Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Townsend

Background

A railroad had a right of way granted by Congress, a map of its location was filed, and the railroad was built before nearby homestead entries. The opinion explains that because the grant and construction came first, the land forming the right of way was removed from public lands and the land department could not lawfully convey it to homesteaders, so those homesteaders acquired no interest in the right-of-way land.

Reasoning

The core question was whether a person can use a state law that gives title by adverse possession to take land that the United States had granted as a railroad right of way. The Court said no. It relied on earlier decisions to explain that the federal grant passed a fee interest but only for the railroad’s designated purpose, with an implied condition that the land be used for the railroad. Letting an individual acquire permanent private ownership by state limitation would conflict with Congress’s grant and the railroad’s duties. The Court also stressed that Congress’s grant of a wide strip showed that the whole strip must be presumed necessary for the railroad.

Real world impact

The decision prevents individuals from turning parts of a federally granted railroad right of way into private property by adverse possession. It affirms that railroads retain title and control over granted strips so long as the railroad is maintained, while still recognizing ordinary public regulation like crossings. The Court reversed the Minnesota decision and sent the case back for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices, Harlan and Brown, dissented from the Court’s judgment and thus disagreed with the majority outcome.