The Wellington enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 1867-188?, 1886-01-20
UNJUST RULINGS.
How the Land COmmissloner's Interpre-
tatldn OF the Homestead Law Operates
upon Western Settlers. s.

tatldn Of the Homestead Law Operates
upon Western Settlers.
Mr.. +. +. Smith, on old resident of
Dakota, whose practice before the land
Office of that Territory has enabled him
to become thoroughly conversant with
the subject, was called on by reporter
to obtain his opinion on the rulings of
Commissioner Sparks relating to Da-
kota.
sin the first place." said Mr.. Smith,
81 will call attention to his Homestead
pre-emption decision, in which he
holds that a person who has taken a
pre-emption can not afterwards COM
mute homestead. This decision has
been very harmful in its effects, and if
persisted in will seriously interfere with
settlers and their property interests.
The practice of the Land Department
for more than twenty years has been to
allow settler who has pre-empted one
hundred and sixty acres of land and
paid the government price for it to take
an additional one hundred and sixty
acres under the Homestead law. Under
an amendment of the Homestead law
the settlers heretofore havO been al
lowed, after six months residence and
improvement, to make proof of the
homestead the same as under the Pre-
emption law, instead of living out the
required period of five years. This
Mr.. Sparks says can no longer be done.
II his decision had reference only to
the future the consequences would not
be SO serious. But to give it a retro
active effect works great hardship in
many cases.
dakota has been Justly styled the
paradise of the poor. People with
ample means or with comfortable
homes in the East have not as rule
cared to incur the hardships and priva-
tions of a life on the bare prairie. Da-
kota has been largely populated by
people of small means, OF by persons
who have failed in business in the
East and seek q new start in life by
taking advantage of the Governments
bounty. Many who took homestead
in good faith, intending to comply
with the requirements of the Home
stead law, have found by committing
their homesteads they could dispose Of
them, and by investing the money thus
obtained in stock and necessary farm
ing tools and then filing on pre-emp-
tions could very materially advance
their interests and develop farms much
so ooner than they otherwise could have
done.
"Many have done this, and Sparks
ruling, il carried out, will deprive all
such of the pre-emption claim. In
mauy cases settlers who have resided
the required five years upon homestead
entries have been refused patents be-
cause their improvements are not such
as Mr.. Sparks imagines they should be.
Here again Mr.. Sparks loses sight of
the fact that our population is made
up Of people of small means, and that
it takes good deal of money and time
to cultivate and adorn with costly
buildings one hundred and sixty acres
OF land.
81 have resided at Huron over four
years, and in an extensive practice be-
fore the land Office assure you upon
my professional honor that / have
never known of fraudulent entry.
either undert the Presumption or Home
stead law. BY this / mean that have
never known an entry to be made
where there has not been degree of
compliance with the requirements of
those laws as to acts performed, backed
by an honest intention. In other
words, If they have not always CON-
piled with the strict letter of the law
they at least, so far as their means
would permit, have tried to comply
with its spirit.
at may be, and IL probably was, the
intention Of the commutation clause of
the act that il should be asubstitute for
the Presumption law; but laws are not
repealed by presumption, and the COM
mutation clause of the Homestead law
left the Presumption law precisely as it
had existed for thirty years. In all
fpirness and justice to the settler his
acts performed and property interests
acquired under the former interpreta-
ton Of the Homestead and Presumption
laws should remain inviolate II it is
intended that a man shall acquire but
one hundred and sixty acres of the
pnblic land let tho Presumption law be
repealed"
"You say you have known Of no
fraudulent entries under the Pre-emp-
ton or Homestead law; how about the
Timber-culture lawp"
THAT law was we'll intended, and
II faithfully carried out would be pro-
ductivc of good results. But in its OPP
Grafton and effect it is farce. Tree
claims are taken largely by non resi-
dents, and after being held for two or
three years are relinquished for a con-
sideration and again become part of
the public domain. There has doubt
less been much speculation and many
frauds under this law; it serves no good
purpose, and should be repealed.
ut has been the theory and practice
for years in the public-land States and
Territories that when final proof was
made 10 the satisfaction of the local
land officers the title of land was then
vested in the settler and he could do
with II as he chose. This view Is sus-
tanned by the United States Supreme
Court in various cases, and has never
been questioned until now.
"After the proof, the settler in many
cases has sold or mortgaged his land.
Sparks now holds that such conveyance
or incumbrance works forfeiture Of the
land This is the unkindest cut Of all,