Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1894-06-21
NOW IT HAS COME!
The Great Land Suit Against the
UlIol Pacific.
GOVERNMENT DEMANDS A RETURN


A suit Of exceptional Interest was
hlei 80 tbs Third district court this
morning by District Attorney Judd,
bearing the signature Of Attorney
Generel Of ire United States Richard
Olney.
It's title IL the U. $. Of America,
plaintiff, W. the Union Pacific railroad,
oliver W. Mink, T.. Ellcry Anderson,
j. H. Couderi ami john w. Diane,
receivers, and the Union Pacific Coal
company, corporation.
The compliant which il very volumi.
u0us, sets forth that by the net II Con.
gfess approved June q. ts7i,it was
provided that In the ndjuttmrnt OF oil
fuilroai land grants, whether mado
directly to any railroad company or to
any state for railroad purposes, II any
OF the lands granted be- found In tho
pos'yssion VI an actual settler whose
entryOr filing had been allowed under
the redemption or homestead laws OF
The United States Bubscquont to the
time NJ which, by the decieion Of the
land oIlcc, the right VI such ROAD was
declared % have attached 10 said lands
the grantees upon "a proper rollnquish.
meut OF the lands - entered Or fileu
Tor should be- entitled TO select au equal
quantity not mineral aud villain
the limits Of the grant, not otherwise
appropriated at the datc 0f selrc.
ton 10 which they should have
received title 10 same ~ though
originally granted. Next II N
set forth that the line Of this defend.
ant nilfoai company, IN the land
districts hereinafter described, was
definitely liked on Oct 9iih, 1864. in
tho Neigh land district OF the 3 ato vi
Nebraska, anu on April 23lh, 1863, IA
tue Silt Lake land district OF Utah
Territory; and plaintiff AYERS that at
the times Of such FILINGS OF the line
there was Included under tue apparent
grant Of the act Of Congress OF July
let, ls32-flrsi, the sixth principal me.
ridian; second, the Salt Lake meridian.
(Ihose lands are described In tho
complaint la detail. Is then averru1
that although such lands were nIpAr.
emily within tho grant made by At OF
Congress, such WIS not the real fact;
but that on the contrary, they all hhu
been long prior 10 th0 time Of location
"s0ld, reserved, or otherwise disposed
Of by the United States" or "pft-
empti0n and homestead claims had
attached thuretO;" they were excepted
out OF said grant aad DID
no! pass thereby to the
defendants. "a list Oi the entries Ou
the respective tracts IL given In full
Notwithstanding (says Tho complaint
iutihof) the facts stated, aud which Il
IL alleged weru well known TO the rail.
road company, said company declared |
that SAID Janus had been, upon inveati- |
CATION, fouuu 10 be In tue possession VI |
the actual settlers whose entTieH or
filings had been allowed under pre- |
umptiOn or homestead laws sub. |
sequontiy 10 the time ut which |
tbs deiendants' line Of road had |
been definitely located, inside claim |
anu procured from plainiin, under the |
act Of June -, 1874, patent for other |
lands Ia lieu " those heretofore |
described. Said patent was Issued by |
plaintiff August /, 1879, and conveyed
therein certain (duscribedl lands In |
Summit county, Utah,
It's next stated that the Issuance OF |
such patent was done through iuRd.
vertence and mistake ON plaintiff /
part, and without any consideration
whatever on tho part OF tho defend.
ant company; that the lands 10 selected |
were not subject to selection under
the laws Of the United States, tnat
the defendant company has been TO.
quested 10 surrender the patent anu re-
convey the lands Aforesaid 10 plaintiff,
In accordance with the Act OF Con-
gtess entitled IAN Act to provide for
the adjustment Of land grants made by
Congress, to aid In the construction Of
railroads anu for the foreclosure OF
uneAtned lands, ana for other pur-
poses" approved March 3, 1857, but has
refused anu still refuses to comply with
The demand. Plaintiff Is TURNER In
formed aud believes that subsequent
- tue delivery OF said patent the de.
iendhnt railroad company conveyed
by deed some Interest IN portion Of
me Janus IN controversy ~ the defend.
ant Union Pacific Coal company.
Hence II Is prayed that said patent
be adludged to have bHen Issued 10 the
railr All company without authority
VI law aud to be void; thar defend.
ants DO required TO surTsnder
Inc same Tor cancellation and
10 reconyey tho land TO the United
States; that the u. T.. Coal COMPANY
no required TO set forth all ana sInuu.
lar Whatever Interest II may claim {,
have In any Of the lands, aud that
" hateVer conyeyAnoes or Te.cOnvey.
'nces have been made to them be
declared null and void; that II any Of
lie said lands have been 10 conveyed
lr Rilenated ~ 10 put 1t beyond the
power Of this court 10 compel recon.
geyaucs toplaintih, then decree liz
prayed for against the defendants for
he Jul value Of the lands In money by
way Of compensation.