| OCR Text |
Show OPMN IS GIVEN IN RAILWAY CASE Without passing upon the point of whether th act of congress, approved March o, 1S75. granting to railways rights-of-way through public lands, applies ap-plies only to railroads constructed and operated after the act was passed, or to railroads constructed and in operation opera-tion before the act was passed, the supreme su-preme court, in an opinion handed down Tuesday, reversed-tho Judgment of the Third district court In favor of the defendant In the fuH of the ltlo Grande Western Railway company com-pany against the. Strlnghams to quiet title to a strip of ground 200 lent wide along the, right-of-way of tho Bingham branch of the present Denver & Rio Grande. The Strlnghams acquired possession of the ground in question by right of settlement bark in the seventies. Tho Bingham Canyon &. Camp Floyd Rill-way Rill-way company, predecessor of the Rio Grande Western. In 1S72 organized to build a line from Sandy to Lewlston. Tooele county, a distance of thirty-five thirty-five miles, and In September of 1875 filed Its Incorporation articles with the secretary of the Interior, but failed fail-ed to finish the road beyond Bingham. The Rio Grande Western afterward took over the line with Its appurtenances, appurten-ances, but the Strlnghams refused to ;.ive up possession of tho part ot the right-of-way they occupied and suit was necessary. Lower Court Decision, The lower court held that the act of congress granting railways rights-of-way through publis grounds did nt apply to railways then in operation or partly in operation and entered Judgment Judg-ment in favor of the Strlncbams except ex-cept as to a strip twelve and one-half feet wide on either side of the track, which the Strlnghams held from NU biotas bi-otas Treweek. who got title froru the 1'nlted States. The railway company appealed. Tho supreme court says that the Stringhams lost title to tho ground by falling to file their declaratory statement state-ment and making entry as pre-emptors within the time prescribed by law. ond therefore acquired no prior right by settlement or occupancy. The grounds were railway grounds when the railway company Incorporated, and the secretary of the Interior, when he accepted the incorporation articles, determined the question under consideration. con-sideration. This operated as a conveyance con-veyance of title to the proposed ri.ijht-of-way to the railway company, the supreme court says, and the lower court Is ordered to enter judgment accordingly. The opinion Is written by Chief Justice Jus-tice D. X. Straup. his associates concurring. con-curring. The defendants were Thomas 11. and Eli Strlngham, man and wife, and nine other Strlnghams. |
