Slike strani
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

Are to be kept at the surveyor-general's
office, and at the local and general land
office for public information...

Markings on the official plats, showing
land as saline, swamp, mineral, or timbered.
do not absolutely reserve it from claims if
in fact it is proved to be not of the character
described

Copies of plats; seo Fees.

As to use of plats by the public, see under
Land Department.

Agricultural land in mineral regions; see
under Mineral Land.
PRICE.

Lands raised to double minimum on ac-
count of railroad grants, and put in market
prior to January 1861, were reduced to single
minimum by Sec. 3, Act of June 15, 1880;
said act required a public offering before en-
try; where sales were afterwards allowed
without such offering, or made at double-
minium, they were confirmed by the act of
March 3,1883...

462

849

847

677

The price of the alternate reserved sec-
tions along the line of railroads was fixed
by statute (Sec. 2357, R. S.) at double mini-
mum, which has not since been changed... 681
Decision, holding for cancellation an entry
at $1.25 made in an even section prior to re-
ceipt of notice of executive withdrawal for
railroad purposes, is reversed

Though certain odd sections within the
limits of the Northern Pacific Railroad did
not pass by the grant, because at its dato
within the limits of the Bitter Root Valley
reservation, they are nevertheless fixed at
double minimum

On the theory that the Northern Pacific
Railroad Company is entitled to indemnity
for lands within reservations existing at date
of the grant, if the even sections are sold
at single minimum, the government suffers
financial loss.

Lands in the San Francisco district, with-
drawn for the Central Pacific Railroad, were
held not to inure to that company; before res-

[blocks in formation]

Where an isolated tract has been sur-
veyed at the instance of a person who has
deposited the expenses of advertising and of-
fering, under Sec. 2455, R. S., it is not sub-
ject to soldiers' additional entry.

"Sales of public lands," in all laws relat-
ing to public lands, means cash sales; fees
are not part of the price of land
See Payment and Repayment.
IMPROVEMENTS.

On land embraced by an uncanceled en-
try give no right...

Sale of improvements on a claim (home-
stead and donation) is evidence of the claim-
ant's abandonment

242

696

122

..62, 427

[blocks in formation]

557

[blocks in formation]

676

676

POSSESSION.

Of mines, see Mining Claim.

The Atherton-Fowler doctrine applies to
a case where a bona-fide homestead entry
and improvement (of which the adverse
claimant had notice) of a quarter-section of
surveyed land gave a legal possessory right,

[blocks in formation]

A settled in July 1881, on land not subject
to homestead or pre-emption, and thereafter
resided on and improved it; the land was
opened to settlers on December 14, 1882; on
January 6, 1883, B made homestead entry,
and on March 15, 1883. A filed pre-emption
declaratory statement, which was rejected
by the local office because of B's claim of
record and A's failure to file as required by
law; B's entry was relinquished April 23,
1883, and on the same day C made homestead
entry; held that A was protected by the
rule in Atherton v. Fowler....

Circular of July 1, 1879, declaring invalid
entry on land in the possession of a settler,
protected the contestant under it until it
was revoked

Peaceable settlement may lawfully be
made on a part of a forty already settled
on by another, but not in his actual posses-
sion by inclosure or otherwise..

The Atherton-Fowler doctrine is not to be
extended to cases where the prior settler is
a mere trespasser, or has disregarded statu-
tory requirements....
Where the claim (pre-emption) is rejected
finally, further occupation of the land by the
claimant is a trespass

.....

A made pre-emption filing May 4, 1879; B
made entry (timber-culture) January 13,
1882; A gave notice January 30, 1882, of his
intention to make final proof April 8, 1882
(thirty-five months after filing); held that
A had forfeited his right, as against B, by
failure to make final proof in time..........

597

67

630

45

505

593

Taking possession of and improving land,
relying upon the erroneous statement of an
attorney, without initiating legal claim to it,
gave no right against soldiers' additional
homestead entries subsequently allowed... 56
Where one went upon public land as the
tenant of another, who has absented himself
without claim to it, he may make entry of it
in the absence of fraud

One will not be permitted, in the face of a
contest for default against his timber-cul-
ture entry, to assert a homestead right ini.
tiated (by building and improving) while the
tract was covered by said entry....

