St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-06-15
THE NORTHERN PACIFIC.
Debate i'm paae Senate ON the Forfeit-
Mre Bill.


ure BILL.
WASHINGTON, June lin the senate
the Northern Pacific forfeiture bill was
taken up. Mr.. Call advocated the propo-
sition to forfeit all lands not earned within
the time prescribed by congress.
Mr. Mitchell offered an amendment to ey-
clude from forfeiture the lands coterminus
with the completed portion of the Cascade
branch. Ii the company could not complete
the Cascade branch the farmers and producers
of the Pacific Northwest would have to re-
main at the mercy of the Oregon, Railway &
Navigation company. Mr.. Mitchell discussed
the purely legal aspect of the question of the
right OF the government to forfeit In this
discussion Mr.. George, Mr.. Eustis, Mr.. Van
Wyck and Mr.. Coke participated Mr.. Hearst
said that since the railroad company had
taken all the good land and had used il, they
should not be allowed to throw up the poor
land thus relieve themselves of their respons-
Utilities. There ought to be some way de-
vised to compel them to fulfill their
obligations and complete the road.
Mr.. Van Wyck, referring to the
argument of the company's friends that con-
gress has no right to forfeit these lands, said
that whenever a question of forfeiture came
before congress we were confronted with
novel and startling propositions. Our friends,
the senators from Oregon protested, but it
might be thought that they protested too
much. Mr.. Mitchell said he was not arguing
the matter from the c0mpany'S standpoint,
but the standpoint of the people of the sec
ton of country affected. Mr.. Van WICK said
we had built three lines to the Pacific, and all
the patriots who came to congress with
propositions to build those lines professed to
be actuated by desire to have ''competi-
tion,' first with the ocean line and then with
the railroad lines. The first thing the COM
panies did, however, was to
COMBINE WITH ONE ANOTHER
to destroy the railroad competitor and then
continue to buy up and corrupt the ocean
line. Mr.. Van Wyck held that If congress
had right to forfeit the land for a breach of
the conditions under which it was granted,
congress had right to date the forfeiture
from the date of the breach of conditions
only taking care of the rights of settlers.
He believed congress ought not to forfeit
everything which it had right to forfeit. He
referred ironically to the Understanding res
olutiOns' of both political parties passed
every four years about railroad forfeitures
and reseryIng the public domain for actual
settlers, and contrasted these resolutions
with what he declared to be the fact, that
neither party ever accomplished anything
There being difference of opinion in the SEN
ate as to what should be forfeited, Mr.. Van
Wyck would be prepared to take the largest
measure of forfeiture that the senate was
prepared to pass. Mr. Mcmillan said he
would vote against the amendment Of Mr..
Van Wyck for the reasons stated by MIR.
Sherman and others. He (Mr. McMillan) said
that the passage of that amendment would be
doing great njuStice to the people of Wash
ington Territory. MI. Brown said the govern
ment had inspected this road, and on the fav-
orable certificate OF the governments agents
each section was accepted as complete. ac-
cordng to the contract. Whether there was
a legal estoppel or not. it was very clear to
MIR. Browns mind that there was
AN EQUITABLE EsToPPEL.
The government gave no notice that it
would insist on forfeiture and the govern
ment accepted the road in sections as COM
pleted. The ninety-five uncompleted miles
of the Cascade grant constituted most i'm
portant section of the road whose completion
was of the utmost consequence to the people
of the Northwest. Mr.. George desired to
speak, but the hour being late, a suggestion
was made that he defer his speech till to-
morrow. A motion to go into executive ses-
sion was defeated by the Republicans, as was
also motion to adjourn. Mr.. George, there
fore, began his remarks, but had not pro-
ceeded far when another motion to go into
executive session was made, which met the
fate of the former. Several motions to adj
journ ali failed. Mr.. Edmunds suggested
that the senators who profeSSed the most
anxiety to have a forfeiture bill passed
seemed the most determined not TO come to
vote on it. Mr.. George said the criticism
could not apply to him. While proceeding
with his remarks, the senate being in great
confusion, Mr.. George remarked that if the
senators insisted on his proceeding with his
remarks at this late hour Che had a dozen
law books on his desk) he thought it due to
him that senators should listen. Any sena-
tor who did not wish to hear what Mr.. George
had to say could retire from the chamber.
After some further progress with his argu-
ment Mr.. George was relieved by motion to
adjourn, which was agreed to.