Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-07-14

large results in this direction viii
hardly be denied. and that the fencing
In Of large bodies Of land, to the us'
and occupation Of the wealthy ant
the exclusion Of the poor, i
barrier TO these, Is equally
incapable Of denial in the face OF suct
testimony as that given by Gov. Ire
land, and, in fact, by every member o
the land board. Figures based on The
record have been given to show the
actual financial benefits to be derived
from the lease; now II is proposed Il
contrast these with the probable J,
suits Of settlement. Look at the bal
ance sheet, which shows annual in
come from the settler, leaving un
touched the principal.
To interest on 81 ,eso. purchase money OF
one section, at s per cent............... Si q
To taxes on 81 80 At say % cents ...... 81
TO taxes on si.Oe0 improvements ...... 8 O
Annual Income per section sold-...,.. SIS a
INST income II leased 81 D
-
Difference In favor OF sale. ......... ia y
II will be noted that TO secure a rev.
enue Of 81 900, 900 would only require
the sale OF s,497, $50 acres, which, I'M
der efficient management and wise
legislation, could easily be done in the
margin of four and one-half years, al
lotted TO swell the lease revenues tn
that sum. Another great point of diff
ference is that the settler goes on pay
ing and increasing his taxes forever,
while the pGstureman, even If he
should be forced to give up his lease at
the expiration of six years, turns
it over to the state untaXable
and unremunerative. Another signif-
icant fact is that, while the
lease men are themselves anxious for
short leases, yet those made in the
last year of the term necessitated to
swell the income to their own figures,
would only expire at the end of six
years, or nearly eleven years in the
future, while TO retain the benefits Of
the system for any considerable time
would require the renewal of other
contacts which expire in the mean
time, thus practically perpetuating
the system for an indefinite period
But beyond all this and beyond the
revenues TO be derived from either
lease or sale, there exists a higher
bic person will deny that the de
velopnient of the agricultural re-
sources of the school lands will
secure an immense increment in
their values. 1t is hardly Wis
ionary TO hope that in five years If
properly developed and advertised
instead of being almost unmarketable
at two dollars an acre, they would find
ready sale at five dollars all acre. The
public lands of Kansas and other
Northwestern states, which are not
one whit richer or more desirable,
command IA much, and no valid
reason can be urged why our lands
should not be sold at those figures.
Concede, however, that the increase
would only amount to one dollar an
acre, which under system of settle
menti is vastly too low, and yet you have
sum equivalent to two and one-hali
times the lease revenues for the same
term, leaving out of the calculation
entirely taxes TO be derived from
lands and improvements acquired in
the meantime.
These facts are potent and cannot be
gainsaid. They show that from
whatever point the lease system is
viewed 1t is pernicious, an incubus
alike upon the settler and the school
fund. They also indicate that the
true method of assistance to the school,
Is the adoption of u policy looking 1,
the speedy settlement of the schoo
lands. Whatever iuterferes in tn,
slightest degree with the accomplish
ment of such grand result is wron,
in principle and should meet IN
hearty condemnation of all thinkip,
people.