The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1915-07-26
Supreme Court Suggests
that Legislative Body De-
eide Ownership.
TRACK WORTH millions
oregon-California Railroad
Company Seeks to Retain
Control.
by gibson GARDNER.

{
WASHINGTON, July 26.-When
CONGRESS meets in December it will
face one Of the most remarkable prob
lens it has ever encountered. namely
suggestion by the United States Su
preme Court that Congress undertake
the solution of a problem found too
difficult for the Supreme Court to de-
eide. This is in substance the result
Of the courts decision in the so-called
Dregen Railroad land grant case.
This case was brought by the gov
eminent to recover from the Oregon
california Railroad Company Ia sub
sidiary Of the Southern Pacifcl a
tract Of land so miles wide, 400 miles
long. comprising 100000 acres and
Containing about 20 billion board teet
Of very valuable timber. the whole
tract worth between 40 and SO million
dollars. This was one Of the famous
Western land grants enacted by Con
sress in the early COS, which nave
caused SO much scandal since. A pro.
vision Of the act granting this land 10
the railroad company required that the
railroad should sell the land to set
Tiers at $3.50 an acre, The court
found that this provision OF the grant
had been fagrantly disregarded by
the railroad. Some OF the land had
been sold at prices higher than s2.oO
an acre. a little OF it at that price. but
the vast majority Of 1t had been re-
tanned by the railroad company which
has been holding 1t for increase in
svaiue.
In spite Of the fact that the court
found that the railroad had violated
the terms of the grant. It declined to
decree a. forfeiture in accordance with
the provision contained in the grant
under which the lands would revert
to, the federal government The sit
uation is complicated somewhat by
the fact that there are settlers on
some of the lands. some.of whom hope
Insecure the title by payment OF the
$3.50 an acre as required by law. The
lands, Of course, are worth much more
than this price. but some of the set
tiers went on in good faith. expecting
tosecure them at this law.named price
Other settlers are clearly dummy en-
frymen nut on by the railroad when
the road found it was to be sued.
The Supreme Court did neither one
thing nor the other. 1t admitted that
the governments contention was cor,
rect ana that the road had violated
the terms Of the grant. but 1t did not
forfeit the lands and restore them to
the public domain; nor did 1t leave the
title with the railroad company and
direct the immediate sale OF the tim.
bef at $3.50 an acre. Instead. It lodged
the whole question, by passing it up
to Congress.
This, then. being the situation.
said the court in its decision. result.
ing from conditions now existing, in.
cident, It may be, to the prolonged
disregard Of the covenants by the rail.
road company, the lands invite now
more to. speculation than to settle
ment, and we think, therefore, that the
railroad company should not only be
enjoined from sales in violation Of the
covenants, but enjoined from any dis.
position Of them whatever or Of the
timber thereon and from cutting or
.ButhoriZing the cutting or removal OF
any OF the timber thereon, until Con
gress shall have a reasonable oppoT.
tinity to provide by legislation for
their disposition in accordance with
such policy as It may deem fitting I'M
der the circumstances, and at the same
time secure to the defendants all the
value the granting acts conferred upon
the railroads.
IF Congress does not make such
provision the defendants THE railroad)
may apply to the District Court within
reasonable time, not less than six
mouths, from the entry Of the decree
herein, for a modification OF so much
OF the Injunction herein ordered as en-
Joins any disposition OF the lands and
y timber until Congress shall act, and
the court IN its discretion may modify
the decree accordingly"
IN other words, the Supreme Court
has handed down decision entirely
favorable to the railroad, for, unless
Congress acts, the road, after six
months, can go into the local District
Court and get modification Of the
Injunction to permit 1t to cut and sell
all the timber 1t wants 70 AS the
decision was rendered June 81. the
4RAIU6U aCdA ~ 4AtV SSull again OC
cefiher 81. This makes no provision
orithe settlers on the lands nor for
the federal governments right to re
: cover the lands.
The struggle which will come up in
Congress next winter will be to pre-.
vent these valuable timber lands from
passing from the hands OF the rail
foad into the hands OF the lumber
trust. There will be much talk about
the s"deserving settler" and efforts
WILDE made to pass title to those on
the lands, dummy entrymen and all
and to new settlers, and so through
them into the hands Of the lumber
trust. The most equitable solution
would be for Congress to declare
these lands forfeited and turn them
into o national forest, providing, how
ever. that any bona fide settler would
hayea prior right Of fling on locations
on which he Is now squatting. To
permit this valuable tract to be sold
1ndiscriminately at $3.50 an acre
would be criminal waste Of a val
kams resource which ought to be
saved and administered by the fedora
eoyernment.