Little Falls herald. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1889-1950, 1904-10-28

ga
verse opinion, did not feel JUSTIFIED IN
bringing the suits & alone. Outside
counsel were. employed to assist in
carving on the litigation. Suits were
brought 81 the state IN, the state
.courts also ~ the railroad company
in The. federal courts. The several
suits were finally removed to the Unit
ed States circuit court and ali tried
together before Judge Lochren. All
the data for. trying these cases were
furnished by Mr.. Dunn. The lists of
land, both those which had been
decided to the company and those
which had been selected but not
decided, came from his office. He was
one OF the principal witnesses In the
poses his suit. Through his negli-
:gence, however, the attention Of the
attorneys or of the court was not
called to the fact that the list Of some
10000 acres$of land selected by the
company, but not decided by the state,
contained $4,000 acres of land already
selected for the state institutions and
held by the state in trust for them.
q: = DECISION is FILED.
! { On the .sth day. of January, 1900,
Judge Lochren filed his decision in
which he held the grant valid, and de-
.cided5 that the company was entitled
to the. lands already decided to it and
also to all lands contained in the list
which it bad selected. (This latter
list, as have already explained. con-
tanned the. $4,000 acres belonging to
the state institutions). After con-
sultation between the attorney gener-
al myself and the auditor, we came
to the conclusion unanimously that it
was nadvisable to continue the litiga-
ton, the Supreme court of the state,
as well as the United States circuit
court, having already sustained the
validity Of the grant. (see state audi-
tors report for the year. 1900,4 SPACE
25). f.: - - -,
Under this decision, while the rail-
road company was entitled to select
enough more swamp lands to fill this
grant, it was bound to. make such Sc
lections in a reasonable time under
the decision of our supreme court. 1t
had no right to any particular parcel
until. after it had selected the same.
The state, under the earlier grant for
the state institutions, had first right
to select for these institutions, as the
list of swamp lands came in after the
public surveys had been made, and
this first right in the state to select
nvo1H 1xy f1o 'v,,1o hot y, a
state was required to leave enough
lands SO that the railroad company
could fill it's grant. After this decision
by Judge Lochren, and I. think largely
upon my personal suggestion, some
additional lands were selected by the
state auditor for the state institutions
in the Iron Range district.
Duluth & Iron Range land grant
closed. The correspondence on file
in the governors office shows my ef-
forts in that behalf, and finally, on the
18th day of December 1900. almost
my last official act, I prepared the
form of a deed. The description Of
the land was supplied by the auditor
conveying to the Duluth & Iron Range
Railroad company the balance Of the
acreage required to fill its grant. This
deed is on record in the state audi
tors office. The deed was delivered to
the railroad company, but as I after
wards learned 1t refused to accept it.
The company wanted to keep the mat
ter open so that when new lists of
land came, it would be in position to
select such as were likely to contain
ore, as it had done heretofore.
DUNN'S ERROR. DISCOVERED.
About this time Mr.. Dunn's error in
permitting the $4,000 acres of state
institution land to be included in the
judgment in favor Of the railroad
company was discovered. Those lands
contained mineral Of probably greater
value than stated by Mr.: Dunn.
Application was made by Mr.. Dunn
and by the attorney general to the
railroad company to release these
lands from Judge Lochren's decree
and reinstate the title to them in the
state. I called on Mr.. Kellogg in re-
gard to the matter long after had
retired from Office. Mr.. Kellogg was
counsel for the railroad company. He
111uACdISu ~ ulc lAdI O1l dCCOuIll u
Mr.. Dunn's oversight he would be
willing to recommend to the company
to release the lands. He made the
same statement to Judge Douglas,
then attorney general, and presum-
ably, to Mr.. Dunn.
Subsequently Mr.. Dunn advertised
certain timber on some Of these lands
claimed by the company for sale at
Duluth. The company had its repre-
sentative at the sale and objected.
This angered Mr.. Dunn, as I am in
formed, and he proceeded to pay his
respects to the officers and counsel of
the railroad before the assembled pub
Tic at the sale in language more char
acteristic than chaste.
The proposition to release the land
was promptly Withdrawn by the Of
flcers OF the company and their attor-
neys. : This compelled the attorney
general, Judge Douglas to bring an
action in the United States circuit
court before Judge Lochren to have
Mr.. 9Dunn's error rectifled. This ac-
ton was brought on May g. 1901.
The: excuse set out by Mr.,Douglas in
his complaint for. the amendment Of
the Judgment is: = 800 - - :. - -