The San Angelo press. (San Angelo, Tex.) 1897-1907, 1902-04-16
LAND SUIT IN SUPREME
COURT AFFECTING AC-
TUAL SETTLER.

public school fund, and the people
of West Texas and the Panhandle
country was argued in the Su-
preme Court today. Lieutenant
Governor J. N. Browning of
Amarillo and Theodore Mack of
Fort Worth, representing the
plaintiff in error. The style of
the case was w. G. Logan against
j. w. Curry, ct. al, and its re-
suits will be watched for with
great interest by the people of the
section of the State interested.
The fact that the people of the
western part of the State became
uneasy about the condition of
their titles and had within the
past year applied for patents for
lands upon which they were only
paying 3 per cent interest became
significant in the state department
and the records in the land office
show that since April 1, 1901, up
to April 1, 1902 there were 2421
patents issued for school lands
covering about one million acres;
that the principal of money paid
into the Treasury on these lands
amounted to $1,036, 668. As, and
for the month of March, 1902,
the sum of 1920, 1886 was paid
in. Had these lands not been
patented the available school fund
would have received in interest
about $4,000 annually on the
lands thus patented. The result
of the unprecedented numbers of
patents applied for and issued is
to diminish the available school
fund and horde up vast sums in the
Treasury awaiting investment by
the state Board of Education. 1t
is n recognized fact that the State
EducationalBoard has experienced
great difficulty in investing the
permanent school fund and this
influx of money will make the
problem more perpleXing. The
consensus among the people of
the West is that the insecurity
of school land titles has constrain-
ed actual settlers to patent their
lands and thus not avail them
selves of the low rate of interest.
3 per cent, on the deferred pur-
chase money which, under the
law, may be paid at any time
within forty years. In the case
submitted today these sig
nificant facts were incidentally
referred to by counsel. The facts
as disclosed by the record in the
case argued today are briefly these.
In January, 1896, one Ried APP
piled to purchase school land in
Nolan county az an actual settler.
On Oct. 10 1897, he sold to
Logan, who Immediately went on
the land as an actual settler and in
May, 1899, substituted himself
as an actual settler by again APP
plying for the land in his own
name and complying with the law
relative to making the afiidav it
and rendering the purcase money
TO the state Treasurer. On
March 30, 1900, the Commissioner
of the General Land Office issued
to Logan a certificate of occupancy
Thereafter, in October, 1900,
Curry applied to purchase as
additional the section in con-
troversy. This application was
rejected by the land Commissioner.
Curry filed suit for the land in
the district court of Nolan county
and prevailed in the suit, the
trial court holding that since
Reid was not an actual settler on
the land and since Logan acted
in collision with another in
purchasing the land, Curry was
entitled to Il Judgment. This
Judgment was subsequently affirm
ed by the FIT Worth court civil APP
peals and writ of error was grant
ed by the Supreme Court. The
points made in the argument to-
day were these: First, the action
of the Commissioner of the General
Land Office in awarding the land
to Red could not be assailed by
defendent in error, even though 1T
be admitted that Ried was not an
actual settler; that such act could
only be avoided by the state ina
direct proceeding had for that
purpose, Second, that since
Logan had substituted himself as
the original purchaser, his affidavit
even though it be false insofar, as
the question of collision be con-
cerned. Could not be inquired in
to by third person subsequently
applying to purchase the land.
Third, that the certificate of oc-
cupancy issued by the COM