The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1894-07-12
1,838,190 ACRES
RECOVERED FOR THE STATE OF
TEXAs-HoN. L. D. BROOKS
CREDITED WITH 1888
$50 ACRES.
PHENOMENAL JUDGMENT OBTAINED
BY Hon. C. A. CulbersOn For 90, O4o Not I'm
bracsd In His Petition Unprecedented
Judgment by the General For
rs 800, Which Was Disclaimsd
by Every Defendant
in the Suit.
PHENOMENAL JUDGMENT OBTAINED

that the Hon. l. d. Brooks raised the
sidinps and switches certificate issue
And that on this issue the first SUIT
was against the Houston and Texas
Central Railway company for III, 2lI
acres in Nolan county, instituted by
Attorney General Hog in April, lS0O
(See his report for 1891, page D
The excessive and illegal surveys III
The Texas and Pacific reservation
were also ascertained by Mr.. Brooks,
and on this aud the sidings and
switches issue 594072 acres OF land
were recovered as follows; From the
Houston and Texas Central Railway
comnany. in Nolan county. lO,24O
acres. in Lipscomb county, l7O, $50
acres. from the Galveston, Harrisburg
and San Antonio Railway company, in
len DAVIS, Reeves, Pecos and
Preside counties. IS 9l2 acres
in Val Verde county 5000 acres; and
from Canda ct al. in JeI DAVIS
Reeves. Preside, PecOs and Ell Paso
counties 2j7,00 acres. For above see
General Culberson's report for 1873 p
3, ct seq.) and his campaign speeches
bottom of third column.
In determining the sidings and
switches issue raisedsby Mr.. Brooks,
was developed the improper Issuance
of certificates for main track to the
Galveston, Harrisburg and San An
tonic railway, for its rORd from the
Gaudalupe river to San Antonio (Sl
Tex. 572); and thus in consequence OF
Mr.. Brooks sidings and switches Is
she there was recovered from this rail
way in Brewster, Schleicher, Sutton,
Edwards, jeff Davis and Preside
counties S19,07S acres, maxi
ing total recovery through
Mr., Brooks discernment OF
.4G3. $50 acres. And sUil his name is
not mentioned in Attorney General
Culberson's report OF these reCoverics
(see Rep. 1898, nor is he mentioned in
G enernl Culberson's campaign speech
es as entitled to the slightest credit
But no matter, for while Mr.. Brooks
deserves such credit as there be Tor
this land recovery, and while he was
the paid attorney of the state in more
than one of these suits, he is Lot a
gubernatorial candidate, so claims no
credit for doing his duty TO his client
But General Culberson is entitled to
ali the credit for the recovery of 375,
O40 acres from G. @. Gibbs; Mr.. Brooks
neither deserves nor desires any credit
therefor.
This suit against Gibbs ct al was in
stituted for $50 sections or 352 900 acres,
and without amending his petition to
include other lands, General Culber
son recovered 37j, 0l0 acres or % O4O
acres which was not set out in his pc
tition. Under the act Of 1870 Gibbs
ct al paid the state $l39, 100 for 4GG
sections or 99S, 240 acres; and while
every defendant in this suit disclaimed
on the trial all other lands sued for.
General Culberson recovered 3i5, 04O
acres or 76,SO0 acres which was un-
claimed by any defendant, and dis
claimed 10y every defendant. y
See General Culberson's report for
1893, pages : and s, and his campaign
speeches, bottom Of third column, for
the recovery from Gibbs. Particular
attention is called TO the pleadings in
the case, numbered 5G2. district court
of Mitchell county, fall term, 1891, and
to the printed record thereof in the
supreme court at Austin, in tle court
of civil appeals at Fort Worth aud in
the supreme court at Washington
The amended original petition of Gen
eral Culberson is on page OF the
printed record, and the amended
original answer of Gibbs ct al, is on
page ct seq. These pleadings fully
sustain every statement made.
General Culberson's memory must
be couded and his protici
ency in arithmetic impaired 10y the
magnitude of his land recoveries. or
by his desire to occupy the guberna
torial mansion; otherwise he could no
have deliberately claimed at Garland
as he did. that he recovered iron,
Gibbs %, U40 acres of land for which b.
did not sue, and 70, 800 acres more than
any defendant claimed, and over.
looked the appeal pending at Wash
ington for the her 29S ,240 acrts
and then send this Garland sreecl
over the state to induce the Democ-
racy of Texas to name him as their
chief executive nominee.
If General Culberson's commendablC
ambition should lead him to aspire tC
the presidency it would not be at all
surprising, that he should create 4
boom for himself by recovering a score
or more million acres OF the common
school lands, unclaimed by all save
the state of Texas
In the cause ggaiust Cauda ct AL IT
which the state paid Mr. Brooks Q
Zee of $1,000, en- AGREED Judgment tor
81. 600 acres was entered, and eycep
for Mr.. Brooks the Judgment woulC
have been entered Tor some 30 90,
acres less So it can NOT be said tina
Mr. Brooks die not earn his fee. Thi
cause was determined in the distrie
court OF Travis county aud the attor
news of record for Canda ct al, resid,
in Austin aud know the facts.
II General Culbers0n instead of MIR
Brooks were entitled to the credit TO
recovering these lands, still ne ha
not done his whole duty; for Mr.
Brooks has submitted to General Cul
berson other important land litiga
fion, which has not been acted upon
And while it is not comforting, still /
"a true. that Mr.. Brooks has read )