The Kansas herald of freedom., 1855-08-04

them, and they could not help them
iseIves.
IL. Sec. Il of the organic act say
that .'the constitution and all the laws q
the United States which are not loeall
inapplieable shall have the same fore
aud effect within the said Territory c
Kansas as elsewhere within the Unitei
States" This, together with the law Q
24th July, 1854, extends the pre- Exemption
law of Sept. 4, 1841, over this Territory
By section 10 of the act of l841, we fin,
'.that from and after the passage of thi
act every person being the head of
family, or widow, or single man of th,
age Of 81 years, and being citizen o
the United States, or having fled his de
elaration of intention to become citizen
as required by the naturalization laws
who since the 1st day of June. A. D
1910 Tor 28th of Sept, 1854, hasmade
or shall hereafter make, settlement il
person on public lands to which the In
dian title has been, at the time of sueI
settlement, exiinguished, and which hav,
been, or shall have been surveyed priol
thereto, and who shall inhabit or improve
the same, and who has or shall erect &
dwelling house thereon, shall be and i:
hereby authorized to enter with the reg
lister of the land Office for the district II
which such lands may lie, by legal sub.
divisions, any number of acres not ex
ceeding one hundred and sixty, or one
quarter section of land, to include the
residence of such claimants, by paving
to the United States the minimum price
of such lands, subject, however, to the
following limitationsand exceptions :" he
shall claim mo portion of the public lands
which have been selected for the seat o.
a city or town ; no parcel or lot of land
actually settled and occupied for the pur.
pose OF trade, and not agriculture" This
law says that the land must be s'sur.
veyed," and this fact may be used to de.
strey our argument. But we will show
that 1t has no force for if town sites
cannet be laid out in this Territory be,
cause the land is not surveyed, then
farm claims for pre-emption cannot be
taken. But the law of the 24th of July,
1854, section IL, specially provides fol
the settlement and pre-emption of unsur.
veyed lands, except lands included
within the limits of any incorporated
town, or which had been selected for a
city or town, or lands actually settled OF
occupied for the purpose oftrade and not
agriculture
Out of the very mouths of the claim
ants will we furnish their condemnation
for. by reference again to that immacu-
late Sovereign Squatter" meeting, we
find them admitting "thst we have in
good faith settled upon government lands
belonging to the United States, with the
view of pre-empting said lands according
to the act of Sept. 4th, 1841, and We re-
gard the opinion of his Excellency, A.
H. REEDER, as fully in accordance with
the act of Sept. 4th, 1841, which is ex-
tended to this Territory byan act of24th
July, 1854" We are glad to hear this
for we consider Gov. Reeder's legal opin-
ion worth something, and are willing to
base our arguments upon his. In let
ter 22d January, 1855, to B. Fl. Thorn
bley, Esq, he says: ''The act of 94th
July, 1854, extends the pre-emption of
1S41 to our unsurveyed lands, for the
following reasons None of our lands,
at the date of this act, were surveyed
One of the cardinal rules of law for the
construction of statutes is, that they
shall not be so construed as to make
them nugatory or unmeaning, and when
any proposed construction brings us to
such conclusion it is an infallible test by
which we may know that the construc-
ton is erroneous; for we are not to
charge upon a Legislature the folly of
passing laws which have no purport or
Now, if the act of 1854. is
only applicable to the surveyed lands of
our Territory, it is of no more effect
than blank paper, for the act of 1841,
being equally applicable to all the public
lands wheresoever situate, did not need
the act of 1854, to extend it to this
Territory, and we should thus charge
upon Congress that they grayely and sol
emnly enacted statute which had not
a particle of effect, and which only left
the law as it had been before. Again,
The act of l84l required that the land
which may be pre-empted shall have
two properties, to wit: that the Indian
title shall be extinguished, and that it
shall be surveyed. The act of 1854
provides that all the land to which the
Indian title is extinguished shall be
subject, DC, but is silent as to the sur
gey. Here we are met by another rule
Of construction conveyed in the well
known law maxim, sCnius eEpressio
uterus ct est ezeIusio' mention Of
The one is but the exclusion of the
other. But to preclude all doubts, the
act has this proyiso: "That when un-
surveyed lands are claimed by pre-
notice of the specific tract
claimed shall be filed within three
months after the survey" Thus We
have shown by the organic act, the pre-
smption laws of 184l and 1854, the
of the original claimants, and
the arguments of Gov. Reeder, that
Earm claims and town sites may be laid
,ff on unsurveyed public lands, to which
the Indian title is extinguished, and
hat town sites take precedence OF farm
claims; and that the Lawrence Assoei-
stion had, on, and after the 28th Sep
;ember, a perfect right to take the
present site of Lawrence for town,
md that the citizens of Lawrence have
now an indefeasible title to it for the
of trade and not agriculture.
To make the thing doubly sure, upon
he question of precedent of town sizes
over farm claims, we win quote a little
rom copy of a letter from Commis-
'ioner Wilson on this subject, in reference
% . town site similarly situated; and viii
publish the copy entire as an
,ffset to the one pu-porting to come last
winter written from kim TO the original
claimants:
eThis Office, in view of the above
acts, would enquire the legal grounds
--l - IL - .at,,,,, a. an pf,-ai~,