Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1912-05-11

han ten years Immediately prior
to the commencement of this
action, many of them for nearly
twenty years. Valuable improve
ments have been made by the
defendants. the said land consisting
of town lots in the city of Spokane.
and having been plated and laid
out as additions to the CITY Of
Spokane by the defendants or their
grantors after acquiring title to
the same from the United. States
government. During all these
years no claim whatever to these
lands has teen made by the
appellant. 1t has stood by and
seen improvements made thereon
and, in the case of defendant
Brown. an agreement was entered
into between him and General
Sprague. who was then the general
superintendent of the N. P. R. r.
Co., that they would plat their
lots so that the streets of the addi.
ton which the railroad company
was dedicatinG to the city of
Spokane, and the agreement was
carried out by arranging the
streets in accordance Herewith.
These streets have been used by
the public fo- from ten to eighteen
years. The testimony shows that.
in addition to the improvements
which these defendants have made
upon their lots, many thousand
have been paid by them for assess
nents levied upon abutting land
for the Improvement of streets
running through the right of way;
that the appellant has never paid
these assessments; that they have
been never assessed to the appel
liant. and that no question has ever
been raised by the appellant as to
the right and obligation of the
defendants to pay the same. While
the record does not show that any
of the lands owned by the defend
ants were decided to them by the
appellant. il does show that the N.
R. P. K. Co. has decided to other
parties lots in the city of Spokane
situateS within the 400 feet of
right of way upon which valuable
improvements have Sc IN made by
it's grantees.
The supreme court held that the
action was Jared by the statute of
limitations; that the company was
st o1ped from asserting title by
reason of circumstances; and that:
Where through the negligence
and laches of railroad company
the occupancy by others of portions
of the right of way granted to it
by the government has ripened
into title by adverse possession the
| company cannot set up the defense
that the right of way was granted
for public purpose only, and that
it would be against public policy to
permit either its abandonment by
the company or the acquisition of
adverse rights therein by way of
estoppel or of the bar of the
statute of limitations"
AS before stated on, May a 1908,
the decision of this court in N. P.
R. Co. VS. Townsend U. S. Sup. Cour
Repts. was announced. I'VE there
ruled that individuals could not
for private purpose acquire by
adverse possession under q state
statute of limitations any portion
of right of way granted ny the
United States to a railroad com.
pany etc.
We are not prepared to override
that decision. and, tested by it, the
judgement in this case must be
reversed. But we were then deal.
ing with the original right of way
which was of a width of 400 feet.
April 28, 1904, an Act of Congress
entitled"kn Act Validating Certain
Conveyances of the N. P. R. r. Co.
and the N. P. Ry. Co., was APP