The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-12-05

The supreme Court OF the United States
has affirmed the decision Of Judge Hughes,
holding that the United States Government
has not legal title to the Arlington estate,
and that the right Of the late Mrs. Robert
Il. Lee. and Of the successor to her life
estate, General Gusts Lee, has not been
diycsted, but still remains, and that the pro-
perry is Of right the
PROPERTY or GENERAL @. ". GUSTS LEE.
The history Of this case is somewhat COM
plicated. The property was. during the
civil war. abandoned by General and Mrs.
Robert f. Lee. 1t had been devised by
Mr.. Parke Gusts TO Mrs. Lee for her lie,
and afterwards to her eldest son, u. w.
GUSTS Lee.
b The abandonment Of it during the war
subjected II TO the right OF the United
States Government TO coniiscatc 1t during
the life OF Mrs. Robert +. Lee. But no
proceedings were taken looking to confls-
cation. On the contrary, the agents OF the
United States Treasury took another course,
looking TO the permanent acquisition
Of title BY the Government. Under
the laws enacted by the Congress OF
1872,
TAX ON REAL ESTATE
was imposed upon all the real estate OF the
United States. Under this law tax OF
some S92 was assessed upon the Arlington
estate.
Several friends OF General Lee made re-
peated efforts to pay this tax. But in every
case the commissioners Of taxes for Alex
andria county refused TO receive the prof.
fered amount. They decided, not only in
respect 10 the Arlington estate. but to all
properties I'm Alexandria city and county,
that they would receive the taxes due from
no other than the owners OF properties
taxed. rendered in person. The
CONSEQUENCE or THIS RULING
was-a ruling which was advertised to the
public. and which in many cases prevented
the tender OF taxes due that all the real
estate properties owned in Alexandria city
and county by men connected with "the
rebellion" were returned as delinquent for
the non-payment Of taxes.
The sequel of this was a vast number Of
sales Of real property for the taxes due
upon them. Amongst other OF the nu-
merous propertes sold for such taxes was
the arlington estate. Many OF the other
properties sold were bought by private in
dividuals. The titles Of these purchasers
have been, In dozens OF cases,
BEFORE THE UNITED STATES COURT
Of Alexandria for adjudication. and they
have been adiudged by Judge Hughes to
Nave been invalid, and the original owners
have been allowed to redeem their estates
By paying up the taxes that were dein-
qUent at the dates OF the sales. II was
held that the action OF the United States
tax commissioners in refusing to receive
taxes rendered, though rendered by other
persons than the owners OF the lands, was
Invalid. and that their sales of these lands
after the tenders OF the taxes were in VIOLA
ton OF private right. and
NULL AND VOID.
The sales Of the tax commissioners to
private persons were easily disposed OF.
But i'm the single instance OF the Airing
ton estate the United States Government
was the purchaser in this case. The tax
commissioners having refused to receive
the tax assessed upon the estate OF 500, and
the land being in consequence found de-
linquent, this great historical estate Wa
put up 20 auction for sale in 1863, and the
United States Government itself bought il
in at the sum Of $4,000. Having pur-
chased, O was claimed,
THE FEE-sIMPLE ESTATE,
the Government proceeded to treat it a.
rs own.
The tract contained LOO acres; OF this
the Government converted 200 acres, i'm
mediately adjacent TO aud embracing the
Arlington mansion, INTO cemetery. The
remaining 900 acres it declared to be q
military" reservation, and devoted il as
a common TO the promiscuOus occupancy,
free of rent, Of great number Of colored
people. nom" military in every sense OF
the word.
This occupancy, partly for cemetery
and partly free-negro occupation OF q
military" reservation, continued until
after the death Of his mother. and the ter.
mnation OF her life-estate
GENERAL GUSTS LEE
instituted his suits for the property.
These were commenced i'll the Circui'
Court Of the county OF Alexandria and
were removed thence by authority OF law
into the United States Circuit Court set.
ting at Alexandria. There were two
suits both in eicctment. One of then
was brought against the officials of the
United States army i'm charge OF the GENE
tery the other against Tom. Dick, ant
Harry
TAG, RAG, AND B0BTAIL-
"occupying the outlying nine hundred
acres.
There were many questions OF law in the
ease ruled upon by Judge Hughes, most OF
them arising on instructions to the jury,
which made a dangerous quicksand foi
exploration by the Supreme Court. But
that court sustained the ruling OF the court
below on these technical questions, and left
them out OF consideration in dealing with
the main question upon which the case
turned.
That main question was
WHETHER THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
COULD BE SUED
at all.
Judge Hughes held that il could be sued
in all cases In which the service Of process
issued for commencing the suit did moi
Gust the possession of the officers OF the
Government.
This was the pivotal question in the
case-viz., whether the United States Gov.
eminent could be sued.
The Supreme Court has now. to the
honor Of American Jurisprudence, declared
that where the United States Government
has tortious possession Of property, and
the service Of process to try the title to that
property does not Dust the possession OF
the agents OF the Government, the courts
may entertain the suit and pass upon The
Governments right and title TO the pro-
perry.
The title and right OF possession being
eoncededly IN General Gusts Lee. the de.
csson OF the Supreme Court that he miSb,
sue me government and that the right Mas
In him, gives him "his own '
foLicF Court The following case. were
disposed OF yesterday:
Jonn !. Prosser, charged with assaulting