Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1883-03-06
SURVEYING THE PUBLIC Ian Ds.

. H Il AH1L r ON1LxkC AAA N U.s.
An Effort Made In Congress to In.
rea Frices-What was Said for
and Against the Proposition.
At the last session of Congress the
prices for surveying the public lands in
the Western States and Territories were
reduced nearly 40 per cent. As q result
surveyors refused to take contracts at the
reduced rates and no surveys have been
made during the past year. 1t will be re-
membered that our Legislature memorial
lied Congress to restore the old prices.
While the sundry Civil Appropriation bill
was under consideration on the 23d of
February an effort was unsuccessfully
made by Western Representatives to go
back to the old figures. The following
running debate on the subject is from the
Congressional Record OF the date indi-
Gated:
Mr.. Brents-I ask the gentleman to
withhold his point of order.
Mr.. Hiscock-I will reserve it until the
gentleman makes his statements.
Mr.. Brents-U Under the provisions of the
Sundry Civil Appropriation bill of last
year tu0 dtc III surveys WcT0 T6uuC6Q
So per mile. I opposed that reduction at
that time for the reason that I was salts
fed surveys could not be made in my Ter
ritory at those rates. Subsequent in
formation has confirmed me in that opin-
ion. We have been unable to get. any
surveys whatever made at the minimum
rates provided in that act for SIS per mile
for section lines and 81 per mile for town
ship lines.
The matter has been brought to the at
tention of the COMMISSIONS Of the Gem
eral Land Office and the Secretary Of the
Interior, and they have written letters
asking that increased rates be allowed for
Oregon and Washington Territory. This
proposition was submitted to them and
modified in some respects at their sugges-
ton.
1t simply gives the Commissions Of the
General Land Office q Discretionary power
to allow greater rates for surveys in Wash
ington and Oregon. 1t is utterly impossi-
Bile to get surveys made there at the rates
provided for in this bill. Our agricul-
tural lands cannot be surveyed at all. We
have been unable to get any contracts
taken in either Oregon or Washington for
the survey of agricultural lands at the
rates provided for in this bill.
Augmented rates are provided for heavi-
ly timbered lands and lands covered with
thick underbrush. We have had some
surveys of those lands at the augmented
ratios, but the agricultural lands, where
the tide of immigration is necessarily set
ting in, canno be surveyed at these rates,
for the deputy surveyors cannot make
surveys at these rates except at a loss.
Mr.. Cassidy-I would like to be heard
for a moment upon that amendment. All
that has been said by the gentleman from
Washington Territory and the gentleman
from Oregon applies with equal force to
all the Western States and Territories.
Under the reduction in the price allowed
for these surveys in that Western country,
where labor il necessarily much higher
than elsewhere, the surveys have been
practically suspended during the past
year. The reduction made at the last
Congress was over 81 per cent in the price.
In reference to the point made by the
gentleman from New York, the Chairman
of the Committee on Appropriations, ask
that his be ruled out upon the point
Of order, I desire to say simply that it ID
not proposed by this amendment to change
the existing law in any sense whatever.
There is nothing in the amendment which
goes to the manner or classification of the
1t is simply the compensation
allowed for them that is affected by this
amendment. And l hold, therefore, that,
being Sermane under Rule XXI, it is en-
admissible as an amendment to this
bill.
I had the honor of presenting a few days
since to this House a memorial, unani-
mously adopted by the Legislature of my
State, praying this body to increase the
price Of the surveys OF public lands in that
This memorial set forth fully the
fact that during the last year there had
been no surveys whatever made under the
contract saytem. Prior to 1880 the price
paid for this same class Of surveys was
SIP, $14 and $40, according to the CLASH
f~ication. At the last session of Congress l
joined with the honorable gentleman from
New York in repeating that portion of the
upon this subject which related to
the deposit system. In other words, we
migrated upon the bill a provision that
taken in payment Of the sur
veys should be applicable only in the land
where the survey is made. I be-
lieve that was correct legislation. But I
do not believe that 1t was wise to reduce
the rate for the surveying, or that the
rates should have been cut so largely as
they were by that last appropriation bill.
I therefore appeal to gentlemen on this
floor to vote with me to restore in q meas.
ure the old rates. The amendment I sug-
gest increases the rates 81 per mile on the
classes of surveys.