The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-11-11
SETTLERS LOSE
KANSAS LANDS
layhaWker Supreme Court
Hands Down Decision Favor
able to Railroad Company.
CASE WILL BE APPEALED
PATENTS CONFLICT WITH LAND
GRANT.

Topeka, Kas, Nov. 10-Thousands Of
acres OF the most valuable farm land in
Kansas, together with a large amount
of land located In towns and cities OF
the state, is given TO the Missouri
Kansas and Texas railroad by de-
cision of the Kansas supreme court to-
day in the case Of that railway against
Watson.
In July, 1866. congress granted to the
Union Pacific Railroad company,
southern branch. now the Missouri,
Kansas e. Texas Railway company,
right-of-way 200 feet wide from Fort
Riley TO the south line of the state.
Afterward patents were issued to pri-
vate persons for land through which
the railroad runs, without excepting the
right-of-way. These persons have
treated the right-of-way as being only
100 feet wide and in some cases valu-
able improvements have been erected
on the outer fifty feet on each side,
which have been occupied and used
without disturbance for many years.
The railroad company brought suit to
Gust these occupants and the court de-
cides in its favor,
Several Counties Affected.
The land affected by the decision lies
in Geary. Morris, Lyon. Coffey, Wood
son, Allen, Neosho and Labette coun-
ties.
Among the larger places touched in
these counties by the Missouri, Kansas
& Texas railway are White City, Coun-
Gil Grove, Emporia, Burlington, Cha
mute, Parsons. Oswego and Chetopa.
The distance from Fort Riley to the
south state line is about 100 miles.
Mr.. Watson, the defendant, is simply
one Of the land holders, and was select
ed as a figurehead in which to make
q test case. 1t is thought that the case
will be appealed to the supreme court
of the United States.
Opinion of the Court.
The opinion was written by Justice
Burch. who said the case must finally
be decided in the United States supreme
court, as an act of congress is involved.
From former decisions of the higher
court Justice Burch holds that the
grant to the railroad took effect imme-
diately on the passage of the act. and
that the persons who bought lands adj
Joining the railroad property took their
titles subject 10 the company's rights.
This is based on the fact that the Off
Gals OF the land department could not
issue patents to persons which would
allow the purchaser a title to the land
which already had been given to the
railroads.
Details of the Grant.
The wide right-of-way was granted to
the railway with the express provision
that all troops and munitions of war
should be carried free forever, and pri-
Vate individuals could not encroach
upon the right-of-way since the coun-
try has been settled so that the COM
pany can be deprived of the land
The case decided today should not be
confused with the suit of the Missouri,
Kansas & Texas railway against the
government for the land grant in In
dian Territory in which Kansas is act
ing as trustee for the railroad COM
pany. The latter case is now in the
United States supreme court.
History of the Case.
The case of the Missouri, Kansas &
Texas Railway company VS.. VIM.
Watson was filed June 26. 1905, in the
supreme court from Labette county.
1t appears from the agreed facts in
this case that the two tracts of land
are in section 26, but in different quar-
ter sections. On one quarter section,
Clea Miller settled and on April IS, 1870.
said Clea Miller purchased at the
United States land office at Humboldt.
Kansas, the entire quarter section for
the sum or $2OO and received a land Of
flee receipt. and on June 5, 1871. a pat
ent was issued TO said Clea Miller. and
both the receipt and patent were duly
filed in the office of register Of deeds
of Labette county, Kansas. On the
other quarter section, MILFORD Conner
settled and on April %, 1870 purchased
at the United States land office at
Humboldt, Kansas this quarter section
and paid therefor the sum of 5000 and
received a land office receipt and aft
erwards, on June 5, 1871. he received a
patent. and both said receipt and pat
emit were duly recorded in the office of
the register OF deeds of Labette county,
Kansas.
The two tracts of land in controversy
are part OF these two quarter sections
of land and William Watson, the de-
PENDANT in error, claims his title by vir-
tue of q cha OF conveyances from
these two patents down 10 himself. and
also he claims title by virtue of ad.
verse possession for more than twenty
- 81, To, tn,