The Daily state register. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1870-1872, 1871-05-25
GENERAL LAND OFFICE,

ANtNd1d u lDC IS tolf u Tx
opinion filed by the Commissioners:
GENERAL LAND OFFICE,
WASHINGTON, ID. c., May 2, 1871.
Messrs. Britton Il Gray, Washing
ton, ID. C.-Gentlemen: | am in re-
ceipt of your letter of the 9TH ultimo,
asking that instructions be issued to
the Registers and Receivers of the
several Land Districts within the
State of Nevada. to enable hat State
to make selections of swamp lands
under the Act of September IS, 1850.
The fourth section of the Act re-
ferred to provides ''that the provisions
of this Act be extended to and their
benefits be conferred on each of the
other States of the Cnion,' etc.
1t has always been held by this
office that the grant extended only
10 States in existence ut the date of
the Act. and that as new States were
admitted to the Union additional leg
i>latiOn VAS needed to confer the ben
etits of the swamp grant upon them.
In this construction Congress seems to
concur, for in 1860 we find a special
statute extending the swamp grant to
the States of Oregon and Minnesota,
which States had been admitted sub
Sequentlv 10 the passage of the grant
OF 1850. 1t is held however by you
that the enabling Act Of March 2l,
1864, provides:
l>t. That after certain requirements
(which were met the State of Nevada
should be admitted to the Union by
Executive proclamation upon an equal
footing with the original States. with
out further action on the part of Con
greSS; and 2d. That the laws of the
United States not locally inappllcabie,
shall have the amt force and effect
within said State a> elsewhere within
the United States. and that these pro-
visions carry with them to the State
an extension of the swamp grant of
1880.
| see nothing in these enactments
which can reasonably be construed a>
relating Is the swamp lands or similar
grants. All grants of the public do
main are i'll the nature of benefits. and
not usually bestowed by special but
by general legislation derived through
the original granting power designat-
ing the character and extent of the
grants and the II in which they
are to be ilade effective and secure TO
the grantee.
The laws referred to under the sec
Ond head above. are evidently such
laws as relate TO general public pollty
and not specific grants. If this were
otherwise, the organic Territorial Act
of March =. 1851. invested the Terri
tory OF Nevada with the benefits of
the wamp grant, for We find vol. l..
p. III, Sec. l6) the same provisions
there as contained in the Enabling
Act. In the case Of Minnesota the
Act admitting the State contains a sim
liar clause. and Vet, as before stated
additional legislation was thought
necessary to extend the swamp grant
to that state. In the Enabling Act of
March p, 1864, we find mon other
things certain specific grants of lands
to az prospective State. but among
these grants nothing is said of swamp
lands. On the contrary, the State is
required by the fourth section of that
Act to diSclaim all. right, title and in
terest to unappropriated public lands
within her limits; and as this office Is
aware of no appropriation of swamp
lands within that State. the title to
such lands must still remain with the
United States.
w. DRUMMOND, Commissioner.
This being the law of the case it now
becomes the duty of the Senators and
Representatives from this State TO fol-
low the precedent of Minnesota and
Oregon, and by Il special Act obtain
that equality of benefits of which the
people of Nevada are 10Y deprived.
The arnount of the lands of this de-
ScriptiOn lying along the rivers and
lakes of this State constitute no incon-
siderable portion of the public do
main. If this State is to be deprived
of these lands it Will he a serious loss
10 the treasury and to the people.
knowing all the facts Of the case as
our Senators and former Representa-
tives must have done-or at least
ought t o have done-we are surprised
that they have 50 far neglected the i'll
terests of their constituents as to allow
year after year to pass by without
taking any Congressional action to
maintain the rights of the people Of
this State. Their neglect is in striking
contrast with the activity of the repre-
sentatives of Minnesota and Oregon,
by whose exertions this defective
4