The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1914-06-22
Southern Pacific Wins Suit in
q. s. Supreme Court
Involving Title to Lands Valued
at 500, ,oo0y 900.
THREE PARTIES INVOLVED
Both Government and Settlers
Had Set Up Clsims.
Decision of Great importance
to Land Grant Roads.

Washington. June 11lTransconti-
mental railways won their night for title
to some 500, ,O00, 900 worth of oil lands
when the supreme court today held
void, the clause in the patents. max
ing the land revert to- the government
II found to contain mineral.
The court held that the patents were
irregular but that they could not be
attacked collaterally-by ether claim
ants but could only be Bet aside by a
direct attack by the government. JUS
Van Deventer, for the court, incidental
1y emphasized the claim that the gov
ernment's time In which 1t could at
tack the patents had expired in 1900 or
1901.
History OF the Case.
More than 500, ,000, 900 worth of oil
lands owned by the great transcontt-
mental railroads are involved in the SUI
preme courts decision in the case Of
Edmund Burke, who claimed title to
part Of the lands which were granted
by the government to the Southern Pa
cific railroad in California The gov
ernment contended that when it gave
the lands to the railroad 1t did not
grant valuable minerals not then
known to exist.
The government issued a patent in
1864 to the Southern Pacific in aid OF
it's construction of transcontinental
line. Patents were issued likewise to
the Northern Pacific and other lines
tranversing the plains and the Rock
les to the coast. Each patent contained
an exception and reservation reading
as follows:
Excluding and excepting all min
eral lands should any such be found in
the tracts aforesaid, but this exclusion
and exception, according to the term
of the statute. shall not be construed
to include coal and iron lands"
For years q fierce controversy has
been waged as to the effect of the dis
covery of oil. The railroads contend
ed that oil was not q mineral and
therefore oil lands were NOT excepted
fsGm n,a the q s.entd nss.ers ere.n.tcr c
was void under. the 1aws governing
realty.
The Gosernanent,s Contention.
The government took the position
that 1t could show at any time. even
after the issuance OF the patent that
the lands were Oil in nature and thus
prevent their remaining in the hands
Of the railroads.
Previous to the government suit, q
three-cOrnered nature of the contro-
versy was emphasized by Burke and
others laying claim to a portion of
the oil lands, under the placer mining
laws. They contended that the
Southern Pacific had no title to the
lands on much the same grounds as
the government, and asserted af5rms
tive title for themselves.
The Northern Pacific obtained
leave, because Of its indirect interest
in the litigation, to present an argu-
ment in the case. 1t contended that
other 1and-grant railroads would he
affected vitality by a decision uphold
ing Burke's claim.
The value of the property at stake
has been emphasized by showing that
it is more than the valuation placed
upon both real and personal property
for taxation in either Louisiana.
Rhode Island, Virginia, North Caro-
lima or Nebraska. and nearly as great
as that in Georgia, Kentucky or Ore
gon. The value is said to be seven
times as great as all the gold coin in
the United States and about three
times the combined public debts of
the various states.