Vicksburg weekly herald., 1877-11-02

EIk-L Euppun9 luG puulAShAAbH al
your paper Of the decree by the Chan
cery Court of Kinds county, dated 2Slh
September, 1877, is intended as a notice
10 the former owners Of lands involved
in the litigation which preceded that
decree.
This notice is, however, like that BY
which the same owners are assumed 10
be in Court, and, failing to answer, the
usual pro confesso was entered. In
this case, as II was in that Of Brown
against the Levee Commissioners, the
constitutional protection Of the citizen
is disregarded, and the attempt ID
again made, by this decree, to deprive
the land owner Of his property without
"due process Of law
The Chancery Court Of Kinds coun'
ly has jurisdiction, it may be, OF the
official acts Of the Auditor and Treas
urer, and they were the real defend
ants in this case, and the only parties
in Court, no doubt, by legal notice !;
having, however, no interest IN the is-
sue, they willingly consented TO de-
cree which did not interfere with their
duties, and perhaps increased their
compensation but that the land own
ers were "parties consenting' to this
decree, does violence TO the ninth COM
mandment These landowners are all
over the Yszoo valley, BY the thousand,
remote from the Clerks Office Of Kinds
county, yet by this decree they beco , c
liable TO have titles 10 their lands di-
vested, when not one in a thousand
will have heard of such q suit. And
besides, they must all attend In person,
or by attorney, every month in Ray
mond, TO know how far the reports Of
the Commissioners may affect their
rights. The Commissioners are re-
quired By tho decree "lo make month
~ reports to the Court" and no doubt
all sales made will be confirmed,
and this by "consent" Of the land
owners, with as much of truth, as this
consent was entered in the decree.
The decree recites "by consent OF par
ties" who, were only complainant, the
Commissioners and the comprehensive
ct al this last designation can identify
no one whose name Is not giveh, much
less several thousand former land own
ers who are neither named 10 the bill
notices or decree, and yet their land!
may pass from them BY this new aud
indirect way OF perfecting tsx.tiiles.
That the Kinds county Courts OF an!
kind have jurisdiction OF citizen who
lives on his land in Bolivar county, il
litigation about his right to that land
admits of such doubt that some one
may appeal unless all parties intereste
whether in Court or otherwise, arr
estopped by the consent OF parties
allowed TO be entered In the decree.
This decree provides largely ant
divests fully for the complainant, Com
miasioners aud officers Of Court, bu
there are points Of interest TO the Stat
and former owners not alluded L
The liquidatiug levee tax reviv
ed by that decree, Is more tha
fifty cents per acre on all the land i
the Yfzoo Valley, and will aggregat
probably two millions of dollars, whil
the debt secured and to be paid vii
not exceed one-tenth of that sun
Now, whom the dobts are all paid b,
redemption or purchase, and moae!
will still be coming into the Stat
Treasury, what will The State do wit
the excess? Shall the Commissioner
cease sitting? Several persons hav
heretofore purchased or redeemed land
since the passage Of the Abatement AZ
of 1875. These paid only about ont
third Of the liquidating tax. Is Ii
portion unpaid revived, and are the'
lands s i'll liable to redemption or sol
for this deficit, and If not, why not
, Whilst these lawyers were making d.
cree "by consent" as stated, whic
seems to be legislative as we'll as jud
cial, they should have made the cond
8 lion Of the land owners among then
e selves and their relation to the State
: part Of their decree. II the Act
February l, 1877, be void as to Il
{ rights of the bOndholders, and no ne
e bonds are 10 be issued, shall the Act
>. IL force as 10 the tax levied 10 pay Il
intended new bonds?
Does the decree operate q repeal
the whole act or so much as reduc
: the old bonds and debts?
8 Again, If the debt be paid by collie
liOns, redemptions and purchase Wit
= only one-fourth Of the land has bet
disposed of, the three.fourths will
Q wholly exempt, and thus never pay al
=. part of the liquidatiug tax, when tho
{ lands are as much benefited BY Il
outlay as those that pay all.
The decree directs such manageme
as "may be T. the best interest of Il
i parties TO this suit" Now If the Ian
owners are considered parties, tht
some provision should be made 10 cor
o pei each landowner to pay that pr
a portion of the whole debt proper
i chargeable to his land, and not collie
from one.fourth the debt of all, or d
: ing so, the paying ones should ha
E some claim for refunding from Il
Q others. The decree provides for q
Q "iurther orders of this Court," and the
= suggestions may be some ofthe "furth
I orders" intended. II is respectful
I submitted, however, that the act bell
b void, preceding laws are In force
t legislation becomes necessary, aud th
: the judiciary, In none Of its brancht
, nau hv iudUmank nF daeraa aaiahli