Williams news., 1904-07-02
BRIGHT ANGEL TRAIL
Decision Rendered In This Ceie. brated Case by Sec. Hitchcock

Secretary's Office, Washington, June P, 1904.
 Bright Angel Trail.
 Grand Canyon Forest Reserve,
 Grand Canyon Railroad Company, Applicant
 The Commissioner of the General Land Office
 Sir:-Pendng proceedings for formulation of the contract and bond in the matter of grant ing special privilege to the Grand Can--on Rail free public highway n trail from the rim of the Grand Canyon to the Colorado river, objection, i'll the nature of protest was filed February 6, guson and C. H. Mcclure, against granting to the railroad company the privilege sought. The matter has beel suspended for the parties ! to su bmit proofs and briefs December 27, 1902 (not reported) the department upon the appli- cation of Ralph H. Cameron and proofs sub eion that whatever rights had been acquired under the laws Of Arizona by location and con- struction Of u toll road prior to the creation of the forest reserve were unaffected by the crea- ton of the reserve and were protected by the law, so that no license from the department was necessary for their protection or to author ize operation of the toll road by its owners, and q license to Ralph H. Cameron, who claimed to be the owner of the road and franchise, was denied.
 October r, 1903 your office submitted an ap- pl1cat tion, made in the name of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railway company for permission to construct and maintain the Bright Angel Trail from the rim of the Grand Canyon to the Indian Gardens and to conrrol it subject to departmental regulations, as a free public highway. Herewith was transmitted a
 
 the Fourth judicial district of Arizona, in pro- eeedings of quo warranto instituted by the ter ritory against Ralph H. Cameron, busting him from exercise of the right and franchise claimed and the department November g. 1903, deemed that judgment final as to the ex- lstence of a franchise, and that the trail was ''adjudged to be free to passage by the public at large and for reasoIae then stated. directed approval of the department granting to the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway com papy, right to maintain, operate and control the trail g public free bv the h. lie generally, under such regulations as may from time to time be prescribed, and exempt claim of any person for labor or material ex- pended in the proposed undertaking, from lia- bility for negligence in maintenance of the trail or for accidents to persons passing or employed thereon, from claim of said Cameron or others claiming rights of franchise or property in said trail. for trespass thereon or appropriation thereof, and from all or any liability in any way arising from grant of the application or prose cution of the proposed enterprise.
 December 26, 1903 your office transmitted the contract and bond of the Grand Canyon Rail- way company, with. explanations by, counsel that the former application was intended to be on behalf of the latter company, and that the trail was intended to extend to the bank of the part way down the wall of the canyon. No ob- jection was seen to these changes in the party and the extent of the proposed license. but the proposed contract was to continue until term mated by 'either party hereto giving to the other one years notice in writing This feat ure was deemed objectionable. and the de- pertinent, January 16 1904, held that:
 "It is necessary to a complete and effective control of the forest reserves that the Secretary of the Interior may revoke such license at his when the privilege granted is in his opinion abused, or when for any reason the wherein necessity to delay for year. or any other period, might result prejudicially to the public interest In view of the department this power cannot be granted away or restrict. ed. But to remove any future question in that respect, the provision, restrictive of the secre- tary's power of revocation, will be eliminated from the contract"
 February 6, 1904, Niles J Cameron and his associates filed their protest, representing that they had located and constructed the trail at great expense, and were in possession of. man- | taining, and operating the same as their prop States and of the territory of Arizona prior to the establishment of the reserve. Herewith l the Fourth judicial district of Arizona at the l suit of Martin Buggeln against Niles J. Cam eron and others, d1smissing Buggeln's suit to road The court found, among other things, | that
 l. The right to collect tolls on the Bright 1891 III ?. That said franchise was duly and legally | extended and renewed by the supervisors of | Coeonino county for the period of five years | from the slst day of January, 1901.
 3. That the franchise has never been de- 1 dared forfeited in any proceeding brought for hat purpose, nor by legislative enactment. The Grand Canyon forest reserve was created )y executive proclamation of February 20, 1893, p Stat 1O64), and while it may well be ques- toned whether the local authorities have power o extend the franchise to operate within the eserve and affect the power of the Secretary of he Interior to control the reserve, no reason lppears in the present case to interfere with he possession, control and operation of the rail by those who located and constructed it | lnder the local law prior to the creation of the eserve, so long as they maintain the road in afe pa ssable condition, for reasonable rates of oll considering their expenditure in the in- crest of public convenience, without favor, liscrimination or extortion, and with due re- ard to regulations established for control and conservation of the forest reserve.
 The department therefore deems it inadvisa ,le to interfere with the control of the trail by hose who constructed it prior to the creation fl the reserve under the provisions of local law he application of the railway company is therefore denied.
 The papers are herewith returned
 Very respectfully,
 lSigned1 F.. A. HrTCHCOCK. Secretary