Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-07-06
The Issue.

wEArHEeFoRp, TEN, July 8, 1854.
To the Editor OF the Gazette.
The constitution of 1875 set apart to
the public free school fund all the al
ternate sections of land Heretofore or
thereafter surveyed, and provided that
it should be sold and the proceeds in
vested in certain designated securities.
The principal was made the perma-
nent school fund, while the interest is
required 10 be used in defraying the
annual expenses of the common
schools.
Undeniably the constitution clearly
and distinctly outlined the policy
which was to be adopted by the leg.
islature in the management of the
fund. In accepting and ratifying that
instrument, the people of the state
acted with reference to that distinctive
policy.
As the constitution covers the entire
subject, and clearly points out the
mode in which the fund should be
managed, 1t admits of some doubt at
least, whether the legislature can pro-
coed in any other than the manner
thus designated. 1t might with some
plausibilily be contended that there is
in the constitution an implied inhibi-
bition against the legislature proceed
ing in any other than the manner
therein designated.
But pretermitting any discussion as
to the power of the legislature in this
respect, the question recurs as to the
policy of leasing these lands.
Those who advocate the lease
system have attempted to cut
short all investigation and argument,
by the demagogue's cry, that this is a
sacred trust fund, 1.-THE children's
grass" which has neither reason nor
argument for its support.
Before the appropriation these lands
belonged to the people of the state, and
there has been no change in the own
ership by reason of that appropriations;
the lands still belong to the people, but
acting in their sovereign capacity they
have set apart these lands and limited
the uses to which they could be APP
piled. 1t is II mistake to suppose that
this appropriation constitutes an ire
vocable grant rs against the people of
the state, for acting in their sovereign
capacity they could supersede the con-
stitution and amend all statutes upon
that subject, and devote these lands to
whatever purpose the sovereign will
might direct. The appropriation was
not made to protect these lands as
against the people, but to protect them
against improvident legislation.
To that appropriation was appended,
as part of it, well defined policy to
be pursued in the management of the
fund. The sovereign will is voiced in
the language of the organic law, which
commands the lands to be sold, and
the proceeds invested In interest bear
ing securities. There Is not one word
In the constitution foreshadowlng this
lease system. Was the legislature ius-
titled in the assumption that the peo.
pie did not intend to confine 1t to the
policy fully and distinctly outlined in
the organic law? Who can say tn At If
II had been understood that thi, ratifi-
| cation OF the constitution carried
with it the lease p,licy.
majority of the people would
not have voted against the constitu-
ton" To secure q ratification by hold
Ing out to the people as an inducement
well-detined policy is, by all rules of
right and fair dealing among men. If
not in law, permanently ii < that
as the policy TO be pursued with refer
enee to the particular subject matter.
The advocates of the lease system
justify the moral fraud upon the neo.
Pile by claiming that it is a good specu.
lation. Here they have again erected
thelr superstructure upon the quick
sand; by that system they claim that
an annual revenue of $1,000 900 will
accrue to the school fund. The very
legislature that originated the lease
system, twelve months after il had
gone into operation, showed a want
OF confidence in that assumption Inv
increasing the school tax cents on the
hundred dollars worth ofproperty. Rut
assuming that the 80, 100000 acres Of
school land can be leased, aud that the
annual yield would be $1,000 OOU. as
claimed, then what about the speeuIa.
tion. That same legislature fixed the
minimum value according TO the class.
iication OF the land from So to IS nar
acre; Then, suppose the land was sold
~ ~ % per acre, that would give SIS
VV.oU, which invested In Securities
bearing interest at 5 per cent. Der an.
mum, would yield annually $3.50. 900.
besides the taxes that would accrne
upon the land.
AZ Is evident, therefore, if the
matter Is to be considered solely
Ia the light OF Speculation
that the advantage is with that noIicu
determined by the sovereign will =,
the people, and which has bssn
ignored by the legislature.
Another obvious advantage I'm favor
ol the constitutional policy, Ia that in
.ne nature OF things no permanent inn.
Provemen.s will be placed upon tba
leased lands, and those made by ths
tenant are removable at the end ~ ths
term, whereas If the lands are sold 90
directed by the constitution Wilt.
tue next decade vast wealth will Ia
added TO the taxable values of tbs
s.a'e, oy reason Of permanent and val.
uaoie improvements placed thereon
by the owners. n
l would like to pursue the question
lutther, but the length OF this rommu-
nication forbids. In my opinion H. Il
not any antagonism To Gov. Iraland
which prompts the people OF the Nor,h'
west to complain of the Democratio
party. But the lease system prssen,s
% them the alternative OF either Vol,
ng against the most vital Interests ~
heir section, or else TO abandon the
,hty. Il II the part OF wisdom
IMPLY 70 continue questionable nal,
~ 70 force such an alternative upon
ocd Democrats: For myself I shst,