Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-08-15
THURSDAY, AUG. 10, 1854.
WHO Is RIGHT ,n

Those who have paid any attention at all to tn,
ss ssagitaton 4" through the public prints on tn,
| questions growing out of the withdrawal of Ger
tain lands from sale, will bear witness that tn,
Minnesotian has, from the outset, contended tha
the course adopted by the commissioner of tn,
General Land Office was the only one to protect
the s'bona de'' settler in his legal rights and al
the same time shut out the chances of greedy spec
ulators, who were seeking to get hold of all the
valuable lands along the line of road, and thus
not only defeat the objects of the grant itself fo,
railroad purposes, but also prevent the country
from being settled for years to come. We were
aware that such must be the course adopted
neS0tidn.
CY We do not wish to take from our neighbo,
any laurels he has fairly and honestly won, but
the above smacks so much of perfection, that we
cannot resist the temptation Sc to condemn him
out of his own mouth" Now it is we'll known
that on this question the Minnesotian, from the
first, has been Topping about like a toad in a mud
puddle, very desirous to jump at a given signal
SO as to make ''squatter' claim, and prove up
his pre-emption right,'' as the first and only
consistent editor in St. Paul. This is all we'll
enough, if his ''pre- emption" is ''valid." Let
us see if it is. Well then, when it was rumored
that the lands were to be withdrawn from sale,
the {" senior :" remarked, that this (the withdraw
al of the lands) would be s'the next best thing to
the Homestead Bill" Afterward, when the with
drawal of the lands had been ordered, he then
stated, (this is his language) that
g No further entries could be made upon them
until further notice, save Of valid emption
claims made preriOuS to the ,rithdfaacdl from,
SALE"
This is exactly the point he wished to reach,
well knowing that there is not one out of ten on
the lands who could prove up his "valid pre-
emption' claim, and as matter of course, the
lands would then revert to the railroad company.
And here is where we took issue with our neigh
Dor, endeavoring to prove that if such was the
construction of the law there would be but very
few persons who would be able to hold their
claims. Now mark. After having gloated over
the idea that &c no further entries could be made
upon the lands, save those of valid redemption
claims made prerious to the ,rihdra,cal from SALE"
he asserts that the course recently adopted by Mr.
Wilson that persons can "nOW'' make entries
can "mow" go on the lands and make pre- emp
ton claims, is the course the immaculate Mime
sotian has pursued from the first, and the
course he has always thought s'must be" adop-
ted ''Most righteous judge!" Most perfect
Minncsotian! Most consistent man
The Democrat; abiding to this matter, very
pertincntly remarks -
The Commissioner OF the General Land Office
in his reply to MIR. Eastman, explained his instruc
tiOns to that the right of pre- emption claims
made previous to the sc withdrawal from SALE"
but that the lands would be open to settlement
and entry by Prescriptions at least until the road
was located. This would have been a stumper to a
person of less elastic consistency than the editor
of the Mnnesotian, but not SO with him. SO
''whOp" goes the '' lndia-rubber man'' and he
cndcavors to straghten himself up in his new po-
siton, as if he had always stood there, and never
advocated an opposite policy. The following from
his paper of this morning in relation to Mr.. Viii
sons letter is little the coolest specimen of the
ridiculous which we have lately seen:
''Wc pity the men who hive condemned the
liberal course Of the General Land Office in adopt
ing a policy which was the only one, under the
law and the circumstances, to protect the bona
fde settler in his legal rights.''
He pity the men who have opposed the rights of
settlers to locate on the want lands! When it is
recollectcd that the Minncsotian is the only paper
in the Territory which has ever advocated or de-
Tended their exclusion, and that the other papers
have uniformly contcnded that such policy would
prove in the highest degree ruinous to the inter-
csts and prosperity Of the Territory, who will not
now be willing to acknowledge him as the very
prince of cons stcncy?
How comes it that the Mnnesotian should advo-
cate the views of Mr.. Wilson from the first, when
Mr.. Wilson has just explained what he meant in
letter to Mr.. Eastman? How comes it that the
Receivers at the various Land Offices should under
stand the matter Just as the community have un-
derstood it, u,tl Mr.. Wilson's letter made its ap-
pcarancc! How comes it that the Minnesotan
being possessed of this knowledge from, tie first,
has never made it known before? "Consistcncy.
thou art a jewel"