USA > Washington > Douglas County > An illustrated history of the Big Bend country, embracing Lincoln, Douglas, Adams, and Franklin counties, state of Washington, pt 2 > Part 82
USA > Washington > Adams County > An illustrated history of the Big Bend country, embracing Lincoln, Douglas, Adams, and Franklin counties, state of Washington, pt 2 > Part 82
USA > Washington > Franklin County > An illustrated history of the Big Bend country, embracing Lincoln, Douglas, Adams, and Franklin counties, state of Washington, pt 2 > Part 82
USA > Washington > Lincoln County > An illustrated history of the Big Bend country, embracing Lincoln, Douglas, Adams, and Franklin counties, state of Washington, pt 2 > Part 82
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82
by the Northern Pacific Railway Company. In transmitting the same its president stated that it was a "map of the preliminary line of the road of this company from the Red River of the North to the Columbia at the mouth of the Walla Walla river." He also requested with-, drawal of all odd numbered sections of land along said line, and the acting commissioner of the general land office ( Mr. Curtis) directed the register and receiver at Walla Walla to withhold odd sections within forty-mile limits of this amended line, and to increase the price of land in all even numbered sections to two dollars and a half per acre. This new line en- tered the Territory at a point about one hun- dred and eight miles north of that at which the line designated by the map of 1870 crossed the easthern boundary. Running thence in a gen- eral southwesterly direction, it joined the Co- lumbia opposite the mouth of the Walla Walla river as in the line of 1870. It should be men- tioned that this was a second map of general route, and that in ordering withdrawal in ac- cordance with it, the acting commissioner pro- ceeded without instructions from the depart . ment of the interior.
It will certainly be apparent to all that in permitting this second withdrawal an act of in- justice was committed. A map of general route is filed in 1870 and withdrawals in ac- cordance with it made. Homestead sections on odd sections are prohibited and the price of even sections is doubled. Then, after many have purchased lands at the advanced price, the entire route is changed and another eighty- mile belt is established. Surely this was an erroneous manner in which to conserve the in- terests of immigrants or to encourage the set- tlement of the country.
This advances us to 1873. By way of comment it may be said that when congress granted to the Northern Pacific Railway Com- pany all the odd sections of land for forty miles on each side of its track in territories, and for twenty miles in states, from St. Paul and Du-
luth to Puget sound, and to the tide water on the Columbia river, it was not supposed that any amount of these lands would be occupied in advance of those acts of the company which were necessary to have the lands withdrawn from settlement. Experience soon proved the error this assumption. "Westward the Star of Empire" had taken its way. The few scat- tering settlers had become
"The first low wash of waves where soon Shall roll a human sea."
Immigration was not content to remain behind the slowly marching iron rails. Con- sequently when the railway company applied for a title to its lands the Government awoke to the fact that thousands of acres had been settled upon under the general land laws. To reimburse the company for such heavy losses congress passed an act granting it other lands in lieu of those already occupied by settlers, which lands might be selected within a strip ten miles on each side of the original grant. This act was approved by the president of the United States October 14, 1873.
October 14, 1880, the Northern Pacific Railway Company filed its map of definite lo- cation, according to which the line was to enter Washington Territory some miles south of the point established by the map of 1872. Withdrawals of odd-numbered sections for forty miles on each side of this definite line were ordered. More than this. The com- pany was permitted to select lands between the forty-mile limit lines and lines established ten miles further from their road. In making their selections the company laid claim to many acres of land in various counties which had been located upon and improved by bona-fide settlers.
The leading case of the entire contest was that of the Northern Pacific Railway Company vs. Guilford Miller, the defendant being a resi- dent near Almota, in Whitman county. Mr.
1
HISTORY OF THE BIG BEND COUNTRY.
1022
Miller's land was without the railway limits of the map of 1870, within those of the map of 1872, and was, also, more than forty, but less than fifty miles from the line of definite loca- tion. It was, therefore, reserved by the order of the acting commissioner in 1872, and was also within the lieu lands belt. It was selected by the railroad company as a portion of its indemnity land, and suit was brought to have Mr. Miller's entry canceled.
As illustrating the depth of interest taken in this litigation by the federal government, and as tersely exhibiting the principle involved, we quote in full a letter transmitted by Presi- dent Cleveland to L. Q. C. Lamar, at that period secretary of the interior :
EXECUTIVE MANSION. Washington, D. C., April 28, 1887. To the Secretary of the Interior, Washing- ton, D. C.
Dear Sir :- I have examined with much care and interest the questions involved in the conflicting claim of Guilford Miller and the Northern Pacific Railway Company to cer- tain lands in Washington Territory. The legal aspectes of the case have been examined and passed upon by several officers of the govern- ment, who do not agree in their conclusions.
Miller, claims to be a settler upon the land in question, whose possession dates from 1878. He alleges that he has made substantial im- provements upon this land, and cultivated the same, and it appears that he filed his claim to the same under the homestead law, on the 29th of December, 1884.
The railroad company contends that this land is within the territory or area from which it was entitled to select such a quantity of public land as might be necessary to supply any deficiency that shall be found to exist in the specified land mentioned in a grant by the government to, said company in aid of the construction of its roads, such deficiency be- ing contemplated as likely to arise from the
paramount right of private parties and settlers within the territory embracing said granted lands and that the land in dispute was selected by the company on the 19th day of December, 1883. A large tract, including this land, was withdrawn by an order of the interior depart- ment from sale, and from pre-emption and homestead entry in 1872, in anticipation of the construction of said railroad and a deficiency in its granted lands. In 1880, upon the filing of a map of definite location, the land in con- troversy, and much more which has been so withdrawn, was found to lie outside the limits which included the granted land; but its with- drawal and reservation from settlement and entry under our laws was continued upon the theory that it was within the limits of the in- demnity lands which might be selected by the company as provided in the law making the grant.
