Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884-11-04

III ANHH31o8 DMRA91MAAI.
Low ID wss 1aname1 aus1ng - ILL.,
~ sennrz 90 As1ssrssx n 80 L.
s<resfs ~ ~ 9a1Breaas ~ Axalnse
Tire Hnsesesss - 90 ResD1e.
A distinguished United SKATES Ssna-
ter. the Hon Jsnes n. Slater, IN IN
able and telling spsseh b ths Genatscn
the I7fh Of IAss April, els&riy exp0sed
The rank, shameful fsvorifisn shown
the great corporations In the Depart
msnt at Washington, and q the SANS
time pat In . STRONG light the riRid
accountability 20 which The poor ssttIer
i held. and. By comparison, tbs Rross
and gIzxing injusties done him. a pe-
rusaI Of this IL enough TO make the
blood Of an honorabls man indignantly
boil within him.
Senator Sister said:
These concessions of public lands 10
railroads have BEEN the fruitful source
81 xcaudals IN and out Of Congress;
tbey have brought distxust upon every
department. Of the Government charged
with the administration of the land
laws Of the country. So great has this
disfrust come 70 b that among the pec-
Ma who have been seeking homes upon
public lands il b boldly asserted that
he influences Of the railroad corpora
tioua dominate and control the rulings
az the Land Department. and Is IL 20
the shame and disoredft Of the country
that the accusation Is too well suD-
tanned By facts which are MOI 70 Be
denied. The rulings Of that Depart
ment have been % validating, 80 often
modified or reversed, and %
often made in the face Of well reCcR-
nized principles ct law, ~ TO SUGGEST
gross incompetence, or, what 10 wore,
and collusion.
The settled principles Of Law which
require public grants 10 be most stricfly
construed against the grantee have been
ignored In the constructions
Qiven these grants by the Land Depart
ment, a. Ia shown By numerous deci-
siona. j. w. LIE Barnes, one of the Law
clerks of the General Land Once, In his
testimony before the Senate Committee
on Public Lands in the Forty seventh
Congress. testifies as follows before that
committee:
O. Have the laws generally been lit
orally construed in favor Of the rail-
roads?
A. Yes, sir. The principle of law appli
cable to public grants-that they ought
TO be construed strictly against the
Rrantees-h has mot been observed, al
though the exceptions to the grant are
very strictly ruled against.
q. That is TO say, that the grants
have been construed very literally to
the grantee and against the settler?
A. Yes, sir.
La another part of his testimony this
witness says, ia speaking Of the GLASS of
GASES which come before the law clerks
for their examination, as follows:
q. Are these questions that 90 before
Won for adjudication such AZ are not sat
isfactory to the corporations interested
in them?
A. IL In the other way. The cases in
which the decisions that have been made
are satisfactory to the corporations are
the only ones that usually come before
the law clerks division.
Q. How is that?
A. In reviewing the Office decisions
the cases that may be thought to have
been erroneousiy decided according to
the views of the law division are usually
those where the decisions are favorable
70 the corporations. II is not usual
TO make mistakes in favor OF the set
tiers.
O. Il Ia In the revision Of this class of
work and the detection of what seems to
You 10 be injustice toward settlers that
the questions arisep
A. Yes, sir; and in the same way
where the interests OF the United States
are concerned.
Aud in speaking Of the way in which
contests between settlers and these COR
poratians are brought mp, heard and de-
and before whom determined.
this witness says:
q. Before what tribunal or what class
of minds are these questions heard in
the first instance?
A. Before the clerks having that mat
ter In charge.
Q. Before ordinary clerks?
A. Yes. sir.
Q. Do these counsel have access in
formally to these clerks in private CON-
versation and otherwise, and epdeayor
TO press their views upon these clerks
with such means as they see fit to exer-
else upon theml
A. think il has usually been the fact
that the views of railroad attorneys and
their construction of the law have been
fully impressed upon the minds of clerks
acting upon cases in which corporations
are interested. The regulations pro.
hibit conferences between attorneys and
clerks except upon permission. Such
regulations have not ALWAYS proved ef-
fective, although they are now more
strictly enforced than formerly. Attor-
neys have, however, full access to chiefs
Of division.
In his next answer this witness fur
Their says:
4. There are no formal hearings. The
pressure brought upon clerks is the
pressure Of the poger aad Influence of
great corporations. III case involving
railroad interests adverse to a settlers
right or 10 the public interest happens
to come to the attention of the Con-
missioner before final decision, the attor-
neys usually find 1t eat and interview
the Commissioner on the subject. They
also look very closely after eases that
may in the same manner come before
the law clerk for his opinion.
From these statements of this witness
is appears too plainly to be doubted that
the rulings and constructions of the
Land Department as between the land
grant corporations and settlers has been
steadily and almost uniformly in the
direction Of enlarging the rights Of
these corporations by ignoring the set
tied principles of Law that public grants
ought TO be strictly construed against
the grantee and giving these grants the
most liberal construction In favor of the
railroads, and at the same time restrict
ing by construction the exceptions and
limitations contained in these grants to
the narrowess limits possible. Ii is q
little remarkable, Mr.. President, that
most Of the mistakes in the rulings of
the subordinate clerks of the Depart
ment are made against the settler. The