United States v. Northern Pacific Railroad

Citations

• 177 U.S. 435
• 20 S. Ct. 706
• 44 L. Ed. 836
• 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1812

Syllabus

<p>The important questions of fact and law are substantially the same in this case and in Doherty v. Northern Pacific Railway Company, ante, 421, and that case is followed in this in regard to the questions common to the two cases.</p> <p>The obvious purpose of this suit was, to have the question of the proper terminus of the company’s road determined; and if that terminus was found to be at Ashland, then the complainant would not be entitled to any relief. , '</p> <p>Under the act of July 2, 1864, non-completion of the railroad within the time limited did not operate as a forfeiture.</p> <p>As the bill, in this case, does not allege that it is brought under authority of Congress, for the purpose of enforcing a forfeiture, and does not allege any other legislative act, looking to such an intention, this suit must be regarded as only intended to have the point of the eastern terminus judicially ascertained.</p> <p>As the evidence and cqnceded facts failed to show any mistake, fraud or rror, in fact or in law, in the action of the land department in accepting the location of the eastern terminus made by the company, and in issuing the patent in question, the bill was properly dismissed.</p>