Where one makes entry (homestead) of a
tract, but settles on another intentionally,
and fails to use diligence in appropriating
it lawfully (amended entry), he is a tres-
passer on the second tract, and a third per-
son is not bound by notice of his homestead
settlement and improvements

4531 L 0-57

135

265

576

[blocks in formation]

Where there have been bona-fide resi
dence and cultivation by donation settlers
(New Mexico), whose claims are, however,
invalid, they should have opportunity to save
their improvements, if they have not ex-
hausted their right to acquire land under
other laws
..410, 411, 412

Where a settler has properly initiated a
claim to a tract, of which he has retained
possession, though he has failed to do the
things necessary to the acquisition of title,
another settler, on an adjacent tract, cannot
by a mere verbal claim, or without attempt-
ing to reduce the tract to possession, acquire
any right to it....
..186, 637
Bona-fide occupation and improvement of
land bars a subsequent application under the
timber and stone act..

Purchaser.

Doctrine of "innocent purchaser" in re-
lation to sale of land claims; see Fraud.
Of improvements on the public lands; see
under Public Land.

Of relinquishments; see Relinquishment.
Of timber illegally cut from the public
domain; see under Timber Cutting.

Of homestead entries under act of June
15, 1880; see under Homestead.

Railroad.

CENTRAL PACIFIC.

dis-

336

Lands within the San Francisco, Cal.,
trict did not inure to the road...... .679, 681
The Central Pacific assigned to the West-
ern Pacific the right to construct the road
between San José and Sacramento, and Con.
gress ratified the assignment March 3, 1865;
the lands involved are held under the terms
of the original act, and not as of date of said
ratification.....

The act of May 6, 1870, was a present
grant of a right of way, absolute and uncon.
ditional, to the Central and Union Pacific
Roads, conveying certain specified tracts;
A filed a pre-emption claim on one of said
tracts May 19, 1869, and relinquished it
March 29, 1871, on which day B made home-
stead entry thereon; held tha, as there was
no privity between B and A, B's case was
not within the provision of said act protect-
ing the rights of private persons.....
NORTHERN PACIFIC.

Whether the provision in the resolution
of May 31, 1870, relating to the time for the

479

844

Page.

Page

completion of that portion of the main line
between the western terminus and Portland,
affected or abrogated existing legislation as
to the time for the completion of the other
portions of the main line, quære........

860

On May 17, 1883, the Secretary declined to
withdraw from settlement any portion of
the odd sections lying within the second in-
demnity limits in the Territories, on the
ground that withdrawal is not at present
necessary for the company's protection .... 511
SAINT PAUL & PACIFIC.

The grant in aid of the Saint Paul and
Pacific Railroad, under act of March 3, 1857,
was adjusted along the main line as far
west as Range 38 in 1863; the lands to which
the company was entitled were certified to
it, and those not needed to satisfy the grant
were restored to market by public offering
under proclamation No. 700, dated April 18,
1864, and the offering was made September
5, 1864...
SOUTHERN PACIFIC.

502

Lands within the San Francisco, Cal.,
district did not inure to the Central Pacific,
though withdrawn; prior to restoration
they were embraced by the grant to the
Southern Pacific, but it was held that they
were excepted therefrom...
..679, 681

The right to either granted or indemnity
land, of actual settlers, on June 28, 1870,
though settlement was made after with-
drawal, was saved by the joint resolution of
that date, authorizing a construction of the
road on the route indicated by the map filed
in 1867...

UNION PACIFIC.

Act of May 6, 1870; see Central Pacific,
supra.

Railroad Grant.

TITLE UNDER.

GRANTED LAND.

When the language imports a present
grant, title passes by the act and attaches to
the grant, and such title becomes complete
and perfect when precision and identity are
given to the particular tract by selection or
location of the land.

559

...... 493

By the act of June 3, 1856, title to land in
intersecting limits passed to the State of
Alabama upon definite location of the road
first located...

The right of the State (Kansas) and of the
company (St.Joseph and Denver) attached to
the granted lands when the route of the road
was definitely fixed (i. e., when the map was
filed and accepted)....

Title to the Western Pacific Company (and
its successors), assignees of the Central Pa
cific, did not pass as of date of act March
3, 1865, which was merely a ratification of
the assignment

476

483

479

[blocks in formation]

The object of the law is to give the com-
pany (Northern Pacific) within the entire
indemnity belt just what has been lost in
place, by other appropriation within the
granted limits, to the amount of lands in-
tended to be granted, and no more........ 514
If the company (Northern Pacific) neg-
lects to make its selection, and uses the prior
or subsequent withdrawals for the purpose
of defeating the operation of the settlement
laws, it will be the duty of the Department
to revoke the withdrawals.....

It is discretionary with the Secretary
whether he will permit the company (North-
ern Pacific) to select lands occupied by bona-
fide settlers, and he may protect such occu-
pants so far as it can be done consistently
with law and a due regard to the company's
rights.

