Weekly Phoenix herald., 1884-10-30

| Campbells declarations be inter
prdted,
The treatment of the land ques
tion by the Gazette in Its daily issu
of last Tuesday is a fair sample o
the dishonesty of that sheet and is il
fact an insult to an intelligent com.
mHDity. The Gazette clearly pre-
sum IS that the Teople are ignoraH
of the facts and will never know ApJ
better than 10 think that it's D, oSt grOsl
misrepre sensations are facts and vii
so unquestioned. Il makes lhre,
statements that are the most fragrant
conversions of facts we have ever
read in any p:per. They are as
follows: The homestead and pre-
emption laws are dead letters on
the statute books" "All the
agricultural and grazing lands
have been set aside for monopolies. -
The price has been raised ION gov
eminent lands) from 1925 to IS and
SO per acre" Every man who has
ever taken up land Or knows
anything whatever of our land
laws knows that tie foregoing
statements are The grossest sort
of misrepresenlations-knows that
a title cannot be gained except
under the homestead or preemp-
ton laws, and knows that he pays
simply $1.25 FER acre.
Those ''forelgn syndicate" that
the Gazette talks about having COB
bled up $4,000 900 and cattle kings
100000 acres more, have got
those lands, how? Through the old
presumption laws first passed in the
administration of Jefferson himself,
which put up public surveyed lands
at auction, If not otherwise disposed
of.
Again the Gazette states that $780,
100000 acres of land have been
granted to corporations, abiding to
RAILROAD grants. Now the report of
the Commission on Public Lands,
which lays before US, shows that the
total of all grants has been 55,00O,>
600 acres.
The Gazette states that within the
past six weeks 7,s50,00O acres have
been disposed OF to four persons.
Does it mean TO say that the gov
eminent sold that much land to four
persons? Does ii mean to say that
four persons pre>empted or home
steaded that mut b land: Does the
publish the facts in the case?
Aga IN this morally cratic organ
talks of pre-cmpti' and homestead
laws passed by q Democratic Com
zress"
Thc facts are that the original pre-
smp.ion law passed in 1901 and |
which was used fer giving away the !
public lands. wholesale, has been
at not less than twenty
TWO different Cong essional sessions,
and the most important mndifica-
lions have been made siuce 1860.
So far as the Homestead law il
concerned, it WIS passed in 1860 by
4 vote of is to 81 in the house and
SO 10 2 II the senate, and was
vetoed By Buchanan the Democratic
president.
The bill, however, was again
brought up by its friends at various
sessions till Feb. %, 1862, it passed
the house by vote OF LOT to Is, and
on the following May 6, passed the
senate by a vote of 33 to Z, the seven
senators voting against it being
Bayard, Carlisle, Davis, Powell,
salisbury, Stark and Wiley, all
Democrats We trust enough of
the facts concerning the land BUSH
ness have been here given
TO satisfy the readers of
the Gazette that that sheet has been
attempting to mIslead by most gross
and outrageous statements, but
nevertheless, the course it has pur~
sued in this land matter, from the
time it sold put to the land thief
Reavis. up 10 the present date, has
been entirely consistent with it's
treachrous and misleading state
nents in its endeavor 10 again be-
come sufficiently "solid" with the
Democratic party to scoop it once
more to the tune of few NOR e
undreds of dellars.
If our contemporary had given
credit 10 the San Francisco Examiner
for The editorial 10 which we have
referred, we might have pointed our