The legal points in the controversy turned upon the validity and effect of the withdrawal and reservation of this land and the contin- uance thereof. The attorney general is of the opinion that such withdrawal and reserva- tion were at all times effectual, and that they operate to prevent Miller from acquiring any interest in or right to the land claimed by him.
With this interpretation of the law, and the former order and action of the interior de- partment, it will be seen that their effect has been the withdrawal and reservation since 1872 of thousands, if not millions, of acres of these lands from the operation of the land laws of the United States, thus placing them beyond the reach of our, citizens desiring under such laws to settle and make homes upon the same, and that this has been done for the bene- fit of a railroad company having no fixed, cer- tain, definite interest in such lands.
In this manner the beneficent policy and in- tention of the government, in relation to the public domain, has for all these years to that extent been thwarted. There seems to be no
1023
HISTORY OF THE BIG BEND COUNTRY.
evidence presented showing how much, if any, of this vast territory is necessary for the ful- fillment of the grant to the railway company ; nor does there appear to be any limitation of the time within which this fact should be made known and the corporation obliged to make its selection. After a lapse of fifteen years this large body of public domain is still held in reserve, to the exclusion of settlers, for the convenience of a corporation beneficiary of the gov- ernment, and awaiting its selection, though it is entirely certain that much of this reserved land can never be honestly claimed by said corporation.
Such a condition of the public land should no longer continue. So far as it is the re- sult of executive rules and methods these should be abandoned; and so far as it is a consequence of improvident laws, these should be repealed and amended. Our public domain is our national wealth, the earnest of growth and the heritage of our people. In the case under consideration I assume that there is an abundance of land within the area that has been reserved for indemnity, in which no citi- zen or settler has legal or equitable interest, for all purposes of such indemnification of this railroad company if its grant has not al- ready been satisfied. I understand, too, that selections made by such corporation are not complete and effectual until the same have been approved by the secretary of the interior, or unless they are made, in the words of the statute, under his direction.
You have thus far taken no action in this matter, and it seems to me that you are in condition to deal with the subject in such a manner as to protect this settler from hard- ship and loss.
I transmit herewith the papers and docu- ments in the case, which were submitted to me at my request.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
In 1888 the Guilford Miller case came be- fore Secretary Vilas for trial. Notwithstand- ing the opinion of the attorney general that Miller's entry should be cancelled, the secre- tary decided that the withdrawal in accord- ance with the map of 1872 was void. He said that when the statutory withdrawal had been once exercised it was exhausted and could not be taken advantage of a second time; that therefore the amended map was without au- thority in law.
Though this decision secured to Mr. Miller his right to the land and was a decided victory for the many other settlers similarly situated it did not end the controversy. "One swallow does not make a summer," and the company would not yield its. claim on account of one defeat. The vexatious uncertainty concerning titles continued to disturb the minds of the lieu-landers. In 1893, in the memorable case of Charles Cole vs. the Northern Pacific Rail- way Company, a determined effort was made by the defendant corporation's counsel to have the Guilford case overruled. But in an elabor- ate decision, the then secretary of the interior, Hoke Smith, sustained the rulings of secre- tary Vilas, and the lieu-land contest, so far as Whitman county was concerned, was con- sidered as practically determined.
Not so, however, The Northern Pacific Railway Company appealed to the United States circuit court, and finally to the federal supreme court. But everywhere the Guilford Miller decision and the decisions following it were sustained. Nevertheless each case from the various counties in Washington involved in these contests had to be tried on its own merits. Even those who had obtained United States patents to lieu lands could not rest se- cure, as a reversal of the rulings under which they had been issued might invalidate their deeds. One by one the cases, like wounded snakes, "dragged their slow lengths along" through the state departments and courts, the
1024
HISTORY OF THE BIG BEND COUNTRY.
company fighting with ability and vigor, and with heart-sickening tenacity; the settlers con- tending for their hard-earned homes with equal firmness.
To sum up in syllabus the status of the lieu-land cases at this point, it would appear to be about as follows: By the decisions referred to it was decided that bona fide settlement on odd-numbered sections within indemnity limits prior to 1885 would give the land to the set- tlers. But a case in which settlement was made subsequent to that date, in March, 1898, was decided against the settler, and his filings re- fused. The effect of this was to recognize the validity of the company's selection of 1885, and consequently to take from the numerous claimants who had made entries subsequent to the said selection both their lands and the valu- able improvements thereon. To prevent such hardship and loss, congress passed an act pro- viding that in cases in which railroad lieu-lands were held by bona fide settlers under color of
title or claim of right under any law of the United States or any ruling of the land de- partment, the company might relinquish its claim and select lands in lieu thereof wherever it could find an equal amount not mineral or reserved and free from valid adverse claims. Although this is the substance of the act there are other provisions, but not so germane to the question at issue. This statute was introduced and pushed by Senator John L. Wilson, and carried as a rider to the Sundry Civil Appro- priation bill. To the settlers it proved a boon of incalculable worth, saving them the expense and anxiety of prolonged litigation and in some instances, perhaps, the loss of their homes. Critics of the measure contend that it was of. still more benefit to the railroad company, in- asmuch as it permitted their selection of tim- ber lands much more valuable than the agricul- tural lands relinquished. But is is far from the province of this work to attempt to deter- mine the truth or falsity of this assertion.
N MANCHESTER, INDIANA
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.