Gilpin observer., 1913-06-05
.LAYLIN MAKES RULING
PERMANENT RIGHTS FOR HIGH.
WAYS ACROSS PUBLIC LANDS.
States Already Possess Easements for
Construction Of Roads on Public
Lands Not Reserved.

Washington. = In an important
ruling, made at the request of Con-
gressman e. T. Taylor of Colorado.
the Department Of the Interior last
week gave assurance that highways
across tract OF public land which have
become established through usage may
be held permanent rights of way by
states or counties adopting them. In
letter to Taylor, Assistant Secretary
OF the Interior Laylin says the states
already possess easements for the con-
struction of highways over public
lands not reserved for public uses.
and unless 1t Is deemed advisable to
secure an easement or right Of way
prior to construction and use, or to
have such rights Of way noted upon
the records of the local or general
land offices, additional legislation by
congress Is unnecessary.
The coming activity Of the state
Highway Commission in Colorado
makes the information extremely i'm
portant. for there will be many In
stances. here and there in the state,
where it will be found desirable to
rtraighten and repair long stretches of
road which leads across lands still
owned by the government. Unless
there Is assurance that the state 10
to have title to these highways after
they are rebuilt, and that they are
not to be seized and included in the
holdings Of coming settlers, there will
be naturally some diffidence on the
part of the Highway Commission as
to proceeding with permanent works.
d query of this nature having been re-
ceived from Charles w. Taylor, coun-
ty attorney of Garfield county, Con-
gressman Taylor at once recognized
the gravity of the question and pro-
ceeded to lay it before the Interior De-
partment. The reply of Assistant
Secretary Laylin is recognized as Of
ficial in character. Section 2477 of
the Revised Statutes is pointed out
as carrying the authority for the states
to construct and holds vested rights
IN such roads as they wish over the
public domain, where it is not re-
served for public uses. A case il
cited which involves the townsite of
Creede, Colo, and holds that a vested
right of way for road is not de-
feated by subsequent townsite
settlement. 1t is also noted that the
Department has held that a reserva.
ton Of right of way claimed under
Sec. 2477, in patent issued for lands
traversed thereby. is not necessary to
the protection of such right
Congressman Taylor asserts that the
ruling of the Department will have the
effect of assuring many localities in
Colorado of their right to maintain
roads over the public domain. He
calls attention to the fact, however,
that the statute does not apply to for.
est reserves.
LayIin's Letter.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
Washington, May 23 1913.-Hon. Ed
ward T. Taylor, House of Representa-
tives: My Dear Mr.. Taylor-I have
your letter of May 9Th. inclosing COM
munication from Mr.. Charles w. Tay-
lor. County Attorney of Garfield Coun-
ty. Colorado, asking whether there II
any way in which the United States
can give permanent easement or
right of way to a state or county for
highways. You suggest that you will
be pleased TO have reference to any
laws or decisions which may bear
upon the subject-matter, and to be
advised as to whether or not additional
legislation is necessary or advisable.
In reply l direct your attention to
the act of July 26. 1866 "a Stat. 253)
carried into Section 2477 of the Revised
Statutes, wherein 1t is said:
The. right of way for the con-
struction of highways over public
lands. not reserved for public uses,
is hereby granted.
Constituting this section. the Depart
ment held in the case of Wason Toll
Road Company y The Townsite Of
ed right of way over public lands was
acquired by the location and construc-
tion of road as can not be defeated
by a subsequent townsite settlement;
and In the later case of Pasadena and
Mount Wilson Toll Road ct al V. Schnei-
der (31 l. p. 405) the Department ad.
cited and further held that the reserva-
tion of right OF way claimed under
ssssiSn ,ssa ss R9ysed statuiss in
thereby is not necessary to the protec-
tion of such right.
County q SO. Oak. il the object OF
the section was to enable citizens and
residents to build and construct high
out making themselves liable as tres
passers. and the Supreme Court of
North Dakota, In the case of Walcott
County. v. Skague, held that the right
granted is not In the nature of n IL
cense revocable at the pleasure of the
grantor but that when highways are
main under this section the public be-
comes vested with an absolute right to
voked by the United States GO n. Oak,
8S2). a number OF courts have held
that where n right of way has been
der the provisions OF TINS section a sub
sequent purchaser or grantee OF tho
land takes It subject to the easement
easement has been extinguished by the
operation OF state laws See McRoss
Toll Roads Company v. Edwards Is
Colo. Appeals. 7D: Thoii " Koies (65
Kans.. s02);.. wnlcott Township '.
EairYieM ToMnshln Is & Dak hhal: