OCR Text |
Show I I- SWEET LITIGATION I j ONCE AGAIN HEARD ; mh , United States Circuit Court of Appeals Rc-i H J verses Action Regarding School Lands B Near Camp of Black Hawk. bpH BBBBB , i DKNVKIt. Sept. ST. Tho cam BBBBB of Prederlek A. Hweet, ndmlnls H Irnlnr of llio estate nf Arthur A. BBBBB k Bwcel, from tho Utah district was BBBBB reversed and remanded by the BBBBB f' I United Hint court of nppeals BBBBV' today. Tho rnso Involved school BBBBB; i' lands (in which the government BBBBB Jj rlnlmrit It linn coal right. bbbi H )' B "If (ho circuit court has reversed J I H ii Judge John A. Marshall on tho law, BBBBB?! , Ml believe It has. It In tho moil lm BBBBB?' ! 0rtAnt trSI decision that ha Imp H lrtiFil In t'tnli rlncri ',i coming Cf t.k. BBBBB jploncera," dcclutcd llusecll (1. ftchul BBBBBJ Ur of the luw firm of Dickson, Kills, BBBBBJ J5llla ft Hchulder last Monday at Halt BBBBBJ Mlw City when ulinu'n tli aloo rile BBBBB t' iiatcli. The firm of which Hchulder In BBBBBJ B n member conducted thn rnso for BBBBB, thn Bwcct Interests ami wan Inter en BBBBBjr gaged Iiy tho italo of Utah an special HK' counsel to carry thn appeal to tho clr- J I c,ult court. Continuing, Hchulder BVjbbbW f;' "If llio crtun tin lieen roverwd on (hn law It Mill mean that It will tin lint n few year before. Utah will not know what n school tax In, for tho simple renion that mi school tax will i Imi necessary. Tho hinds from tho J stato noli no I land will meet all re BBBV1 tiulremeuts for school purposes, not BBBBBb'1 jj nlnnn for a few years, hut for Benern BBBBa, tlon) to Hh V.ttwt Of (llO H 5 ' "It will mean that thousands of BBBBBB; acre of In ml that arc known to he BBBBBBj It l mineral liearlnit will become the prop BBBBBB I, ! crly of the Ktntn and may ho wild a BBBBBBk t mineral land. Thero linn never heen BBBBBBJ F j. any tieiitlou In my mind an to what BBBBBS . that part of the t'tali enabling act BBBBBB l-il meant. It follows tho exact wording BBBBBB; V ot ,no enabling act of Michigan ami ill other states which loivr all of certain 1 land to tho iitato for kcIiooI puriioncn. 1 Tlio aupremn court of the United I Htatea ha held that thn MIcIiIkiui act M wa leicaj. na well na tho name kind of T tilauiMlu thn enatdhiK act of other fj Htatea. Tlurn la no renixin to believe U that tho court will reverao llaelf In M thn rnan of Utah." Thn en no la one B of lone atnudliKf In thn United Htatea U courta. A lirlef hlatory nf thn raan la 1 slveh ly Frederick A. Hwcct, admin H latrator of tho eatatn of Arthur A. n Hweet, anil by Hchulder. I Tuo Into A. A. Sweet purchased tho Ian J In dispute, Hi Acre In Cartiort S 4i county near the ISmery county line, In '1 fit ItOt. Tlio purcliaao wda mnda from BBBBji ,11' partli-a who had purchaaeil til prop BBBBBB rtr from the atato na pomlhta public BBBBBBj; t, V achool land irranted to thn atato under BBBBBB) 'i; the enabllnK act. In 190 the United JBBBBBJ; Htatea bmuRht an It ncalnat A. A. BBBBBBl '? Sweet to quiet title to thn land on the BBBBBB' & cround that It waa mineral or coal BBBBBB ft';' Umt and that the atate had no title BBBBBB 'IjlJ to tho laud and therefore could not BBBBfl ' i,y'J paaa title to another. In the trial of BBBBBB M the caan the Kovrrnmeiit waa repre- BBBBBBj . Iij aented by John A. Mnynnrd, na apeclal BBBBBBj .11 counael for thn department of Justice. BBBBBL' n j The defendant waa repreeented by BBBBBBh f Dlckaon. Kill. Hllla and Bchulder. BBBBBBj) f ( Tlio defcimc ndmltted that the land VBBBB!' Jj waa coal land, but aritued that at the BBBBH 3 tlmn of thn eualilltiK act and even at BBBBBBki I