New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-04-28

psriculsrly about was the first cut the reser-
vstion at Fort Smelling. That was set back 70 me
LAID Department ard sold by the land ofhoers. :.
yeu AK me in ref TO The ssles OF public lands
IN the West generally, by the Land Depanmeu' d az
that they have seldom brought more .Aan ;,h
lar and quarter am not coovereass
the sales ~ spy reseryaops by the War Department
except the case before alluded 10 -. ,La po,,
Question 525. How viii that Por,.cn o. sS eom.
ra,e in ynlns or ousl!ty With that SOLO 10 ioOI
Answer. The quality Of the lard might DOT DC very
different as Q whole. Inc uoveiuhh "a a,tSns;va
p.",aan,s on the other. Then, 10 the ooe case,
thssr wss sold by the Land Office, under which oil
Y"'nt nee ard the lands that portion Of the re-
nrye had at the time OF sale, think, as many a. Two
settlers ~ every quar- er section.
ou,,t,on SOC DO you know anything Of the history
Of he leei,ls,ion u6der which the first psI # that
reserve, mean The act Of 1852, was sold how that
legislation was obtained
Answer. BY recollection ia not distinct at all. l
know there was lcpg controversy or lorg struggle
about it, ending in tie reserve being reduced and the
pan cut of placed uLder the disposition OF the Land
Office. IL was thought by the settlers and by the
Degste in Congress then, Mr.. Sibley, to be subject
70 Or. smption, aud he contepded until the Land
DetarteIt decided against it after which, there
specisl act passed, authorizing it to be settled by
prtSaptiop. My opinion IL, that 1t wac nearly all en-
tred BY pIon under this special act OF Congress-
Question 527. DO you refer TO the ect Of 1857
Answer. think it was subsequent act. Ill,
Question j2S. Were there no Government build
eiiiesf
An,wer 1t is as beautiful tract of country as
ever Jaw, think, You could build city there as
large LoIdoD, go far es that mstter IL concerned
Ouestion $40. IL there no town now upon 1t ]
Apswer. yes, Sir; Minneapolis, a large town.
Question $50. DO you say that there was q special
act Of COpgIe,s Obtained for the purpose OF sGoJectng
that II r1ion Of the reservation TO precmp1on
Answer That is my recollection. Ny idea is, that
the reserve reduced 10 1882 and that at subSe-
quent time 1853 1854 there was an act passed au-
fioyizing the pre(mutiOn the lands.
Qgetiion 53l. asked whether there were any Gov
eminent buildings property of any description upon
Answer. Upon the original building Of the fort they
erected saw -lnil a house. and small establishment
for cracking corn for the hores. They are now old.
The cav. mill and part of the stone mil have fallen
dOwr. The buildings are in state OF dlapidaiOn and
decay. The cid house is really not nhabitabe. There
had been for sOno little time persOns living 10 tue
house. Blu. my impression is, that Trey hsd, 10 order
TO make it tensDtabe, to expond much money as it
would have cost 10 build cabin to live 10. shOnld
not tuppose that the buildings are worth clearing OIL
Question $50. WHO became the purchaser of that
portion of the property
Answer. AnsOn NOithruP and Mr.. Charles Russell
l think, entered, by presumption, the property upon
which the mill and the Improvements have men
toned. The improvements were mostly upon that e.
cred by Mr.. Russell.
Question $685. Did any portion of that sell
for more than dollar and quarter an acre.
Answer. think it was catered by presumption,
and of course at 81 % ali acre.
Question Did yJu become purchaser of any por-
ton Of it'll ~
Answer. l became purchaser of some Of it by
second hand sale from the preeDpters. $50
Quetton 535 (by the ChairmsDl. What price did
Answer. My recollection is, that the property /
bought cost me more than 800 per acre.
Question $50 (by the Chairman). How much did
you own there y
Answer. cannot exactly tell; / have bought
great deal secOnd-hauded the property was LAID out
II town lots, aud bought lots; my early purchases
were small.
that
Answer Minneapolis.
Question 53s (by Mr.. Faulkner. Did you meet with
Major Eastman and Mr.. Heiskell there
Answer. No, Sir; might have been introduced to
Msjor Eastman when was in Congress before; but l
do bot know bin, nor do know Mr.. Heiskell; knew
Mr. Hefkell who was in the medical department.
Ipd.r General Lawson.
Examination By the Chairman.
Question 539. Did you meet DIR. Graham or John
T.. hatber.
Apswer. think was introduced to Dr. Graham at
tie Fuller House. in St. Paul met number of Viz
GINA men there | think | met him but once; there |
was among the gentlemtn from Virginia, lame man, |
whom had seen in Mr.. Smiths law Office, in Aexsn-
dris met him or twice after should not know |
Question $40 Did you know Stsee'
Answer. don't know anybody else. -,
Question SAL. Did you have eny conversation with
Steele after you reached the Territory, in April in
regard to the sale Of the property
Answer. No Sir. :,
nations existing at Minneapolis in regard to this mill
tary reservation, which would have prevented that
property from selling at fair price if sold at public
Aptwer never heard Of anything approaching a
Combination, of any efforts made to affect that
sae; and am bound to say that did not believe at
the time Dor do now believe, that there would have
been any difficulty in selling that property 20 as to
have had il come toto the market at its full value
asked partner Of Mr. Steele in regard TO tne sale and
when it was to take place, and, may frankly say,
believe he knew OF the sale, but that he felt that
haa asked question which WAS impertment aud lm'
proper and, therefore, that he was justified in giving
me such aDswer as he Jaw fit; and he answered
bat he did not know anything about II.
Question 543. II understand you, you were upon
inquiry While in that Territory as 20 this SALE when
and where ard how it was to be made
Answer. Yes, Sir.
Question 5l4. Aud that you did not learn that the
fae had been made certainly, until you returned 10
Washington City, in July
Answer. No. Sir; as said before, inquired of the
clerk in the Office here, and left his office believing
that the clerk wa mistaken in what he told me.
Question 545 Were there, or not, number of indi-
vdusls there at Minneapolis DESTROYS OF purchasing
portions Of this reservation
Answer. l presume there were; when speak of
there being numbers waiting to buy alude TO set
tiers there and not 10 persons from abroad.
Question $40. Was, or not the probable sale OF TINS
property matter of general conversation In ali circles
at Fort Smelling Minneapolis, &cl
Answer. There was great deal SAID In reference 70
the sale, and, reported to the Secretary, there
were macy persons who wanted to buy many portions
OF this reserve
Question 5s7. Were you giving it as your opinion
that this property at this time taking the condition OF
the country INTO consideration, worth more than
was paid 70. IL
Answer. think the Government had better pay
back TO the parties that made the purchase the sum
they paid dow $3.50 0O0) and give them all the land
but the 600 acres and the improvements thereon.