Arizona republican., 1912-04-14

of the state and wish herein to call attention thereto and quote the law covering those matters. Before doing so. however, I wish here and now to state, as l did in addressing the leg islative committees few evenings ago upon this subject that I am heartily in favor of the lessees of school lands receiving compensation for their improvements and if there be any doubt in favor of the lessees and especially those that have been actual and bona fide residents upon such lands. MT. Ling says, relying upon the promise which tine territory made to them (said lessees) that they would be reimbursed for these Improvements and have an oppor- tunity to purchase the lands which for so many years they have made their homes, etc. and in said arti- cle he otherwise referred to the sol emn contract and agreement between the state and large number of it's citizens Now Let us see what this solemn contract" is.
 He refers us to Title 6. Revised Statutes of Arizona. 1901. as con stituting that contract
 No where do l find in that act that the territory has promised that said lessees would have an oppOr- tunity to purchase the lands The only preference or right given to them is. first. that Actual and bona fide settlers or occupants who have placed improvements on school or university lands shall have the pre- ferred right to lease the land" (Sec. of said act)
 Second. By the terms of section of that act Anyone occupying school or university lands. refusing or not wishing to lease said lands and oth- CT parties making application to do So.' that the board of supervisors should appoint appraisers to appraise the improvements belonging to said lessee and that the person to whom the lease should be given should pay to the board of supervisors the value of said improvements and the board of supervisors should pay the money over to the occupant of the land when he should vacate said land and give possession to the new lessee.
 Third. Section 22 of said act pro- vides that Anyone making perma- ncnt improvements on school or uni versity lands after leasing the same shall have them appraised and be all lowed compensation therefor at the expiration of lease: or anyone hay ing to surrender leased lands before expiration of lease shall be entitled +. aI ha nf hi
 The last section does not say who shall pay the occupant of the land for the improvements, but taken in connection with section above quot ed the conclusion must be that it is the person who succeeds the occu- pant in the matter of leasing of the land. So that the only promise that the territory made to the lessees of the school lands in that act was that their improvements should be appraised in the manner provided in that act that they should receive compensation therefor from the suc- ceeding lessee.
 Not only does said title 65 not promise the said lessees that they shall have an opportunity to pur- chase the ldIluS Wnlcn they occupy but quite to the contrary is it indi- cated that they are expected. at the expiration of their terms of leasing to surrender possession of said lands. | for section Q of said act provides that leach lease shall contain a covenant that the premises shall be at the expiration of the l term of the lease.'' And each lease | that covenant and each | lessee when he signs that lease makes l a solemn contract and agreement | with the state that he will. at the | expiration of his lease surrender the | premises If this constitutes a con- tract between the occupants of the | school land and the state. and I ad- ] init it does. then in the interest of l the taxpayers of the state should not | the lessee also be bound to his "sol- | emn contract and agreement?" Will | he?
 J. H. LANGSTON.