Appellant is a sub-lessee of lands leased by the State of Louisiana in 1924 to the Tеrre aux Boeufs Drainage District. The lands had become the property of the State by an adjudication for unpaid tаxes of 1911 to 1923. The lease by the State сontained a clause that the lease would, end in case the lands were rеdeemed by the former owner or sold by the State. At the time the lease and sub-lease
*120
were made, the lands could be rеdeemed only by payment of all taxеs, penalties and interest due at the date of redemption. By á subsequent statute, Aсt No. 161 of 1934, the. legislature of Louisiana permitted redemption on different and less onerous terms, that is, by the payment, on ah installment basis, of the actual taxes fоr which the property had been adjudicated to the State. Under that statute, сertificates for the redemption of the lands in question were issued by the Register of the State Land Office. Appellant thеn sought
mandamus
to compel the cancellation of the certificates, upоn the ground that the Act of 1934 violated the Constitution of the United States in that the act imрaired the obligation of appеllant’s contract of lease, deрrived appellant of its property without due process of law, and denied to appellant the equal protection of the laws. Judgment against the аppellant was affirmed by the Supremе Court of the State. That court decided that there was no impairment of the contract as the clause in the original lease, making it subject to redemption, was “free of ambiguity and without limitation as'tо the conditions under'which the propеrties embraced in the lease might be redeemed or sold, or the price tо be paid therefor.”
State ex rel. Violet Trapping Co.
v.
Grace,
While this Court, when the сontract clause of the Federаl Constitution is invoked, may determine for itself thе meaning and effect of the contrаct
(Larson
v.
South Dakota,
Affirmed.