The Big Sandy news. [volume] (Louisa, Ky.) 1885-1929, 1907-12-27
Land Grantors We're Knocked Out.
The Court Of Appeals Decides The Big Case
Involving Titles to Big Sandy Lands.

The Court Of Appeals reno d-rcd
final decision in the litigation which
has been clogging the Courts OF l.
Eastern section OF the state for the
past half century. The opinion
clarifies the title to over 100000
acres OF rich mountain land. lying
mostly in the counties Of Floyd.
Knott, Letcher and Pike The suits
which have been fought through the
Courts time and again. are known as
the Eastern Kentucky land grant |
cases. The decision is considered |
one OF the most important rendered
by the Court OF Appeals IN years.
affecting. as IL does. vast area OF
the commonwealth and settling after
an immense volume Of litigation,
questions OF title which have been
In dispute for generations.
The question Of the ,onstitutionality
OF that part OF the revenue act Of
the last Legislature which made pro-
visions that claimants TO land must
come in within 50 years OF the date
Of patent or grant and list their
lands and pay taxes therein, is decid-
! ed by the Court In his opinion. the
act being upheld. Four appeals. pre-
: senting a common question. are de-
cided together in the opinion. The
e case Is that OF the Eastern Kentucky
{ Coal Lands Corporation against the
Commonwealth. The Circuit Courts
. Of Pike. Floyd. Knett and Letcher
. counties decided the case for tins
+ commonwealth and four appeals wer'
d brought to the Court Of Appeals
i No case in the history OF Kentucky
y Jurisprudence we're harder fought, IN
% coal lands corporation being oompose'
y in the main OF a syniicate OF easterl
re capitalists who were seeking to dis
10 possess the alleged owners. who ha'
r been in possession for scores Of years
fe The title which the coal lands cor
I'd poration claimed the land was base
b under the old Virginia land patent
be and il was upon the validity Of thes
old grants that the Court OF Appeal
~ passed. in addition 10 constituting III
Kentucky revenue laws
en- Proceeding under Article 3 Of th
Z act Of 1906. the appellant. claimin
ut 10 be an owner OF patents Issued ..
rs ON Virginia warrants prior to ISL
e? petitioned the County Courts OF PIX
is Floyd. Knott and Letcher TO list *
Us taxation against it 27J.2S5 acres {
Id land in PIKE county. SS.2l5 acres
ior Floyd. 55.026 in Letcher and 29.c.
zee acres in Knot. aggregating 44T,5.
OF acres.
lat The county courts refused to Ii
an The land upon the grounds that Il
ers petition was not sufficient under u
IN statute On appeal TO the circu
Courts OF those counties the san
md conclusion was renehed and appel
but ants applications were refus'
zen whereupon thes appeals were prosecl
ian ed to the Court OF Apreals.
all Before making final its olinion I
Fed Court CT Appeals goes at length in
ICY. the question OF eonstitutionalii
Idle bealing directly with the various o
ure jections raised by the appellant, s.
ond Ting each one DIN term before maxi
all this final observation: Did cppella
real comply with the statute so that
County Court ought to have list
he the lands. The Court concludes Il
'su- the county courts were right in
nay fusing the list. The court then I
rom ciares the judgment OF the Giro
slad Courts so holding in these cases
sun firmed. The whole court sat in
case. all concurring
In rendering its decision the Co
discussed the difficulties of the sit
iine tion. saying that on one side was
rom legal right OF the original parents
,sed On the other was the moral right
dis those who through Ignorance of
set truth bought and settled upon so
ties. OF these lands. The Court then &
hin. on to show the course Of legislat
.iar- and judicial cognizance OF the sit
the ton. the passage of various 81
la by General Assemblies to provide
sii- tRxasicn Of lands which had not b
oldr listed by the owners or propriet
Itate l1t tells further Of the judicial v
uken BY various Courts on the