The San Francisco call., 1903-01-27
SETTLERS WIN
OVER RAILROAD
Supreme Court Decides
Against Northern
Pacific.
Ruling Involves Title to Land
Claimed Under Federal
Grant.

/ WASHINGTON. Jan. 26.-The' United
States Supreme Court to-day rendered
through Justice Harlan. an opinion affect
ing the Northern Pacific land grant. The
case was that of Peter and Henry Mel
son, who located upon unsurveyed land
within the Northern Pacific grant in the
then Territory OF Washington in 1881 This
was after the railroad company had filed
its gene7al map showing its proposed line,
but before it had filed its map of definite
location.
in the opinion handed down to-day it
was held that the title of the settlers was
netter than that Of the railroad company
and that until the definite map was filed
Congress had control of the lands within
The grant, regardless of the general map.
IN d dissenting opinion Justice Brewer
said this opinion reversed the judgment
Of the court of twenty years ago, by
which the Interior Department had ever
since been controlled in dealing with dis
pUtes between the railroad company and
settlers like the Nelson's.
The land in question was located in
Kittitas County. Justice Harlan said that
the Government certainly had not intend
ed that the railroad company should ac-
AMAit dAA NfcAtu lnhtitSA III kilt ldilQs
within its grant prior to definite location.
In support Of this statement. he cited the
language Of the act Of 1850 excluding from
the grant all lands occupied by homestead
settlers at the time of the definite loca-
tion Of the road. Until this definite loca-
tion was made. he said. the land covered
in the map Of general route was float
that is, land at large and subject to the
entire control of Congress.
If it be said that Nelson's claim was
that Of mere occupancy, unamended by
formal entry or application for the land.
the answer. says the opinion is that this
was a condition of things for which Mel
son was not in any wise responsible and
his rights in law were not lessened by
that fact. The land was not surveyed
until 1893, twelve years after he took up
his residence on il, and under the home
stead law he could not initiate his right
by formal entry of record until the land
was surveyed. He acted was as much
prOmptness as was possible under the cir
cumstances.
Justices Brown and Shiras united with
Justice Brewer in his dissenting opinion.
The chief point OF the dissent was that
the courts decision clouds the title to all
lands granted 10 the railroad company.
At the time the map of definite location
was filed, as well as at the time the road
was completed, there was not. said JUS
tice Brewer, in the records of the Land
Department single word or mark which
indicated TO anybody that Nelson was on
the land or claiming it. or that the title
TO the railroad was other than perfect
Yet continued Justice Brewer. ''be-
cause Nelson was on the land it is held
that the patent of the Government to
the railroad conveyed to if no title, and
that this occupant by oral testimony may
show the fact OF his occupancy and over
throw the record title. If such occupa-
tion is sufficient 10 void the patent of the
United States. has the company sure title
to any lands2"