Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-03-14
NM I.nearned land GRANT Question.

The Unearned Land Grant QucstiOh'
Senator CAL. during the debate in the
Senate on Thursday, relative to the I'M
earned land grant Of Florida railroad
comuanv claimed that the action OF Sena-
tors Morgan and Plumb in criticising the
failure Of the Florida Senators to introduce
bill TO forfeit the land grant in question
was unjust.
The criticism may have been unjust in
SO far as it left the impression hat either
Of the Florida Senator'S wilfully neglected
the interests of their constituents in order
TO advance the interests of a railroad
company, but was it unjust from the
standpoint that Congressman are bound
to be on the lookout to protect the rights
Of the people, not only OF the whole eoun-
try but particularly Of their respective
Statess
From the statements made IN the ueOate
ait appears that there is a very largesnum-
Der Of settlers in Florida who are IN great
danger of losing their homes simply
because a railroad company has Teen
treated with a Iiberality for which there
Is no equity and perhaps no law. In 1886
a comnanv was granted large tracts Of
land on condition that it would build a
railroad within five years. A part Of the
road was built. but the greater part OF II
was rot. Later on these same lands
were turned over to the State by the
general government for internal improve
ment purposes, and the State extended
the time Of the company for building It's
line to ten years. At the end of the
! extension the road had not been built.
7 For fifteen years nothing was done to
wards complying with the conditions OF
tbe grant. At the end of that time q
| company, claiming to be the assignee OF
/ the original grantee, built the road and
/ claimed the land grant. In the mean
time. however, the land had risen in value
until il was worth many times what 1t
I was when the original grant was made.
/ Under the impression that the grant had
! baen forfeited. settlers occupied a great
/ deal of it. and made valuable improve
/ meats upon it. The lands Of this grant,
I together with the improvements Of the
/ settlers. are row offered for sale.
As far back as 1880 Senator Calls at
/ tentiou. as he admits, was directed TO the
condition Of this grant and the peril ofthe
I settlers upon IL. These petitions ought TO
/ have been a sufficient notice TO him that
/ there was something wrong, and ought TO
/ have caused him TO give the whole matter
T a thorough investigation. he does not
/ appear To have done anything beyond pre-
senting 10 Congress the petitions for re-
/ lief which the settlers sent TO him. What
/ he ought TO have done, OF at least what it
+ seems to Us that he ought to have done.
! VAS 10 have introduced a bill TO forfeit
/ the grant. Tie bill would have stopped
! the sale IL the lands, and brought the
whole matter before Congress for its
/ action.
There are d good many other instances
I throughout the country where the rights
+ Of settlers on land grants have been sac
rifeed On the demand Of railroad compa-
MES. The legality Of the transfer Of the
/ Backbone grant in Louisiana TO the New
/ Orleans Pacific road IS now being investi-
gated in the Senate. and Senator Teller,
+ who ordered the patents for this grant to
] be issued 10 that company on the day be-
/ fore be quittei the office of Secretary Of
/ the Interior. is having a rather unpleas-
ant time Of it in defending his action.
/ 1t seems strange that in a contest be-
/ tween a rich corporation and poor settlers
/ the settlers always get worsted. There
/ doesn't appear to be anybody to look after
/ the interests Of the settlers. Their repre-
/ sentatiyes in Washington are too often
/ connected with the corporations.
! Il would be interesting to know how
/ many members of the Senate there are
/ who are not largely interested in railroads
or have not been railroad attorneys. The
number must be very small. The readers
/ Of the public prints could not have failed
/ TO notice in the sketches of the new Sena-
| tors. published within the last few days,
! the frequency of the statement that the
/ subject Of the sketch had been a great
J railroad lawyer. 1t looks now as if the
Senate, in a few years, would be COM
/ posed almost wholly of mel devoted to
the interest of great railroad corpora
tons.
/ Senator Van WICK. during the debate
| Thursday. said that in only one instance
| had the Interior Department in a contest
| between settlers and railroads sided
/ with the settlers, and that was during
the administration Of the famous Michl-
gan politician, Zach Chandler, and yet,
| it IS not easy to see why the railroads
should always have triumphed.
The argument that railroad corpora
! tons which claim land grants like those
/ in Florida and louisiana Is that the grant
/ holds good until it is forfeited by special
act Of Congress; that a failure to comply
/ with the conditions OF the grant does not
| act as a forfeiture, and that if road is
built at any time before Congress declares
I the grant forfeited the railroad
! company is entitled to the
grant. This argument has been adopted
| bv the Interior Department. 1t remains
TO be seen whether it viii be regarded as
satisfactory by Secretary Lamar. His
/ promptness in ordering the patents to the
/ Backbone grant to be withheld seems to
! indicate that he intends to follow Zach
/ Chandier's ruling rather than the almost
unbrokem precedents of the Interior De-
| partment-