Columbia & Puget Sound Railroad v. City of Seattle

Citations

• 33 Wash. 513
• 74 P. 670
• 1903 Wash. LEXIS 547

Syllabus

<p>Dedication — Intention — Plats — Streets not Designated — Presumption. An. intention to dedicate a street below the line of high tide at the west side of a plat will not be presumed from the fact that the streets at right angles thereto are not closed at this point,' and are closed on another part of the plat, when a blank space is left and no street is designated there by name, or the boundaries marked, while the other streets are designated both by name and boundaries, and on the east side a street is so designated; especially in view of the law of Oregon territory in force at the time requiring the width and boundaries of streets to be designated on the plat, and since an intent to dedicate is not presumed and must clearly appear.</p> <p>Streets—Prescription—Use of Public not Inconsistent with Private Use—Access to Private Wharf and Depot. Where a railroad company constructed and maintained piles and planking upon its land immediately adjoining its railway tracks and depot and maintained a roadway to its private wharf, the use thereof by the public for twenty years, for the purpose of gaining access to the tracks, depot, and wharf, was not inconsistent with private ownership and did not establish a public street by adverse usage.</p> <p>Same—Railroads—Application for Franchise—Admissions. In such a case, an application for a franchise to build its railroad within the city including the land in dispute is not an admission that it is not the owner of the land.</p> <p>Deed—Construction—Adverse Possession—Color of Title. A deed conveying all the grantor’s land “in, upon or about” a certain townsite laid out by the grantor, is sufficiently broad and definite to constitute color of title to a strip of land thirteen feet in width immediately adjoining the west side of said plat within the patent line of the grantors donation claim.</p>