Where the grant (to Florida) designated
neither even nor odd sections, the company
(Alantic, Gulf & West India Transit) elected
to take odd sections...

POWER OF DISPOSAL.

The granting act of 1856 (Alabama) with-
held from the State power to dispose of the
granted lands except as the several roads
were constructed, and such a tenancy in
common was created in trust in favor of the
several intersecting roads as to deprive the
State of power to confer the grant on one, or
to dispose of it for the benefit of one to the
exclusion of the others......

Whether the only power of disposal in the
State (Alabama) was to make distribution
for quantity to extent of lands earned by a
completed road, leaving the residue, either as
an undivided share or segregated by act of
partition, for future disposal in favor of any
intersecting road as completed; or whether
the State may set over lands outside of in-
tersecting lines for the benefit of that road
only to which they properly attach, and may
apportion lands within intersecting lines, as
purely a matter of State concern, subject
only to judicial and legislative control;
quære

Prior to March 3, 1865, the disposal of
lands granted to Minnesota, as in other
States, was governed by the act of March 3,
1857, namely, that on completion of specifio
sections the quantity of land as described
"may be sold," and certification was the

516

508

561

476

476

Page.
uniform mode of identification; the act of
March 3, 1865, requiring patents to issue
upon completion of the sections gave no di-
rection as to the manner of disposal by the
State; but by the act of July 13, 1866, the
power of disposal by the State was expressly
recognized to take effect after definite loca-
tion and identification of the lands by cer-
tification
AMENDING ACT.

Enlarging the grant (Minnesota) subject
to the limitations in the original grant takes
effect by relation as of date of the original
grant against the United States only, and
the enlarged grant is subject to all reserva-
tions by way of pre-emption, homestead, or
other lawful claims....

495

510

Attaching a further condition to a grant
(Pacific roads), requiring payment for sur-
vey and selection, prior to the vesting of
title, is upheld by the Supreme Court...... 670
FORFEITURE.

The failure of Congress to take action,
though its attention has been called to tho
fact that large tracts of land are reserved by
withdrawals for uncompleted roads, is ac-
cepted as an expression of the legislative
will that the decisions of the courts and the
opinions of attorneys-general upon the
points involved (that the grants must be
held intact) shall be a guide to the Secretary
in administering the law....

The Central Pacific (successors to the Cal-
ifornia and Oregon) Company have failed to
complete their road in the prescribed time
(July 1, 1880), but as Congress has not de-
clared the consequent forfeiture provided in
the granting act, patents must issue for the
granted lands, as they are earned by the con-
struction and acceptance of a portion of the
road....

The additional provision that, on failure to
complete the road (Central Pacific) in the
prescribed time, the granting "act shall be
null and void," adds nothing to the legal
effect of the forfeiture clause

If the whole of the proposed road (Saint
Joseph and Denver) has not been completed,
any forfeiture thereon can only be asserted
by the grantor, the United States, through
judicial proceedings or through the action
of Congress

No proceedings can be taken, even by Con-
gress, to declare a forfeiture of the North-
ern Pacific grant until one year after the
time fixed for the completion of the road
(July 4, 1880)....

INTERSECTING LINES.

See Title and Power of disposal (supra)
and Railroad (Central Pacific.)

SELECTION.

The provision in the appropriation act of
July 30, 1876, requiring payment by railroad
companies of the cost of surveying, select-

549

489

491

491

859

[blocks in formation]

A selection by the company intact upon
the records, although invalid (land not sub-
ject to selection), bars a homestead entry.. 504
A selection of lieu lands under act of June
22, 1874, invalid for want of a prior formal
relinquishment, does not bar an entry (home-
stead)....

For comparison with other selections, see
State Grants and Swamp Grant.
Compare with Certification, infra.
CERTIFICATION.

The general rule applicable to grants to
States for railroad purposes, in respect of
title by patent or certification, is found in
Sec. 2449, R. S......

After certification, it is the duty of the
Land Department to issue the patents;
when issued they take effect by relation as
of date of the certification and cut off inter-
vening claims

Where title (to granted or indemnity lands
in Minnesota) passed by certification, all
control of the Executive Department over
the title thereafter ceased.

540

496

497

..497, 438

Certification of certain lands to the State
of Minnesota, under act of July 13, 1866,
perfected the title in the State, and patent
was not necessary for that purpose...

The tract in question was within the terms
of the act of 1856 (grant to Iowa), and when
it was selected and the selection approved
and certified by the Commissioner of the
General Land Office, the title became perfect
in the State

The State (Alabama) is entitled to have
certification of certain lands granted June
3, 1856, lying within the intersecting lines
of a completed and of an uncompleted road,
for the purpose of identification, leaving
questions of reversionary right to be de-
clared on by Congress...

