The Washington times., 1915-07-24

PreDent expectations ID tnaC congress
sional action will be directed to com
pleting the recovery Of the 100000 acres
Of very valuable timber lands involved
in the suit which has called forth this
decision, and also to inst'tuting an in.
vestigation to determine whether otheI
forfeiture actions should be started.
The immensity Of the stake involved
Is suggested by the statement Of the
General Land Office that 10000, 900 acres
Of public lands were given to the rail-
roads in the various grants in aid OF
railroad construction. OF this about
0.0O0, 900 acres were afterward declared
forfeit, leaving about 100000 acres
with the roads. This Is considerably
more than the area Of Germany.
OF course. much Of the land thu.
given to the roads has been disposed
OF for settlement or otherwise; and In
many cases the disposal has been
the Government has no complaint. On
the other hand very great areas are
declared to have been either retained
by the railroads or disposed Of in i'm
lands to possible forfeiture to the Gov
ernment.
Comes From Oregon.
The case which has brought forth this
remarkable decision came from Oregon.
In 1896 the Government granted to the
Oregon and California Railroad company
every alternate section for ten miles
on either side Of its proposed line Of
road. There was failure to complete
the required mileage In the time set.
and time was extended. The railroad
got the lands on two conditions whose
violation the court adtudges: they must
be sold. for actual settlement. In allot-
ments Of not over 100 acres to a single
buyer; and they must be sold at not
to exceed $3.50 an acre.
The court pointed out that the obliga-
that. while the law forbade selling more
than 100 acres to a purchaser. areas Of
900. 1900. 10000 and even 45.ooQ
had been disposed OF to single purchas-
ers; and instead Of being used to estab-
lish homes, the lands had been used for
speculative enterprises"
In conclusion the court ordered that
the railroad company be mot only en-
Joined from sales In violation of the
covenants. but enjoined. from any. dis
timber thereon. and from cutting or
authorizing the cutting or removal Of
any Of the timber thereon. until Con-
gress shall have a reasonable oppor-
tSn tSnty TO- prGVde by Legislation
such policy as 1t may. deem fitting
under the circumstances and at the
same time secure to the defendants all
the value the granting acts conferred
upon the railroads.
III Congress does not make such pro-
vision the defendants may apply to the
District Court within a reasonable time.
not less than six months. from the entry
of the decree herein. for modification
80 Ln I,,i, ta,,
any disposition Of the lands until Con-
gress shall act, and the court In its dis
cretion may modify the decree accord
ingly."
In these concluding sentences Of the
decision, which by the way came from
an unanimous court though Mir. JUS
tice McReynolds did not take part in the
case. the whole determination was final
ly put up to Congress. The court. at
another place in the decision, declared
secured directly from Congress without
resort to the legal proceeding SO that.
in effect, it is held that this long-drawn-
out case was unnecessary and wasteful.
Congress could have done. without
awaiting a court decision. whatever it
can do now that 1t has the decision.
The Oregon and California in time
became a subsidiary of the Southern
Pacifc system. A great share of its
lands was held off the market. Ten
ders Of the $3.50 per acre were refused.
The railroad was accused of delaying
even to take out patents for them, in
many cases. after 1t was entitled to
them. in order to avoid paying taxes
communities along the road complain
ed that their development was ham
pered, and the matter was carried to
the Oregon legislature, which memoir
allied Congress to direct the Govern
ment to bring suit to forfeit the grant
Congress at length. in 1908. passed
joint resolution directing the Attor-
ney General to proceed by such action
as might be fitting to forfeit the grant
or otherwise protect the interests of
the Government.
Pushed With Vigor.
Consequent on this mandatory direc-
ton there was instituted one Of the
most remarkable lawsuits in the Gov
ernment's history. The case was pend
ing from September. 1908. in various
until the end of June. 1915.
when the Supreme Court rendered It's
decision; and it was pushed as vigor-
ously as possible, too. 1t is said that
the testimony taken was more volum-
nous than In any other Federal case
ever heard; testimony. briefs. com
plants, answers motions, arguments,
interventions and the like make up a
big library Of the literature of the
case
Yet the real point to be settled was
decidedly a simple one. The Supreme
'ourt, though II wrote long and in
volved opinion, whose full meaning and
implication is not yet very well un-
derstood. admitted that the basic issue
was simple. We cannot refrain" it
said. toward the end OF its opinion,
from repeating that the case in its
S.sn ss.. p'"s!', net S.,.ras IN a,ss' 81 sIS, e: