yesterday sought out Mr.. Joseph
FL. Call, who has been special attorney
for the United States in these suits for
the past six years, with view OF inter
viewing him upon the origin, nature and
extent OF this litigation. Mr.. Call was
first asked as to what lands and how
many acres are embraced in the litiga-
tion between the government and the
Southern Pacific, to which he replied
that there were three suits still pend
ing and undetermined against the
Southern Pacific railroad embracing the
lands within the primary and indemnity
limits OF the grant TO the Atlantic and
Pacific RAILROAD made in 1866, forfeited
in 1856, whore ovsrlapped and inter.
sected by the grants of the Southern
Pacific, made by the acts of 1866, 1870
and 1871, and also the lands within the
grant to the Texas Pacific railroad pri-
mary and indemnity limits, forfeited in
1885, where overlapped by the grant to
the Southern Pacific railroad made by
the act of 1871; that the number of
acres embraced within the limits men
toned, exclusive of Mexican grants and
lands previously disposed of. amounted
to more than 100000 acres, q large
part OF which were desert lands, but
that many valuable lands were included,
as well as the whole San Gabriel forest
reservation.
Mr.. Call was asked to state when and
by whom the land grant cults against
the Southern Pacific railroad were
brought. to which he answered, that
the first test suits involving lands with
in the indemnity limits of the Southern
Pacific grant we're brought in the year
1888. during the first administration of
Grover Cleveland, and that the suits
were brought by direction of Attorney
General Garland. during the first in
cumbency OF George J. Denis as United
States attorney. Mr.. Call said that he
was appointed special attorney in these
suits by Attorney General Garland upon
the application of Mr.. Denis. Before
these casen were finally tried two other
suits were commenced in May, 1890, to
determine the title to lands within the
primary limits of tho Southern Pa
cifio grant. These test suits to OBJ
tain proper construction OF
the grants to the Southern Pacific rail :
road and particularly to determine the
title to the overlapping lands within
both the primary and indemnity limits,
were tried in the United States circuit
| court for the southern district OF Cali
fornia, and upon appeal were finally
tried in the supreme court OF the United
States. That court rendered its de-
cieson in December, 1892. deciding all
the questions in favor of the govern
ment, and held that none of the lands
within the limits of the grant to the
Atlantic and Pacific railroad. either pri-
mary or indemnity. were included in
the grant to the Southern Pacific COM
pany.
The attorney was then asked why all
OF the lands involved in the overlap
ping grants were not included in the
fret suits brought by the government,
and why those suits did not finally de-
termins the title. Mr.. Call stated that
Justice that II the test suits were
United States involving some lands in
upon the inertia, that all the parties in
interest without further litigation
would acquiesce in the decision of that
great court, and by SO doing great ex-
pense would be saved to all parties con.
cernsd, and thst speedy determine
tion of the whole matter would thus be
nh a. hot atak
OF the attorney general were not realized
In this respect. but on the contrary
the Southern Pacific railroad etll per-
sisted in selling lands OF the United
States, chopping down timber on those
lande, and putting parties in possession
who claimed hostilely to the govern
ment; that usually, and under ordinary
circumstances, law.sbididg people would
have acquiesced in the decision OF the
supreme court, and would not further
have antagonized the government nor
invited further litigation by the United
States, but that this railroad had shown
that it was not accustomed to abide by
the decision OF the courts of justice
except where they had come advantage
to gaiu or some benefit to be derived
from litigation against aettlers and when
the facts came to the knowledge of At
torney-General Olney, during the pres
ent administration, he directed suits to
be brought against the Southern Pacific
Railroad company for every acre OF land
claimed by that company embraced
within the conflicting grants mentioned
and comprehended within the decision
OF the supreme court OF the United
States and the construction which that
court gave to the Southern Pacific
grants.
He further stated that he had COM
menced these suite and they were being
vigorously proRecuted, and that the re-
cent deceon OF Judge Roes restoring to
the public domain some 800,0 900 acres OF
land was rendered in one OF the three
caees pending sgainst the Southern Pa.
cific railroad, and that the remaining
two were before the United States cir
cult court, and are the cases in which
Judge Ross recently overruled the pleas
of the Southern Pacific to his jurisdic.
tion.
Mr.. Gall was then asked to state what
effect these suits shave on the United
States and upon tho public. and what
effect upon the Southern Pacific Railroad
company, to which he replied, that at
the government price of these lands
they were worth approximately. $15,-
100000; that intrinsically many OF them
greatly exceeded $2.5 so per acre in value;
that the effect os restoring them to the
public domain would be to allow INN e.
diate settlement upon them, 30 far as they
were valuable for that purpose, but
that much greater benefit was to be