Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-07-26
THE PUBLIC LANDS.
LET the Lease System be Abolished and
Lands Held for Settlers,
A Solution of the Troublesome Question
offered as q Compromise,
GAixnsviLIE, TEN, July Is, 1881.

your valuable daily, my attention has
been attracted by the numerous arti.
Giles appearing in your columns touch
ing the policy of the state of Texas
with regard to the disposition to be
made of her public school lands. There
seems to be great diversity of opinion
upon this subject, the important divis-
ion Of opinion, however, being between
these who favor the lease system and
oppose free grass on the one hand and
those who favor free grass and oppose
the lease system on the other. AS be-
tween these two wide extremes of
opinion [ confess myself unable to
adopt fully the policy of either, while
admit that many sound arguments
are presented by the champions of
both.
cannot agree that it Is wise pol
icy to lease the public lands because /
believe such policy will retard the
settlement and consequently the
growth, progress and prosperity
of the state. Texas Is to-day
the central and most conspicu-
Gus figure of all those states and
territories into which the tide of i'm
migration has been and will continue
to be directed. Texas to-day stands
in the front rank, if she is not leading
this column of advancing states, the
progress of which has been so marvel
Gus in the past few years. This is the
proud attitude before the world which
Texas occupies to-day, and the one
which her citizens intend she shall
maintain; for if there is one feeling
which above all others does honor to
the heart of every patriotic Texan, it
is that feeling of state pride which is
deeply rooted in our hearts, which
causes us to oppose the division of the
state, and to look forward to the time
when Texas will be not only the first
state of the great West but the first
state of a greater Union. This is a
feeling common to all classes of our
people in whatever pursuit engaged.
Hence, the popular demand Is, MS ii
should be, for the adoption by the
state fsuch land policy as will best
encourage immigration to, and extend
actual settlement in every portion of
the broad domains. But immigrants,
to become settlers, must have ht mes.
That they may become permanent
citizens, is Is best they should
own their homes. To own them.
they must purchase either from the
state or from individuals. If from in
dividuals, then they must submit to
the terms of the seller both as 10 price
and the mode of payment. The prop
osition of the seller may be such as to !
price AS to discourage the immi-
grant, o. his terms of PAYMENT
may be such that the Immigrant
cannot meet them. Thwarted in
every other direction in obtaining a
home, the would-be settler here turns |
to the state and appeals to her to fur |
nish him home on reasonable terms.
fiat this point the state deserts him.
he returns to his former home, himself
discouraged and disguised, and dis
couraging and disgusting Others with
Texas. But, even now, az to price and
terms of payment for public lands. the
policy OF our state is liberal, not to
say generous, to the immigrant. Then
let the lease system be abolished, let
the whole unoccupied public domain
be kept open until sold, and let every
acre of 1t be subject to purchase by the
actual settler, and by him alone, and
thus secure to the Immigrant the largest
liberty of choice in the selection Of a
nome, and the most favorable terms in
It's purchase. This done and no man
need leave Texas because he is unable |
either To find home to his liking or
10 meet the terms of payment de-
manded In the sale of the same.
On the contrary, Mr.. Editor, l can |
not concur in opinion with those who
entertain that other extreme view
which opposes the lease system and
proposes TO substitute for il absolute
Tree grass. To this policy object, be-
cause TO me II seems policy which
Toes not deal Justly with all classes of
ne people in every portion of the state.
sui the inquiry arises, wherein is there
INJUSTICE IN this policy and what
iasses does 1t affect? | will answer
The common school system should and
must be maintained. The proper |
Of this system will re. 1
uire large expenditure of money 9
ach year. This money can be derived I
rom only two sources, so far as the |
ate's contribution TO the common L
moods is concerned. 1t will be de- I
Ved, In part, from the sale or lease of I
he lands belonging to the permanent i
'hool fund. Deducting the amount d
derived the deficiency, whatever IT O
Jay be, must come from the special v
* levied by the state on all PROPERTY b
common school purpo ,es. But. If n
e lease system is Abandoned. The n
come from leases will he Lost "
I'd the amount derived o
lnually from the income '
the permanent school fund will he :,
unihisheu. This will necessarily n
i've na,, a larger amount to be raised by q
Aa.ion on all property In order to y
n lhe common schools. In p
uei words, the effect would be to re. +,
,e hlgher rate of taxation by the m
S o ror common school purposes. n,
oW wiz this operate? viii 1t not he n,
secure Tree grass to the stock men at h,
9 expense OF all other tax payers In n
. s,a.e! Would 1t not be favorlnp h,
4 = eiass ana expressing all Others? ia
nv, INV our business men and farmers re
no, nave little or no interest in live In
'ck ana derive little or no benefit m,
~; lree grass. Would it not be al,
,ying on these men tribute for the Ia
h ~ OF the stock grower? Would s a.
y, ~, u io,icy be just? Would II be II
ddl'aole? Can the state. which shonld sh
ueavor 70 DO equal and exact jus, Ice sn
sweeh all her citizens, afford IN sss
I ept such a policy? Will she do it? p" ~
AZ between the lease system on tho ~,
nand ana absolute free grass on the ~,
Ter beg to suggest wig 80
A COMPROMISE ~.
,,ou seems 70 me more nearly In nh. ~
oA'nate, ut the same tiins tho W
nor ,;ey Ior tne state and the most co