The Mason County journal. [volume] (Shelton, W.T.) 1886-1927, 1894-04-27
The Oystermen Win.

compel the Commissioners OF puDllC
lands to issue certificate of purchase
for certain tide lands in Mason county,
which he had prepared and improved
as artificial oyster beds. Smith, IN
his petition, showed that no contest
had been initiated by any person
claiming prior right to purchase.
In December, 1898, however, A. J.
Burr, Joseph Meacham, w. J. Doane
and Doc Simmons filed with the
board of state land commissioners a
protest against Smiths application,
claiming that he was simply a tress-
passer on the lands; that the lands
covered natural oyster beds and were
not such lands as were contemplated
to be sold under the provisions of the
act of March 26, 1890, providing for
the sale of tide lands, except such as
we're withdrawn and reserved from
sale or lease for the purpose of estab-
fishing a natural oyster reserve.
The state land commission took
testimony as to the character of the
land and found it to be covered by
natural oyster beds" and held it to be
reserved from sale. Upon this deci-
sion, the commissioner of public lands
refused to accept the petitioners ten
der and to issue certificate of pur-
chase.
The point of attac k made by Smith
was the jurisdiction of the board of
state land commissioners to receive
and consider the protest and make a
decision of the character pronounced.
The supreme court discusses the
tide land law at length and holds that
when contest is heard before the
state board of land commissioners, the
rights of two rival claimants to pur-
chase are alone to constitute the is
sues. Neither the character of the
land nor the correctness of the appraise-
ment is subject of inquiry in such
proceedings before the board. The
first section of the act of 1890, gave
the disp osition of the tide and shore
lands into the jurisdiction of the
commissioner of public lands and the
determination of what lands should or
should not be sold, rested with the
commissioner of public lands alone.
1t was urged that the new act of 1893
creating the board of state land COM
missioners changed all this by giving
to the state board all the authority OF
the former board of equalization and
appeal. The supreme court says
This court passed upon this same pro-
vision in State ex rel Morse VS. Forrest,
and it was there said: "Under any
known rule of construction of statu-
ties, the conclusion is irresistible that
the legislature did not intend to merge
the local appraisers into the land COM
mission, or any manner1 interfere with
their functions or powers" 1t was
also observed that the act of 1898
makes little or no further reference to
tide lands, and that the whole code
of law therein enacted, with slight
exception, applied only to other lands.
That decision would seem to close the
controversy as to whether the COM
missioner is still vested with the same
authority and charged with the same
duties as specified in the act of 1890
II Z A protest direct
ed to the board and decided by it, is
no justification for the commissioners
refusal to proceed with an application
to purchase, since the board has nc
jurisdiction of the matter involved in
the protest.
The opinion touches on another
matter of much interest, and saws
"Oyster planters are classed as improv
ors of tide lands in the act of 1890
and if it be true that the petitioner
(Smith, y in 1884, cleared off the tract.
he claims and planted and cultivated
oysters thereon continuously unit
1890, when they were of the value ano
Importance that he claims they were
by reason of his labor, it is difficult tC
see how he could fail to be entitled tt
purchase under the law. If in 1881
, he entered upon the tide lands and by
his efforts and skill in planting ant
cultivating oysters here produced
what, upon the passage of the act o.
1890, was substantially an artificial
bed, although there may have beer
natural oysters upon the lands before
he entered, we think the same reason
able liberality should be extended t(
; him as it is the evident policy OF thu
law to extend to other improvers O
tide lands, that is, he should be allow
ed to have the benefit of his labor anc
expense at the appraised value of thu
bare land, it being the intention O
the reservation act, not to effect sucl
lands, but those only whereon natura
oyster beds were to be found at o.
after its passage"
Tho oo,,rf &c cof.cHoJ Al.