The weekly Butte record., 1867-06-15

L
gued great many land grant and preemption ca
ses in the courts Of Louisiana and Mississippi. ant
also in the Supreme Court Of the United States.
R. ]. WALKER.
Mr.. McRuer. Is that intended ss an advertise
mentt
Mr.. Julian. If the gentleman has not comprhen
sion enough TO know " hat it was intended for,
am quite sure cannot enlighten him.
Mr. Speaker. under these rules of the land Office
as endorsed By Hon. Robert j. Walker several o
these cases have been decided, and decided, thu.
far in favor of the preemptors.
Mr.. Bidwell. Will the gentleman yield for {
question,
Mr.. Julian. Only for question.
Mr.. Bidwell. Is not Robert J. Walker partne
of +. P Stanton, Of the lawyers in interest OF
the other side!
Mr.. Julian. ! do not know
Mr.. Btwe. know he is.
| Mr.. Julian. | do not know whether be is or not
and do not care. As have already observed, thi,
! act OF Congress was passed upon the statement
/ that the claimants we're q numerous body of land
! holders, several thousand in all, occupying small
tracts, and only asking the right to purchase Il
the extent of their actual possession; but the fac
turns out to be that after being allowed all the time
that the act of 1852 provides for the assertion and
proof of their clams, only one hundred and fifty
seven claimants all told have made proof under the
law As to their rights Of ownership in that ranch
I Let me give the House a sample OF these small
| land holders.
! John B. Frisbie. one of the grantees under the
4 Vallejo title, claims four thousand acres. He did
not reside and never has resided on the premises
| understand. His residence is in the city OF
Vallejo. Is he "a small holder and "settler'' on
| the ranch?
d. H. Hastings claims nearly FIVE thousand acres.
He resides in the town of Benicia and not on the
land. Has he any rights under the act Of 1863 for
the presumption and purchase or this tract.
c. A. Eastman claims twenty-five hundred acres,
and resides 10 San Francisco. Is he, too small
/ he iuftf nf npfi AZ
tract!
j. NJ. Neville claims six hundred and forty acres,
and is non resident, his home also being in san
Francisco.
Thomas S, Paige claims twenty-seven hundred
acres, and resides in Chill, South America, and has
resided there for many years. Is he. too, small
holder, entitled TO preempt his little possessions?
Is il the policy of this Government to encourage
foreigners to become large land owners among US.
who reside abroad and do nothing for the country
but hinder American citizens from pre-. empting
the public domain in small homesteadsl
]. Lankershim claims four hundred and sixty
six acres, and resides in San Francisco; and the
seven claimants | have named assert the right to
fifteen thousand seven hundred and six acres un
der the act OF 1863 giving them the right to pre-
empt at 81 2j per acre to the extent of their actual
possession.
Mr.. Speaker is it the policy of the Government
to encourage this large land holding by foreigners
and non residents in contraventon of the well set
gress of 1868 ever have enacted this law if they
had understood the character of these claimants?
Is it not perfectly clear that Congress was imposed
upon in ill the passage of that act and that
struction of il should be tolerated which will favor
these monopolists NJ the expense of the precmptos
and homestead ella imants.
Let NE recite some kindred facts. One Single
ton Vaughan claims two hundred and sixty acres;
Charles Ramsey seventeen hundred and sixty; John
w. Bartlett and John Baker three thousond; DO
and Oh III,
year two thousand; Andrew and James Hunter
sixteen hundred: J. Hill, thirteen hundred; j Ohm
Tormey about seven hundred ond siXty-slX; and
Peter Pagan eight hnndred and sixty-sx. This
makes a total of thirteen thousand one hundred and
hftytwo acres owned by ten men, that with the
seven before named here are seventeen land holders
claiming twenty-eighr Thousand eight hundred and
fitty-eight o. this land. of them non
residents Of the ranch, one OF them non resident
OF the country, claiming titles under the law of
1868. which procured, As have shown. by
false and fraudulent representations to both the
committees of Congress at that time.
Let me state some other facts bearing upon the
case. and that have said and shall say these
matters of fact, get from the records OF toe Land
once, 10 which | refer gentlemen who may see lit
10 controvert any statements that | may submit.
Jacob Anderson, father of A. s. Anderson. a
preemptiOn claimant, settled on the Sheebv tract
IN 1853. The first purchase OF Sheehy. the Vallejo
claimant, in August 1856. aud the second IN
Prior in date to the claims set up under the Vallejo
grant. VIII the gentleman from California Mr.
Bldwell pretend that the preemptor should be Gust
eds Berry Shouse bought of Frisble, in October,
1856 the land claimed by Nesbitt preempton.
who proves settle ment in 1873. He built house
stables sheds etc and remained on the land from
that date to 1855. fenced in garden. planted
orchard etc In 1856 the sheriff put him of at the
instance of Frisoe, under the Vallejo title Is this
the treatment of preemptors which California land
specuIators ask us to sanction!
The records of the Land Office show. too. that
some of the Vallejo claimants purchased OF Frlsbe.
who is the son-in law OF Vtllejo after the act of
March, 1858, was passed. and some of them after
the rejection of the grant by the Supreme Court
Have they anv rights under the act OF 1858!
Granting, in other respects the Justice of the
claim of these men. certainly none OF them can as
sert anv right on the ranch subsequent to the date
OF the decision ot the Supreme Court or subsequent
To the passage OF The act OF 1861 TOR the effect OF
the decision was to make il unappropriated public
lands and the effect OF the act OF 1868 was to re
strict all parties to the provisions of that act.
Clearly, then, the Land Office right in decid-
ing as il did in favor of the preemptors IN these
cases in opposition to this void claim set up against
ii; and am very sorry to fud the gentlemen rep
resenting California so strenuousy at work to de.
feat the lust rights asserted hy that decision.
come now. Mr. Speaker, TO the questions OF law
applicable tn these facts. The act which have re-
ferred to and which has been read to the House Is
A n act 10 grant the I1.ut oi pteeuiptou W NSt-
tain purchasers on the Suscol ranch in the State
of California Its title shows that 1t was Itself
an act providing for the preempticn of the land
specified.
The term "preemption'' implies settlement on
the land in person. Congress undoubtedly un-
derstood it. In proof of tins remind the Hon sc of
the language of the report of the Land Committee
in 1868 on which the act was thought TO be lusti-
fed. quote the following.
The SGscol ranch is settled upon and occupied
by au enterprising body of agricuturalists,
Claiming their lands under the Suscol grant.
The entire ranch has passed ont of the
hands of the original grantee, into the possession
Of a multitude of small holders, etc. "All
these settlers upon the ranch hold by a purchase
of NJ. G.. Vallejo.
There are many circumstances which tended to
give 10 the settlers upon the Suscol ranch conf
denee in the title which they purchased
The bill reported by this committee respects the
occupancy of the numerous holders under this title,
recognizing it as preemption." at has
been the uniform practice of Congress 10 respect
and protect the Improvements OF settlers etc.
Ii is thus quite evident that Congress understood
these Vallejo claimants 10 be settlers on the land.
What is settler? | refer 10 the authorities on the
subject:
''Bouvier's Law Dictionary vol. >, p. SIG. gives
it as the right which has person has OF being
considered resident of particular place 1t is
synonymous with domicile. or or the place where
a person has fixed his ordinary dwelling with
present intention of remaining. Id. vol, y. S4a.)
The word comes into the English language from
the Latin sedes OF sideo. and means not only
personal residence, but permanent personal resi-
dsnce. In England As tar back as Elizabeth. q
person must personally reside in parish forty
days with the intention of making it his permanent