The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-12-09
HIS OWN Nj DECISION.
Judge DOster Finds 1t Used Against
Him in Federal Court

A decision which Judge Frank Dos
| ter, then chief justice of the Kansas
supreme court, handed down was used
today in the United States circuit court
to clinch point raised by D. r. Hite,
an attorney, as against Judge Doster
now practicing attorney, who repre-
sented the opposing side of the case
AS the citation of the decision was
made smiles f1ickered across the faces
of the even dozen of lawyers who were
present and Judge Doster himself grin
ned.
| The unusual incident came up in the
| course of the suit which is being heard
in the United States court over the
ownership of a thousand acres of Kan
sas school lands valued at close to
100000 in which forfeiture to the land
was brought about through the failure
to keep up the payments exacted by
the state.
Forty-eight of these suits were filed
| in the United States circuit court in
Topeka representing an acreage of $500
| acres while almost again as many suits
were filed at Wichita in the same court.
In addition to this 1T is estimated that
800 suits of similar nature were
brought in the state courts.
The state supreme court has held for
the present occupants of the lands
upon the basis of a number of techni-
calities which were raised and at the
same time has also held on the general
proposition that the holders of the GER
ment and regain possession. Decisions
falling on both sides of the question
have therefore been handed down. Con-
sequently the decision of the United
States circuit court is awaited with
considerable interest.
The issues have been made up on one
suft-M. P. Beatty VS.. Charles H Will
son. This will be used as a test case
and to do SO the following stipulations
have been agreed upon:
That the nlai1fiffS held the original
certificates duly issued and recorded
That the plaintiffs had made pay
ments for varying lengths of time
That the forfeitures shown by var
ious notices and returns were taken by
the state.
That the sheriffs If allowed to testify
would say that in each case the notices
of default were posted in a conspicuous
place.
That the defendants relied on these
forfeiture proceedings and took on GER
tificates and others patents.
That the improvements are substan-
TALLY the same as hereafter determined
if judgment went to the plaintiff.
NJ P. Beatty whose residence is in
Kentucky invested heavily in the cer~
tificates and rights of those who made
twenty of the suits filed as plaintiff
Representing him in the present suit
are Mulvane and Gault, George F.
Beatty and D. r. Hite, while on the
other side are Frank Doster and Lang
made and Carter.
The suit is just half way along.
Back in the early eighties the state
sold thousands of acres of school lands
for So per acre which was payable in
ten annual installments. The first pay
ments were made in a number of in
stances and then defaulted. The state
then claimed a forfeiture. These lands
were resold to new purchasers. In 1903
the legislature enacted a law which
granted 20 years additional time in
which to make payments on the land
and this induced a great many to offer
the amount of the defaulted INSTALL
ments together with the accumulated
interest to secure the land. 1t was
claimed however by the state that this
law only applied back to the time of
the enactment of the law.