Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1895-06-30

under former law to let his land for \
felt in order to get the bencnt OF the |
reduced price By purchasing under the i
new law, as Ia the clause referred to |
giving him preference right to buy J
on terms not extended to others, but J
deemed advantageous both to him and :
the state. II the argument Is followed !
to it's logical conclusion he thought It !
wluld lead into what seems TO him the !
absurdity of maintaining that no per- |
son who had bought school lands I'M
der former laws could buy at all under
a law that offers the land at n less
price or yower rate Of interest.
IIe understands the constitutional In
hibitlon as regards the granting of
"relief'' to deny the legislature the
power to exempt the purchaser from
the payment Of his obligation to the
state or of any part of II.
Chief Justice stayton reasons this
way. He so contends in the case of Bar
ker against Torrey, reported In the
slxty-ninth volume OF Texas Reports.
II this is correct, then Senator Goss IL
of opinion that the clause referred 10
is not unconstitutional, for IL does not
attempt in any way to affect the con-
tract or obligation of the purchaser
with the state under his former pur-
chase; 1t does not attempt to take
away any right the state may have
for the enforcement Of that contract,
obtain judgment upon that contract
for any amount this right is in no
manner abridged The question of the
enforcement of an unpaid lien can
not arise in the case. Senator Goss
thinks, since the act of 1888, for fall
ure to pay the interest within the time
specified in the law ipso facto works
forfeiture of the purchasers title to
his land, diverts the title out of him
and vests 1t in the state; the land re-
verts to the particular fund to which 1t
originally belonged, and is again
placed upon the market for sale, con-
sequently the rights of the state are
in no way impaired. AS TO the wisdom
of reducing the rate OF interest, and
thus in my opinion, invite a forfeiture
under former purchases, the author Of
the bill says that Is entirely matter
of public policy and not constltu-
tional question.
As to what are the rights of the state
in relation to contracts for the sale of
school lands, whether she can enforce
| the payment of the purchasers obliga-
tition after forfeiture taken, or of any
| part Of IT, and II So what part. Is question
| for the courts to determine, and 1t is not In
volved In this question the senator thinks,
| for none OF these rights II any exist is taken
| away by the clause just mentioned.
| 1t Is claimed that If the attorney general
| should hold the clause to bo unconstitutional,
| the only eject would be to eliminate II from
| the law and to take away this preference
| right altogether. and leave the rest OF the law
| In full force, because of the fact that no
| other part Of the law il dependent upon It,
| and the law will stand complete In all it's
| parts without It, The eject OF this would be
to place former purchasers whose lands have
been or may be forfeited for non-paymont
| OF interest upon the same footing as all 9TH
er persons In the matter Of future pur-
| chaserB. I understand that the other ques-
tions submitted by Commissioner Baker to
the attorr oy-general are OF minor Importance
In view Of the fact that the land commits
hu4 Flna ttnWt Ia
tornoy-gereral for his opinion, he the land
| commissioner Is not inclined to be inter
| viewed on the subject. II would not be
| pleasant for either him or the attorney-gen-
cra If clash was caused by contrary opln-
ions.
amendment which, in the opinion OF leading
lawyers may prove fatal l learn from
reliable source that counsel has already been
retained by parties In West Texas to test
the validity OF the act amending the general
act" mot law while the latter was I'm the
hands Of the governor That these amend
ments submitted by the governor may be
fully understood herewith substantially re-
produce them. Section twenty, which pro-
yides that all leases from the state Of lands
named in the act who are ono year or more
in arrears on their contracts for rent, shall
have the right for the period Of four months
from the time the act goes into effect, but no
longer, within which they may execute and
deliver to the commissioner Of the general
land ONCE their respective obligations in
writing, with personal security satisfactory
[ to the commissioner, for the respective sums
Of money then owing by them to the stntei
and on delivery Of such obligation to the
commissioner and the cash payment of one
years rental in advance, they shall have tho
right to have their lease contracts cancelled,
, and may lease such lands anew under the
act and such obligation shall bind such
losses to pay said sums of money, one-third
, In one year, ono-third In two years, and the
remainder in three years from date and
shall draw six per cent interest per nnnum
payable annually and when this is done the
| commissioner shall balance their accounts
| on the books OF his Office and cancel and de-
, | liver up their old lenses and make to them
, | new leases under the act All lCBseea who
are not In arrears for rent or who shall pay
| all indebtedness on leases TO hav1 the right
to surrender their present leases and lease
anew their said lands under the act, Is re-
peaed.
And sections II and "a OF the act are
amended SO as to make the rental on, all
' lands agricultural, pasture and dry graz
o ing, at not less than cents per acre per
annum Instead OF cents for agricultural
lands and two cents for pasture or dry graz,
. ing lands. as the original bill provided, and
. the amendment to section "a confors 1uris
; dction on tho courts Of Travis county hay
!, ing Jurisdiction thereof oonourrently will
+ courts Of the district In which the lane
:, is situated. for institution Of suits ] un
r | derstand that counsel employed to test INT
y law in a mGudamus suit contend TINT uh
:, | less the supreme court goes back on INT
{ decision In the Pickle case the governor
u amendment Is clearly void, and II void thel
y can surely test the law IN manuai ult
k suit against the commission by ASSERTING
II rights conferred by section 20. These at
torneys, also learn, are Of opinion that the
e can bring test case under section II. y
. II would seem that the Goss land act, wiz
y. the governors amendments. viii nave I
!. go the gauntlet of the courts before beln
u accepted as law. A. o. ~
n ---O-------