The Aberdeen weekly. [volume] (Aberdeen, Miss.) 1878-1933, 1908-01-03
Mississipprs Sixteenth Sections

The decision rendered during the
past week by Judge Niles Of the
United States District Court in Mis-
sissippi, on the question of sixteenth
section leases, probably begins a new
chapter in the history of the litiga-
ton over these leases, which has
been running through the Missis-
sippi court records, as a sort of Sc
rial, for some years. The Federal
jurist's final decision apparently
places him squarely in conflict with
the State supreme courts last rul-
ing. It is announced that an APP
peal will be taken and the case will
undoubtedly reach the Federal SUI
preme court for final hearing
Under an act of the legislature Of
1888, it appears, these sixteenth
sections have been subject to lease
| by the boards of supervisors of the
various counties, for the term Of
ninety-nine years 1t seems to have
been generally understood, for many
years at least, that these leases con-
veyed to the lessees practical own
ership Of the land for the term stat
ed. With this understanding many
| lum Der companies bid in the leases
Of timber sixteenth sections in South
Mississippi, when the States lum-
bef industry began TO develop, sole
ly for the purpose of securing the
timber or the lands. Much of the
timber has already been sremoved.
Some yeals ago the rights OF the
! lessees were called into question and
| test cases were finally instituted for
| the purpose of determining whether
the lum bermen had the right to re-
move the tim Der, or whether such
| removal constituted waste In 1906
| the State supreme court rendered a
| decision, by divided bench, affirm
ing the lessees' right to remove the
tim Der. Shortly thereafter one OF
the justices resigned. Upon the APP
pointment of his successor, and al
ter a rehearing, this opinion was
reversed, the court taking the posi-
ton that the lessees had no right tC
to remove the timber from these
lands under their leases.
Prior to the reversal of the SUI
preme courts first decision, it ap-
pears that Judge Niles, in ruling or
a similar case in his own court
agreed with the State court and up.
held the lessee's right to cut the
timber. Since the reversal of the
State precedent, Judge Niles fur
Their action has been awaited with
great interest. 1t will be seen that
he adheres to his original opinion
declining to conform to the last rul.
ing of the State supreme court, anC
holding that the grantee, under the
lease contract. should have the
right to use the timber on the land
and for whatsoever purpose he see
) fit, and without accountable,
therefor, during the period of tn,
} lease. y
Upon their face, the contradictor,
} rulings of the State and the Fedora
courts have created a rather curiOu
state of affairs, inasmuch as lessee
of sixteenth sections having lega
domiciles outside the State, and thu
: permitted recourse to the Fedora
: courts, are apparently given tn
: right to remove the timber unde
!. their leases, while lessees whose lie
y gal residenc is in Mississippi, hold
= ing similar leases, are debarre
from cutting the timber under PAL
of the usual penalties for waste.
is claimed that in cases of this char
acter the Federal jurists usual
conform their rulings to the prece
dents created by the State suprem
courts, but in this instance Judg
Niles, having agreed to the frs
opinion of the State court, decline
to reverse his preliminary opinion
/, because the State tribunal has re
: versed its ruling, and maintains hi
: right to the exercise of independen
= Judgment in the matter. The larg
interests involved make these suit
among the most important tina
have occurred in Mississippi fo
some years, while the rather uniqu
! history of litigation invests it wit
wide popular interest, New On
leans Times Democrat.