A Railroad Beats a Homesteader Over a Tacoma Land Claim
Judge Gilbert rules James De Lacey abandoned his claim before the Northern Pacific land grant, but De Lacey will appeal.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The case of the Northern Pacific to eject James De Lacey from a pre-emption claim near this city was decided by Judge Gilbert in favor of the railroad, on the ground that De Lacey abandoned the claim prior to the issue of the Northern Pacific land grant. The case will be appealed on the ground that a land grant does not apply where there is a bona fide filing on record, even though the claim was abandoned. De Lacey has made improvements. Many others are interested in similar claims.
“A land grant does not apply where there is a bona fide filing on record, even though the claim was abandoned.”
The 1894 ruling is a reminder that land grants to railroads often came at the expense of small claimants, and that the legal fight over who owns the ground under Washington has never really ended. Contemporary fights over tribal treaty rights, eminent domain and public lands still turn on the same question: whose prior claim counts?
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.