Wichita eagle., 1888-02-18

that matter left to the discretion Of
the commissioners. and in general
give the commissioners more power.
The bill ought to be operative anyway
and then $1.25 per acre, think, is more
than has ever been paid before. Dir.
Springer Is inclined to agree with me,
but he has put it in the report of the
committee and dosen't feel like chang
ing anything in the bill Just now.
Senator ingalls, is quoted as saying
that in his Judgment the effect of the es-
Enlistment OF territorial government
for Oklahoma upon the prosperity OF
Kansas, was. matter of grave doubt,
but he had no objection to the measure,
provided it received the assent of the
Indians. and guaranteed them full COM
pensation for the lands relinquished by
them, to which they were entitled under
the treaties of 1866.
Congressman Morrill, said:
The opening of Oklahoma would be of
no real benefit to Kansas for a year or
two, for thousands will leave the state
and go over the border. But it is short
sighted policy to try to force people to
remain in Kansas or to settle in Kansas
alone. | believe Kansas is the greatest
oteaeS III lAiO ttllti SLt Stotllu O!i
her own merits; and | am heartily in
favor OF the general policy Of THROWN
open new land. The land is for the land
less and everybody who needs home
should have chance to get one. The
bill, think, will pass in some form, and
inside OF year 100000 people will proba-
bly, leave Kansas for the new territory.
and all the valuable quarter sections will
be taken mp. Thousands, too, will SO
through our state to settle in the
new country, but nothing can
stop its permanent growth.
Congressman Perkins expressed his
view substantially as follows:
l should say that the opening of Okla
hOma will not be an immediate benefi!
to the whole state. because of the large
exodus that would certainly take place;
still the general movement to give new
settlers chance is undoubtedly healthy
and Kansas cannot suffer permanently
Her towns will grow and her farms CON
tinue to be productive.
sit looks to me-" said Congressman
Peters,, as if the bill was good and the
prospects of its passage fair. The prin-
cipal cause of the opposition at home. as
l gather from numerous letters and petit
tons from all parts of my district, is
the fact that the crops have not been
large and consequently there would
not to sell to the new settlers. On the
other hand, l have had many sets of res
olutionS of the boards of trade and let
tiers favoring the opening; SO you see
public opinion is divided.
Congressman Ryan being asked how
the passage of the Springer bill would
affect Kansas replied:
'Beneticially. 1t is feared by some
that it will depopulate the western part
of the state. Why should it: The laws
and climate of western Kansas are as
good and probably better than those of
the Indian territory. Some will, of
course, move on, but others better able to
develop comfortable homes will take
their places. The loss of popu-
lation, if any, would be small
and temporary at most, and would be
more than compensated by the excel
lent additional market the territory
would afford. at least for time, for our
products. The opening of the territory
would give to western immigration "a
strong impulse and Kansas, the garden
of the west, would get the cream of it. :"
Congressman Funston thought even if
one hundred thousand people left Kan
sas in year, and even if some of the
eastern people passed over Kansas into
the new territory, Kansas would not suf-
fer permanently. Her growth was sure.
Congressman Anderson said he had
not read theSSpringer bill, but would be
governed by the Judgment of his col
leagues. Congressman Turner was not
interviewed