Compare with Selection, supra, and with
State Grants.

EXECUTIVE WITHDRAWAL.

An executive withdrawal of lands from
private entry is sufficient to defeat a settle-
ment for the purpose of pre-emption while
the order is in force, notwithstanding the
law under which it was made did not con-
template such withdrawal.................

It is the duty of the Land Department to
give timely notice, by prompt withdrawal,
of the date and extent of the granted lim.
its, for the protection of both company and
settlers.....

Entries made prior to receipt at the local
office of the executive withdrawal, on pre-
liminary line, except the tracts from the
grant (Northern Pacific)

The executive withdrawal (Atlantic,

492

497

475

553

514

554

[blocks in formation]

Where after date of grant (Texas and Pa-
cific) withdrawal (on preliminary line) was
made, covering land for which had been
filed an application to purchase (Sec. 7, Act
July 13, 1866), and the land embraced in the
application was afterwards suspended from
sale pending its consideration, the with-
drawal was not affected by said suspension. 549
When executive withdrawal of granted
or indemnity lands is made in general terms,
it only withdraws from market the "public
lands" lying within the limits mentioned.. 507
The power of the Department to withdraw
the granted lands, without any direction ex.
pressed in the act, is well settled; its pur-
pose is to prevent a defeat of the grant by
private appropriation; and the authority to
withdraw the indemnity lands must follow. 514
After withdrawal (indemnity) the Land
Department retained jurisdiction of tracts
covered by entries and pre-emptions at the
time the withdrawal was made

Where an entry (homestead) existed at
date of the withdrawal (indemnity), on can-
cellation thereafter the tract does not fall
within the ban of the withdrawal

Withdrawal of indemnity lands (for
Northern Pacific) is made in the sound dis-
cretion of the Department, so as to subserve
the purposes of the grant.
GENERAL ROUTE.

506

507

508

[blocks in formation]

Where entry (homestead) was made on the
same day as that on which the map of gen-
eral route (Northern Pacific) was filed, the
tract was excepted from the withdrawal;
on subsequent relinquishment, on erroneous
ruling of the local office (as alleged) it be-
came public and was embraced in the with-
drawal on amended line of general route... 569
Where several maps were filed, and with-
drawals under them made, only that map
finally fixing the general route created a
legislative withdrawal; the former with-
drawals were Executive, and took effect on
receipt of notice thereof at the local office.. 554

[blocks in formation]

Where settlement was made after receipt
of notice of withdrawal on general route
(Northern Pacific) on unsurveyed land,
which was found on survey to be on an odd
section, and a subsequent withdrawal on
amended may embraced the land, the entry
(homestead) is disallowed; (see also p. 557).. 551
Where the tract was covered by an en-
try (homestead) at date of withdrawal
(1870) on general route (Northern Pacific),
and was afterwards (1872) relinquished and
the entry canceled, it fell into the subse-
quent withdrawal (1880) for indemnity pur-
poses on definite location........

529-

Where the tract was excepted by a claim
(filing) from the withdrawal on general
route (Northern Pacific), but was afterwards
actually abandoned on erroneous informa-
tion given by the local officers, it thereupon
became public, and passed to the company
on definite location
..474, 570

Where an entry (homestead) existed at
date of filing map of general route (North-
ern Pacific), which was afterwards, but be-
fore definite location, canceled for voluntary
relinquishment, the land became public and
open to the first legal applicant, and is not
to be held to await the definite location... 536
Withdrawal on general route (Northern
Pacific) took effect on lands (unsurveyed)
which were within the limits of an Indian
reservation (in Montana), upon subsequent
extinguishment by executive order of the
right of Indian occupancy
DEFINITE LOCATION.

When a route is adopted by the company
(Saint Joseph and Denver), and a map des-
ignating it is filed with the Secretary of the
Interior (as required by the granting act),
and accepted by that officer, the route is es-
tablished; it is, in the language of the act,
"definitely fixed".

519

481

Where the act required the governor of
the State (Iowa) to file a map of definite
location, held that a map certified and filed
by the president and chief engineer of the
company (McGregor and Missouri River)
was sufficient.
...... 567

The act did not require the filing of a map
of definite location; the road being definitely
located on the ground from Waldo to Tampa
Bay, such a map was filed in 1860, certified
by the officers of the company, but, lacking
the governor's signature, was returned in
1861 for that purpose, and was lost; a dupli-
cate map was filed in 1875, but was not ap-
proved until 1881; held that the original
map was due notice of the definite location
of the road (Atlantic, Gulf and West India

« PrejšnjaNaprej »