The union Democrat. [volume] (Sonora, Calif.) 1854-1946, 1871-08-26

county. on Sherman Island and elsewhere.
would be restored to the public domain or
what would suit the honorable gentleman bet.
ter. to the railroad company. We have here.
tofore shown, and any one can see NJ n GLANCE
that ii would not be necessary to CHANGE tbs
definition to protect settlers. Ifa man cer
live on tract Of land. it is not swami pnasr
the original Act Of 1850. and the verv hast
proof to offer would be the fact that he aid
live there.
But it was the third section Of the Act that
we wanted to call general attention 70. Wa
ask the reader tc go back and re-read that
section. Could any attorney in the employ
ment OF the railroad company have done anv
better for them? Except few little vallevs
claimed as swamp in the mountains, all the,
swamp land Of the State comes within the
railroad grants. and that section of the hill
would, prima facie, give them the land It
would be theirs without investigation, howey.
err swampy it might be- Now, after giving
the railroad company the prima facie title to
all the land, what else does this attorney of
theirs do? 1t would seem that so much
would satisfy the most greedy, but they are
not satisfied. They require their attorneys to,
do tor them what was never before nut in any
law in any State Of these United States, or
any other civilized country. We speak I'D
visedly, and challenge Mr. Sargent, or Mr..
Julian. " or any other man," to show law
in which the plaintiff is required to pay all
the costs. whether successful or not Read
the fourth section of the bill. especially the
last two lines. The railroad company is Civ
en- a prlma facie case--they would never ask
for an investigation. Every man who claim
ed any swamp land would have to demand an
investigation, and then under section FIVE
the company would compel the attendance Of
great number of witnesses. and although
the owner of the land might preve it to be
covered all the year round with water as deep
as the Pacific Ocean, he would have the wit
witnesses and other costs of BOTH sides TO
pay The company would not be out five
cent piece We say it is atrocious yillainy,
We challenge parallel in the whole history
of legislation Who would ever GO into the
courts, if his opponent had q right to compel
the attendance of innumerable and distant wit
nesses, to create all the coSts possible, and
make him pay it, although he might make a
case as plain as a promissory note? This,
then, would give all the odd sections to the
railroad company without opposition, ex-
cept it might be the few cases where large
bodies are held by rich companies. All the
small owners-all those who purchased justso
much as they expected to try to reclaim, or
could use for grazing purposes, would fall
without an attempt to go into such an une-
quail contest.
Nor can it be said that these things were
done in the interest of the Settlers" about
whom these two worthless were so eloquent.
How easy it would have been to have said
that the fact Of settlement should be conclu-
sive evidence of the arabic condition of the
land, and when such actual settlement was
proven, make the swamp claimant pay all
costs, aid for that matter. if it was determin-
ed that such land should not have been claim
ed as swamp, give the actual "settler" a
chance to get exemplary damages. We sug-
gested such a course long before this bill was
fixed up, and pledged ourself to 90 heart and
soul for any measure that contemplated the
protection of the actual settler from either
the swamp land claimants or the railroad
company. We yield to no man the palm in
the advocacy of the rights of the settler. But
the interests of the settlers were not thought
of by the originators of the bill we print above.
They aimed higher. The protection of the
"setter" would have been simple and easy
no change of definition would have been re-
quired for that
We ask the voters of the Second District to
study this bill over carefully, and if they be-
come satisfied, as we think they must that
Mr.. Sargent was working under the instruc-
tons of che railroad company. to work for his
defeat. If he would do so infamous an act as
the above for them against the interest of one
class of citizens, what class can put any de-
pendence in him.
Grant an individual one kind of land. and
then, after he has spent his mouey upon it,
change the terms of the original grant, give
some one else prma facie title to IT,. and if
the owner wants to investigate under the new
departure, make him pay whatever costs the
other party may see proper to put him to
What in all the scope of rascality can be
more villairous? And can such man get
ANY votes for reelection?