## Facts

- The United States acquired the Fort Leavenworth tract before Kansas became a state, and Kansas’s admission did not reserve special federal jurisdiction over the reservation.
- After statehood, Kansas enacted a statute ceding “exclusive jurisdiction” over the Fort Leavenworth Military Reservation to the United States.
- The Kansas cession expressly reserved to the state the right to tax “railroad, bridge, or other corporations, their franchises and property” on the reservation.
- Fort Leavenworth Railroad Company, a Kansas corporation, owned and operated railroad tracks and related property located on the reservation.
- Kansas assessed state and local taxes on the railroad’s property within the reservation under generally applicable tax laws; the railroad paid under protest.
- The railroad sued to recover the taxes; the trial court sustained a demurrer, and the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether the United States holds constitutionally “exclusive” jurisdiction over land within a state only when the land was purchased with the state legislature’s consent under Article I, § 8, cl. 17.
2. Whether a state may cede jurisdiction to the United States on conditions, including reserving a power to tax private corporations and their property within the ceded area.
3. Whether Kansas could tax a private railroad’s franchises and property located on the Fort Leavenworth Military Reservation given Kansas’s reservation of taxing authority in the cession statute.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the Kansas Supreme Court’s judgment.
- Exclusive federal jurisdiction under Article I, § 8, cl. 17 arises when land is purchased by the United States with the state legislature’s consent for enumerated federal purposes.
- When the United States acquires land within a state by other means (including pre-statehood ownership or post-statehood cession), the scope of federal jurisdiction depends on the terms of the state’s cession.
- Kansas validly reserved the right to tax private corporate franchises and property on the reservation, and that reservation did not interfere with federal military use.
- The United States was presumed to have accepted the cession subject to the tax reservation by continuing to occupy and use the reservation without dissent.
- The taxes on the railroad’s property and franchises on the reservation were valid.

## Legal Principles

- Article I, § 8, cl. 17 grants exclusive federal legislative jurisdiction only over places purchased with state legislative consent for specified federal purposes.
- A state may cede jurisdiction over land to the United States outside the Article I, § 8, cl. 17 purchase mechanism.
- A state cession may include conditions and reservations of state authority, including taxation of private property, if the reservation is consistent with the federal use of the property.
- Federal acceptance of a conditional cession may be presumed when the United States takes the benefit of the cession and does not object to the reservation.
- State taxation of private corporations and their property located on a federal reservation is permissible where the tax falls on private interests and does not burden federal property or operations.

## Conclusion

Kansas’s cession of jurisdiction over Fort Leavenworth to the United States did not eliminate state taxing authority over private railroad property because Kansas explicitly reserved that power and the reservation did not interfere with federal purposes; the railroad’s property and franchises on the reservation remained subject to state and local taxation.


Fort Leavenworth R.R. Co. v. Lowe, 114 U.S. 525 (1885)