The Saline County journal. [volume] (Salina, Kan.) 1871-1893, 1886-10-21

Mr.. Anderson, OF Kansas, aAs do
not concur in the report Of The Commit
tee on the Public Lands on this prcpo-
sltiOn, desire 70 state very briefly the
reason why. TIE presentation Of the
case as made By the gentleman from
Illinois lMr. Paysonl Is certainly
strong. Il is this, that here is an 0p-
pOrtunity Of recovering and restoring
to the public domain 1000, 600 acres
which had been granted to these South
ern roads.
This bin as introduced in the House
embraced also the forfeiture Of the
grant to the Gulf and Ship Island road.
IL was reported By the Public Lands
Committee with an amendment that
the Gulf and Ship Island grant be ex-
cepted; and It viii be remembered that
the House refused to except that road. -
To a statement Of Mr.. Anderson.
Mr.. Payton on page e,s0l says, "The
gentleman from Kansas. intends, Of
course 10 be accurate" On the same
page Mr.. Anderson intimates that his
reason for dissenting is that II wished
the country to distinctly understand
the position in which the Senate, often
times places us on these forfeiture bills,
and on the same page the Record says:
Mr.. Anderson, Of Kansas. Il am, for
one, not ready to have a thumbserew
put upon me, by the Senate or any
conceivable form Of railroad power,
saying, Either you shall take what we
will give you or you shall have moth
lng.n Gentlemen say that half 8 loaf
is better than no bread. That depends
PRECISELY on whether you are hungry
or not.
Mr.. PaysOn. We are pretty hungry
Mr.. Anderson, Of Kansas. If you have
had full dinner a half a loaf is not
better than no bread"
After a rambling debate participant
ed in by several members, Mr.. PaysOn
in reference to these and the remarks
Of his colleague, Mr.. Adams, said:
''Mr. Payson. Does my colleague
think that by cOncurTing in this amend
ment this House, or either body. com
mits itself to any right of the Gulf
and Ship Island rOadg Not at all. The
grouping Of these eight railroads in
this bill was simply a matter Of con-
venience. ! may say to my colleague,
for his information, that the bill In its
present shape was reported as long ago
as the first session Of the FOrty-seyenth
Congress: and for i've years Mr.. Speak
er, we have been playing battledOOr
and shuttlecoek with this case-drst in
one house and then In the Other-to
get to this point. For the last Eve OrsiX
years we have been in Just this predi-
cament. That is all care TO say"
In reference to Mr.. AndersOn's
charge against the Senators the gentle
man from Mississippi
Mr.. Barksdale said. 81 understand
the gentleman Os course; but what /
meant to say is that his charge was too
sweeping, and entirely unWarranted.
The senators acted upon their own I'M
biased judgment, and ! simply mean
70 protest against the indiscriminent
cenSIre INDUCED in by the gentlemnt
from Kansas
In order to see how this opposition
Of Mr.. Anderson to the passage Of this
forfeiture bill was regarded, viii only
read from the speech Of Mr.. Cobb: Of
his earnestness and sincerity no doubts
can be entertained. lie favored the
passage Of the measure.
Mr.. Cobb: 1--WE have generally ex-
perienced this difficulty in passing
these land grant bills. l am not going
to make any reflections upon any one;
but here is the practical question which
is presented to the house; whether or
not we viii accept the Senate amend
ment to forfeit 1900, 900 acres Of land,
or whether We win reject the Senate
amendment which would forfeit all
but about a half million Of acres, and
thereby lose the Z, 1000, 900 acres which
would otherwise be restored to the
public domain by this bill. The
Senate passed as has been said this
amendment by Unamous vote. Every
particle of information that the
committee on PublieLands has upon
the subject is that the Senate viii
not agree to the forfeiture Of that
grant now. This bill with the Senate
amendment, leaves that forfeit
ure out. 1t proposes to forfeit the
other 1900, 600 acres, as l have said
and leaves the half-milliOn as the
subject Of an independent proposition,
and the committee on Public Lands
agreed TO the Senate amendment
which leaves the question practi-
cally this: shall we accept
the 10000 forfeiture and let the
other remain 10 be determined here
after or shall we by rejecting the SEN
ate amendment lose the WHOLE
After this discussion the measure
went to vote which stood 146 for, ls
against. Mr.. Anderson and other rail-
road men voting against the restora.
tionof Z ,0O0. 600 acresOf land TO the pub
liclands for use Of settlers. Another
land grant forfeiture bin came up be
fore the house the Mobile & Girard
road road grant It was reported BY Mr..