Omaha daily bee., 1883-05-31

bonded debt is o small matter
compaTatively to the add.
tionsl legislation demanded In
relation TO the land grants. If
congress can alter or amend those
paris Of the charter Of one of thsee
s~ubsidizsd companies relating to the
payments to be made upon the loan,
1t has exactly the same power to alter
the terms Of thelsnd grant, 80 far rs
the un%patented parts are concerned.
Every one Of these charters contains
the provision that congress mey
at n time alter, mod
lily or repeal the same" 1t was
this saving clause that passed the
Thurman act through the house by
q vote Of but two negatives out of
more than 230 members voting, ard
by an overwhelming majority in
the senate. The arguments In
favor of ''vested Iiqhtn" and the 50.
credness of the obligation of a con.
tract were sill In vain, as against the
specific reservation In the charter OF
the right and power of congress to
alter, modify or repeal. This reser-
walton became quite as much a part of
the contract as the loan Of bonds or
the grant Of land. And when the
act was tested In the supreme court,
that tribunal so held, but one of the
justices = Field, of this state, who got
his place through Central Pa.
cifc asslatauce-being of a
contrary opinion. Since then
the court has been reconstructed.
Among the new Justices are Grey of
Massachusetts, Blstohford of New
York, Woods Of Georgia and Mat.
thews Of Ohio. The full court con-
tains nine judgeu, including the chief.
justice. II all the new sppointees
should concur In the opinion with
Field, 8 similar case being presented
to the court, 1t would be decided that
the Thurman act is unconstitutional.
But there Is no good reason for the be-
lief that any other of the new Justices
than Stanly Matthew s would concur
with Field. The reason for
supposlng that he would Is founded on
hia argument as q senator from Ohio
ia the discussion of the principles Of
that act, In which he took the same
view that field took In his dissenting
opinion as q justice of the court. II
Is public opinion that, on q rehearing
of the Gaze, or on a hearing Of another
case involving the same principles of
law, the court would, as now consti.
tuted, decide as before-in favoro of the
oopstitutionality of the act.
And this brings us to the text of
this art!c'e-''Work for the Next
Congress- The work we mean Is the
amendment OF the land grant charters,
so that the grantees may be com.
PEELED to pay at once the expenses of
surveying the grants and take out
patents for the same, that the states
and territories may be enabled to take
the land. Another needful amend
ment Is this: Whenever In the origi-
nal charter there Is anything 10
the grant obscure or ambigu-
Gus, to alter 1t so that 1t shall
be made plain and unambiguour. On
account Of m of these obscurities In
the charter of the Central Pacific, that
corporation has been enabled by a
gross fraud to sell It's unsold lands af.
ter three years from the completion of
the road to a syndicate 81 bstantitially
composed Of It's own directors, the
original grantees-that it to sell to
itself. This Is so manifestly incon-
slstent with the intent Of the grant
that 1t only requires to be presented
to the court In proper shape to work
forfeiture OF those parts of the grant
which remained unsold three years
after the completion of the road. The
supreme court has decided that such q
sale Ia lump might be made under the
wording of the original charter,
which was ambiguous; but ii has also
decided that congress may alter,
or amend, or repeal the original char.
ter. This Is the amendment which
should engage tho attention of the
next congress. 1t will be easy to
show that the sale was a fraud and
that, In fact, nothing was sold. 1t
will be pleaded that right to the land
so tr%audulently transferred vested In
second hands, and Ia, therefore, un-
assailsble by farther legislation. Bat
fraud vltiates everything in law. And
as to the bona fde individual pur.
chasers from the fraudulent syndi.
Gates, the amendment should be 60
drawn up az to protect their interests
These Immigrant corporations have
SO far proved themselves q power
within the state greater than the
state, and If they are permitted to
hold all the land granted to them on
terms OF their OWE construction, free
from tsxatien, 1t must be clear to all
that power will be increased hereafter
just about In proportion to the in.
crease in value OF the land. 1t is In
tho power of congress to take from
them all the land not sold In
good faith within three years after the
completion of the road. The decis.
ion Of the supreme court recognizing
their right to sell en- bloc does
not touch this power of
congress; first, because the question of
fraud was not In the case presented;
and, second, because congress, with a
due regard to public policy, may at
any time alter or amend or repeal the
original charter, as we'll with relation
to the land grant ss to any other part
of 1t.