Summary

by John Marshall Harlan Schlesinger v. Kansas City S. Railway Company…

But judicial proceedings to that end are not absolutely necessary, unless they are prescribed by the grant itself; for, where land and franchises are held upon conditions to be subsequently performed, 'any public assertion by legislative act of the ownership of the estate after default of the grantee such as an act resuming control of them, and appropriating them to particular uses or granting them to others to carry out the original object-will be equally effectual and operative.' Farnsworth v. Railroad Co., 92 U.S. 63
Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan Schlesinger v. Kansas City S. Railway Company…

Another condition was that if Brooks failed to build the railroad to the coal fields mentioned, as stipulated in the deed to him, then the property should revert to the trustees, and reinvest in them, 'the same as they now hold the same.' This condition of forfeiture was, by the terms of the conveyance to Brooks, to become void and extinguished only in the event Brooks expended $50,000 in the construction of a roadbed for said railroad commencing at Kansas City, and running southwardly.
Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan Schlesinger v. Kansas City S. Railway Company…

What was done by the trustees, Hanna, McLean, and Bancroft, evinced, in the clearest possible manner, their purpose to reclaim the property and rights granted to Brooks because of the failure to perform the condition upon which he, or any one claiming under him, was entitled to hold the property.
Under the view we have expressed, it becomes unnecessary to consider other questions discussed by counsel
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature