United States v. Inman-Poulsen Lumber Co.
Opinion
lead Opinion
Gilbert, J.
(after stating the facts as above). The defendant in e^ror contends that the United States has no cause of action to recover the value of the timber, for the reason that at the time when the timber was cut and removed from the land the title to both the land and the timber was vested in the railroad company. If the contention is correct, we have here a case in which a wrong has been committed for which there is no remedy, for the railroad company, having accepted the provisions of the act of 1898, and having relinquished the land and accepted other land in lieu thereof, can show no damage to itself on account of the unlawful cutting and removal of the timber.
From the allegations of the complaint it would appear that the chief value of the land was the timber standing thereon, and that while Stanley entered it ostensibly as a homestead, he entered it in fact for the purpose of cutting and removing the timber, which was sold to the defendant in error. The complaint alleges that this was done after the land had been patented to the railroad company, but that it was done without that company’s knowledge or co'nsent. It is clear that Stanley claimed no right under the railroad…