Sturgis advertiser. (Sturgis, Dakota [S.D.]) 1887-1???, 1888-07-04
OUR WASHINGTON LETTER.


The land matters now pending before
congress in which the public is most in
terested are those relating to contem-
plated forfeitures of railroad grants and
the proposed changes in the presumption,
homestead and timber-cu1ture laws.
With respect to the former, both
houses desire to take some kind OF ac-
ton, but wide difference of opinion as
to the extent of forfeitures to be declared
is entertained by the members Of the
house OF representatives and senate, and
in fact by the several members of the re-
spective bodies.
The senate proposes to forfeit only
such lands as lie opposite the lines of
railroads not yet completed, permitting
the grantees to take all lands opposite
and coterminous with completed por-
tions. of the roads, whether the lines
were constructed prior to or after the ex-
piration of the periods prescribed by the
granting acts, for the completion Of the
same.
In the house the proposition to for
felt entire all railroad grants where the
whole lines were not constructed within
the statutory period, is very popular.
This is an extreme measure to waich
the assent of the senate, as now consti-
tuted, will not be given, and one which,
in the opinion of eminent lawyers, would
not be sustained by the courts, even if
enacted as law The reason for this
belief is that it would be an attempt to
disturb vested rights, and that the gov
eminent having failed to declare for
feitune Of grants at the expiration Of the
period fixed by law, within which the
lines should be completed, cannot take
advantage of the laehes of the grantees
after having secured the benefits which
it was expected would be derived from
the grants. In short, that the grants
and their acceptance constitute con-
tracts, binding alike upon both parties
the grantee (contractor) and the gov
eminent proprietor by which the
former undertook to perform certain
things within specified time for con-
sideration named. That the grantee,
having failed to perform his part within
the time, risked forfeiture OF his grant,
and the government might, at the time,
have declared a forfeiture and refused to
pay the consideration.
That the government having failed to
take advantage of the forfeiture clause in
the grant at the time the laches occurred,
and having permitted the grantee to
construct the line out of time, and hav-
ing accepted the same, has condoned the
fault or laches of the grantee and is
estopped from claiming reversion of
the lands by virtue of the forfeiture
clause in the grant.
Important changes in the redemption,
homestead and tiknber-culture laws are
contemplated by what is known as the
Holman bill, now pending before the
house. In fact it contains provisions
which, if enacted into law, will change,
more or less, all existing laws relating to
the disposal of public lands. It repeats
the presumption and timber-culture laws
and permits the disposal of agricultural
lands only under the homestead law, in
which law numerous changes are pro-
posed. It provides for the classification
of the public lands into class to be des-
ignated as agricultural, timber, mineral,
desert and reserved lands. and prescribes
methods of procedure to procure title to
each Of the classes.
The discussion OF the Mills tariff bill
and the consideration OF the appropria-
tions for the ensuing fiscal year viii oc-
cupy the remainder of the present SEES
sion of congress, and I learn from the
prominent members of both houses that
a railroad forfeiture bill and the Hol-
man bill cannot pass both houses before
next winter. People interested in the
presumption and timber culture laws
may rely on this information. G.
II may be interesting TO note upou
how slender a thread hangs the results
Of presidential elections. Indiana, Con-