The weekly Butte record., 1867-06-22


the report he wond not have Questioned the state
ment which made. --
moment
Mr.. Julian. Yes. sir.
/ Mr.. BidwelI. | desire to say that on this grant
there are two cities the corporate limits of one of
/ them embracing thirty-ive hundred acres Within
those limits were small sndhoders owning from
five to twenty and some fifty acres But the city
limits were entirely excluded from the act of lSes
so that the settlers the cultvato-s OF the soil
toned as numbering one hundred and ffty-seven,
were entirely outside of the city limits. When the
report was made, it embraced all the population,
amounting to perhaps six or seven thousand per
sons the families and employees of the landhollers
( swelling the number very considerably. There
/ was numerous body engaged in the cultivation of
I the soil under those who held under the Vallejo
I title.
Mr. Julian can only say that the gentleman
/ is again mistaken. The report shows that the
committee making it believed the story told them
that there were three thousand settlers besides
eral thousand more outside OF any town and on the
/ ranch proper. They refer TO these small holders
I as the reason for passing tle act which excludes
t the towns. He knows. and need not tell him and
! this House again. that that law procured by
/ false representations, well calculated 10 mislead
/ the committee and Congresi, as il did, into its
enactment. which Congress would not tor mo-
ment have thought Of doing if it had been known
that so large portion of the tract claimed by
I fifteen twenty spectators. . considerable por-
I ton of whom did not reside upon the soil, and
/ some of them residents of foreign country.
! Mr.. Bidwel. How can the gentleman reduce one
hundred and ffty-seven landholders TO fifteen or
twenty.
Mr.. Julian. spoke of the fact that large por-
tiop of this land held by some seventeen land
holders. and Instead of three or four thousand per-
sons persons proving up under the act of ls63,
there were only one hundred and fifty seven.
Mr.. Bidwell. The records show that twenty of
the largest landholders owned some twenty-seven
thousand acres.
/ Mr.. Julian. Does the gentleman argue that those
twenty-seven thousand acres. more than halt Of it
| belonging to non resideIts--
Mr.. Bidweil. No. sir.
Mr.. Julian. Does the gentleman argue that that
was the land properly understood by the commit
tee as occupied by''a multitude of small holders"
who had built their houses planted their orchards
and reduced their claims to possession!
Mr.. Bidwell. | cannot see how the committee
so understood it if it read the memorial and papers
Here is the paper presented to that committee; and
from that they could not have come to any such
conclusion. In justice they could not have passed
any law different from what they did.
Mr.. Julian. That is the opinion OF the gentle
man from California
Mr.. Bidwell. have known this land intimately
for twenty four years.
Mr.. Julian. He saws he has known this land in
timately and we'll. The Land Office having heard
the testimony, filling some seventeen large volumes,
and decided this case, decided that these Vallejo
claimants had no such rights they set up. and
affirmed the rights OF the p-eemptors which are
now sought to be overturned here.
Mr. Bidwell. The Secretary has overruled that
decision.
Mr.. Julian | beg the gentleman s pardon. The
Secretary OF the Interior has never overruled that
decision | know to the contrary. He did, how
ever grant an appeal to the Attorney General. and
the Attorney General in his argument confeSses,
as have shown, what the gentleman denies. He
admits bv his opinion, which is a sort OF plea In
confession and avoidance. that these men were
bona fde preemptors. But he afirms as law that
preemptos have no ii hts under the preempton
laws until the completion of their payments.
Mr.. Epson. Was not the opinion of the Attor-
ney General drawn out by reference of the legal
questions to him by the Secretary of the INTERIOR
Mr. Julian. have said the Secretary of the In
terror granted an appeal. giving opinion OF his
own. The opinion of the Attorney General, no
lawyer on this floor or elsewhere. who Is not the
stipendiary of specnlators, will say is the law. 1t
is burlesque upon the legal profession, aud say
this without the fear of contradiction.
Mr. Highly. The gentleman will allow me to
ask him question.
Mr.. Julian. Certainly.
Mr. Highly. If that be mere buriesque of the
law does the gentleman think the courts would
pay attention to il at all in the decision OF these
cases?
l will answer the gentleman with great pleasure,
and am glad he has called my attention to that
point. think no respectable court would decide
as the Attorney General has decided: but the Sec
retary Of the Interior. as head of the land depart
ment Of the Government, has declared that he will
accept the decision of The Attorney General as the
rule of his action in regard to the public lands of
the country, thus reversing the cases already deci-
ded in the Land Office in favor of the preemptors,
and virtually ousting the remainder. Hence II Is
that have reported this amendment to this bill,
quieng land titles in California declaring in effect
that the act of 1853 shall not be construed in con
srued in with the opinion of the Attor-
ney General and thus saving these people from lit
igation and strife by leaving them peaceably in
their possessions. .
Hr. Highly. Allow me another question.
Mr. Julian. Certainly.
Mr.. Highly. If the Secretary of the Interior says
he is to be controlled by the opinion of the Attor-
ney General the parties interested bound by it!
Is it conclusive one way or the other! Cannot
these parties go into the courts Just As welE
Mr.. Julian. Undoubtedly these poor preemptors
who have no money to spend in tedious litigation,
can itgate the question in the courts of Califor-
nia. which have decided against the laws OF the
United States in more cases than one, as the gen.
tleman knows. 1t is to save the preemptors this
litigation and hazard that the proposed amendment
TO the bill has been reported and Is now so earnest
ly urged. We desire 10 guard their rights by re-
sistiug this attempt to unsettie them through
policy which would assail the rights of preemptors
everywhere.
Mr. Highly The gentleman ailudes to the re-
port of the committee of 1865. | ask what par:
he alludes to?
Mr. Julian. allude to what has been read here
to-day from the Committee on Public Lands.
The Attorney General admits. repeat. that these
were preemptOrs under the laws OF the United
States. The question OF fact is no longer in dis
pute the question is solely of law. and the At
tornev General having decided against the pre-
emptors and against the uniform decisions OF the
courts, submit that in a bill quietlng land titles.
should not reject an amendment that reasserts
the settled policy of the country against this revo-
lutionary interference with vested rights now
peaceabiy enjoyed
Mr.. Rice Of Maine. I ask the gentleman from
Indiana whether the commissioner of the General
Land Office, in whom have much confidence
as in the Attorney General has sent to the COM
mittee anv communication touching this matter.
Mr Julian. We have the rules under which he
decided the case of these preemptors which had
read the other day. have also in my drawer
legal opinion of his in favor of the rights of pre-
emptors. which would be glad to have read TO the
House if my time would permit
Mr.. Wilson. Of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, l desire 10
know whether the preemptors who to be pro-
tected by the amenment OF the committee still re-
/ main on the lands and in the occupation of their
preemption claims.
Mr.. Julian. That is so. large number al least
ars in the actual occupancy Of this land, claiming
il to-day as preemptors.
Mr.. Rice Of Maine. l would inquire whether. if
this bill passes without the amendment, under the
decision of the Attorney General these men claim
ing preemption rights will be ousted?
Mr. Julian. Undoubtedly; they anticipate be-
ing oustea and will be under the ruling of the de
partment: and ii is to guard against that danger
that they earnestly seeking the adoption OF
! this amendment, which will protect the rights
which the Ia nd departuent decides belong TO them