The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1858-04-03

COmpanies-NO security for our S5,-
OOOsOOO.
The report of Mr.. HENDRICKS, Commits
sioner of the General Land Office, which we
said 'sknocked the last prop from under the
advocates of the $5,OOOOOO Ioan,'-show
ing as it did the utter worthlessness of the
securities pretended to be given in the bill
seems to have had an effect upon the writers
in favor of the swindle equivalent to q blow
with CLUB on the top of their heads-it
"coniuses' them sadly! 1t presses down
upon their brains, with tho effect of dented
skull-they talk wildly--their breathing is
sterterous-they beat the air with their hands,
in tho vain effort to recover from the "stun-
ner." One of these fellows with cracked
Uranium labcrs in the Pioneer of Sunday last
the 18th Of March, to argue himself into
believing that Mr.. HENDRICKS decision don't
amount to mucL-in fact, that the editors of
the Pioneer and Democrat differ from the Hon.
Thomas A. HENDRICKS, Commissioner of the
General Land Office upon point which it is
his province to decide-upona point in which
he is authority and the editors of that paper
are not
But suppose we concede the extraor binary
ability of the Pioneer editors! Suppose we
allow their legal acumen!-their wonderful
powers of analy sis!-their unrivalled ability
to unravel tangled legal questions!-to unite
knotty legal points!-their superior compe-
tency to know what law of Congress means!
Suppose we allow all this-and yet, is it
not certain, that whenever the point comes
before the General Land Office, it. will be de-
clded according to the rules and precedents
of that Department-just as it has been deci-
ded in the case of Iowa and other States that
have precisely similar land grant act-and
that then the decision of the Hon. THOMAS A.
HENDRICKS will have much more force than
the sayso of the editors of Pioneer and Demo-
crat who ostensbly father the leader in that
paper of Sunday last
Yet, in voting for the ratification of this
enormous Loan OF 100000 to irresponsible,
bankrupt and corrupt Railroad companies,
that paper advises the people to rely upon its
mere dictum as to the validity of the Secu-
rites offered to prevent the STEALING of this
money and guaranty its proper application,
against the direct, positive, and undoubted
decision of the great land officer of the United
States Government Will the people of
Minnesota be so jolly green as to be thus de-
luded?
But let US look little at the arguments
If we may style them arguments-with
which the Pioneer. tries to break the force OF
Mr.. HEynRIcK's lecision-that the companies
! bnre no Lrnd wherewith to secure the State !!
We all recollect how, early in the fight on
this subject, it was confidently asserted by
the Railr, ad Loan men, that each road would
be entitled to dispose of 120 sections of land
in advance of construction, which would be
at once tangible security to the State; and
these assertions no doubt Influenced many of
the members of the legislature, and have
been relied upon by many of our citizens,
who had not full examined the act of Con-
gress AMI the decisions O. the department.
The decision # the Commissioner we have
before given and referred to; but it will do
no harm to redirect attention to its most
COZ elusive main point. He decides peremp-
"The lands authorized to be sold must be
included within a continuous length of TWEEN
ty miles of the road that is opposite such
completed portion"
SO that no land can be sold in adrance OF
construction, and these Railroad Companies
have lot one acre of land or title of tangible
secnrHy to offer for our trusting 5000, 900 OF
dollars into their hands
Next, as to the act of Congress- This
is plain and decided upon the same point
Mr. HENDRICKS could have arrived at no 9TH
er decision than the one he did. The second
provlso OF the first section of the act of Con-
gress (which first section contains the grant J
is as follows:
Provided further, that the lands hereby
granted for and on account of said roads and
branches severally, shall be exclusively ap-
piled in the construction of that road for and
on account of which such lands are hereby
granted, and shall be disposed Of only as The
@o1k progresses; and the same shall be ap
Piled to no other purpose whatsoever
Now, tits evident from the foregoing, that
whatever quantr of land may be disposed
OF at one time, or whatever may be the re
quirements of the act before these l2O Sec
tons of land can be disposed Of no lard in
aau case can be sold in aduance of construc-
ton, and that it can only be disposed of as
the " work progresses p
This is certainly the literal meaning of the
law and its obvious intent and object forthe
land is to be Exclusively applied to the cen
struction of the road; y any other interpre
tatlon would defeat the object. Thus sup
pose the Companies were allowed to sell 100
sections OF land on each road in odcance of
construction-rai;ng together 4SO sectors
OF iand--and should faI to construct any
portion OF it, The purpose of the act in
that event would oe entirely frustrated, and
the United States would have giuen aavay a
large body of lands for nothing!
Nor is there anything in the fourth section
of the same act, which conflicts with the
previous grant contained in the first section.
conditioned upon the land being Exclusively
applied in the consl ruction of the roads and
to be disposed Of only as the work progress
ses." Where the FORTH section refers to the
disposition of the lands, it, of course, is I'M
derstood to leter to the disposition of the
lands upon the lpreri0usly oppressed condition
that they shall only be disposed of as the
work progresses y the fourth section is
indeed restrictive, aid requires that not more
than 0O srctiors an each rood shall ho soi,]