The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-09-30
THE SCHOOL LAND CASES
The Right TO Purchase Before Ex.
piraiiOn Of Lease.
LHIGANr SAYS THAT II is INVALID.
Suit 70 Determine Also Whether There
Is Any Limit to Purchase Under
Process OF Settlement and Sale.

Austin, Texas, September 29.-At the ap-
preaching session Of the supreme court,
which will begin October G. the two i'm
portant cases now pending to be disposed
OF involve questions Of school land law
which Will be OF vital interest TO the home
seekers and actual SETTLERS OF the state.
These two suits were instituted by Messrs.
Ashby S. James and f. H. Yeiser Of Aus
tin as attorneys for the settlers who de,
sired TO establish themselves homes on
public school land.
In the FIRST Of these cases W. B. Tolllson
vs. Charles Rogan ct al. the relator, Tolls
son, contends that he Is entitled 30 have
the land applied for by him awarded to
him, for the reason that it was applied
for by him as n drst applicant upon the
expiration of the lease, which had existed
up to the time Of the ding Of his applica-
tion. The land commissioner. however,
awarded this land TO another applicant,
who had hled his application to purchase
this land before the expiration Of his lease.
Relator rollison contends that where
land is situated in the absolute lease dis
uiet the land commissioner has no power
TO award and sell the land TO an applicant
who niles his application to purchase be.
fore the lease has expired with the con.
sent Of the lessee. This case Involves ali
sales Of school land Which have been mado
heretofore 10 the employees and representa-
ttHes OF the large pasture OWNERS who have
been permitted To tile on school lands held
under lease by their employers upon Il
transfer or surrender OF the lease on the
particular sections applied Tor by such per.
sons.
Tollsons attorneys declore: 1T Is a
mutt0 6t common nOtoriety that ever since
there has been such d great demand Ivy
settlers FOR the school lands of this state
large lessees Of school land In the absolute
lease district have been snbdividlng their
leases aud transferring same to other per
sous. upon which transfers the land dc,
paitnent has been awarding and selling
OF the citizens Of this state generally. aud
tnla policy was pursued over the protest OF
the citizens of this State until the last
| legislature by statute expressly prohibited
/ the land commissioner from making ans
| further sales 81 this character
Under the policy which has been pur
sued In favor Of the large lessees It was
possible for a lessee who was holding l0l
sections Of school land under a five.yeai
lease within the absolute lease district
| few days before the expiration Of his lease
to subdivide II into twenty-five blocks OF
-four sections each and transfer these blockl
TO twenty-five OF his employees, who would
thereEpon 1le upon them before the lease
had expired and the citizens OF the State
generally, under the law could apply fol
same, and on these applications filed befor,
the expiration Of the lease the land com
missioner would ward all Of the land
1T can thus be seen that under thi'
policy where school land was under eas,
! the citizens of the State generally coult
not acquire II without the consent of this
/ lessee. The attorneys for the relator n
this case feel confident that the supreme
1 court viii declare all such premature sales
/ Illegal and void