the time that the atate old the land BBBBBBjl U It waa not known to contain coal. JB) Judcv Marrliall'H llulliijr. YBBBBw M Judco Marahull held that the atate BBBBBBR ffl did not have a lltlo to the l.tnd, that BBBBBK nB It belonKed to the government ua tnln BBBBBBK If I erul land. In view of thn fact that tho Hj jU 1 kinl" had .old man)' acrca of land to BAfH H lilcli (ho tltlo mlKht be In iiueatlon, ABBBBBJI g; j (a any nothing of thouoanda of ucrea BBBBBB) t of Und, rapeclally In the central and I & Sll; aoutlicrii pari of the alato. Wlilcll trnal BVBB 'lfl and I 'till claimed by the atate aal BBBBBBJ I -ncJiwI land under the emiMInc act, the I BBBBBBj 19 atate, on. recommendation of Attorney! BBBBBK IB itwrnt iiaruea, made an appronria. I 4BBBBBBBBK Iffl JtttB of lv . BBBBBBe flj ..wuaauu uollara and cm BBBBBK IU ployed the firm of Ulckaon, Kllla, HI- IBJBBBJ JtJij lla A. Hchulder to carry the caae to BBBBBj fj ' tha circuit court of uppeuta. The coa waa arxtied before tho court on May 4th lnt, A. C. Kllla, Jr., and Ittianell Q. Hchulder appearing for the appellants' ap-pellants' and United Htatea Dlatrlct At torney Hay of Utah for the govern ment Klnce thn government filed Its notion no-tion agalnrt Arthur A. Hwcct In 1009 Hweet died and Frederick A. Hweet : waa appointed administrator of the estate. In connection with the lx hundred and forty ncrea nf land In dispute, Hweet held other coal prop rrtlea In Carlton and limcry counties. All nf these propertlca were later sold to the United Htatea I'uel company, whlah now alaltna tho tltlo to tho land In dispute. MINHItAUS NOT llltHKUVinM ioviitN.Mi:.vr is tiii: Misnt HALT I.AKK 1'ITV, Hcpt 59 - A telrgrnm received )esterday by Hub' sell (1. Hchulder brought the lnforma lion that the decision was on a point, of law. A dispatch retting forth the. facta of tho decision waa received from ' Penvcr nlw. It follow! Iiy the (ermi of Utah's enabling act the United Btntea grnnted Hectlona 3, 1, 33 and 30 In every township In the! atato for the support of tho common schools. The act contained no reser vntlon of mineral lands from the grant. J In 1901 Utah contracted to sell nj certain section of thesa achool lnnda to (leorgn T. Ilndger, who assigned his, contrnit to Arthur A. Hweet In I90C. Hweet paid the state nineteen hundred and twenty dollars for the land and waa demanding tho deed In 1907 for It when tho government brought suit . against him to quiet tltlo on the' ground that thn land In question waa well known conl land when tho state was admitted to Hut union ntul for that reason title never passed to the state. Thn government's ntlnrne) con tended (lint It waa tho ubllc policy of thn United Htatea to exempt mineral lands from such grants. The lower court sustained the gov ernment'a claim and tho administrator administra-tor appealed. Thn United Blates now nsks thn courts to amend Hectlon 0 by adding thereto the words: "Nor shall any mineral lnnda lie subject to tho grant." Congress had the power to make or withhold this grant In whole or In part. Nevertheless It did not except nor reaerve mineral lands from the grant. The legal presumption la that It Intended to make none and It Is not tkn province nf the courts to q bo, Mineral Ifltnls are not exempted frohl tho congressional grants of achool lands to Michigan. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Missouri, Kansas, Florida and Oklahoma. The grant of achool lauds to Utah la In aubstantlally thn same terms na the grant to Michigan. Judge Hanborn wrote the opinion, alttlng aa the court of appeala with Judgea Corland and fowls. |