Summary

Charles Evans Hughes United States v. Unzeuta — Opinion of the Court

The mere fact that the portion of the reservation in question is actually used as a railroad right of way is not controlling on the question of jurisdiction. Rights of way for various purposes, such as for railroads, ditches, pipe lines, telegraph and telephone lines across Federal reservations, may be entirely compatible with exclusive jurisdiction ceded to the United States.
Source: Wikisource

Charles Evans Hughes United States v. Unzeuta — Opinion of the Court

When the United States acquires title to lands, which are purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state within which they are situated 'for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, Dock-yards, and other needful Buildings' (Const. art. I, § 8) , the Federal jurisdiction is exclusive of all State authority. With reference to land otherwise acquired, this court said in Fort Leavenworth Railroad Co.
Source: Wikisource

Charles Evans Hughes United States v. Unzeuta — Opinion of the Court

Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co., 102 Neb. 578, 168 N. W. 196, held that this refusal of the Secretary of War to permit the erection of fences along the right of way constituted a defense to an action against the railway company for the killing of cattle, although a statute of the state, if it had governed the case, would have made the company liable because of the failure to enclose its tracks.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature