Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1889-01-08
TEx4S NOT d DEFAUL TER.


BOSTON, MASS, Jan. 2, 1883.
Editor Fort Worth Gazette
DEAR SIR-The claim has frequently been
made to me by reputable citizens of this common
wealth that Texas has outstanding agreements to
furnish s. COG, 900 acres Of land on which she has
| defaulted. I claim it is an error. These gentle
men refer me TO recent publication of the APP
pletons Just out, entitled 1.-THE Artof Invest
| ing In this book, among other things, they
say:
''Texas has issued and now has outstanding
agreements to furnish land from her public do
main calling for about 900, 900 acres, an area
nearly three times the size of Connecticut, which
| she does not supply to the certificate holders.
| No charge has ever been made that the warrants
were illegally issued by the state, or improperly
obtained by those owning them. The state had
| the land when they were created and could,
without difficulty, have met her agreements.
| But after the warrants were out she proceeded to
give away such extensive areas for the building OF
a state house, for the endowment of universities,
for the pensiouing of Confederate soldiers, and
for other local purposes, that the holders of her
| land scrip can get no satisfaction. AS matters
stand, the state has the consideration for the
| land, but those who have her paper can get
| neither land nor money. And although this con-
| dition of things has existed for several years.
during which time there have been several ses-
sions of her legislature, Texas has taken steps
| to redress the wrong she has done, and there
seems to be very little desire the part of either
official citizen that reparation should be made,
or concern about the disgrace that attaches to
| them and to their state.''
! Now the above quotation is-or Is not true. In
any event, viii you kindly give your views on the
| matter through the columns of The GAZETTE?
The Appleton book tries TO prove that Texas is a
| defaulter. I have claimed in public utterances
that Texas never defaulted. Very respectfully,
THOMAS J. HURLEY.
Mr.. Hurley will not be required to re-
tract his claim; the state of Texas has
| since it became separate and indepen-
dent political power.
The publication of the Appletons perpe-
trates, either wantonly or ignorantly,
libel upon Texas. 1t is true that land
certificates have been Issued by the state
which are and must remain unsatisfied
| because there is no Incorporated pub
lie domain left upon which to locate
them. These, i'll the aggregate, call for
900 eco and S 900 600 acres Of land.
Over one-half of them were pure dona-
tons. Probably outstanding certificates
for as much as 3 200 900 of acres are held
by railroad companies or their assignees.
This is the only class of certificates on ac-
count of which it can be said that con-
sideraton was rendered to the state
To show that the state kept perfect
faith with the railroads it is only neces-
sary to refer to the constitutional provI-
sion under. which the railroad grants
were made. Section 3, article a, of the
present constitution reads as follows:
The legislature shall have no power to grant
any of the lands of this state to any railroad
company except upon the following restrictions
and conditions: ~ That there shall never be
granted to any such corporation more than six
teen sections (l0,24O acres) to the mile, and no
reservation of any part of the public domain for
the purpose of satisfying such grant shall ever
be made.
Another provision of the same consti-
tuition gave one-half the public domain
to the free school fund, to be set apart in
alternating sections, as private certif-
Gates were located. The holder of the
certificate was required under this pro-
vision to make a survey in checkerboard
fashion, the even numbered sections
going to the school fund and the odd
numbers to the owner of the certificate
The policy of making land grants to rail-
roads was continued until 1882 The first |
session of the legislature which met after |
it was aseertained that the public domain
was exhausted, repealed by act approved |
April %, 1882, the law providing for |
subsidy land grants in aid of internal inn |
provements.
1t happened, naturally enough, that |
before the repeal OF the law |
certificates had been issued in ex- !
cess of the lands subject to |
location Under the circumstances it
would have been impossible to have |
avoided such result. The exact amount |
of the public domain was unknown IN |
ehoate rights existed and were aeeumu-
lating under the homestead and pre- |
emption laws involving claims, the ag- |
gregate of which could not be determined |
at any precise date.
The claim that Texas is morally re- |
sponsible for the value of the lands that I
might have been located under these Ger
tificates ignores the plain terms of the /
law under which they were issued. The /
constitution, as quoted above, provided |
that no reservation should be made of
any part of the public domain to satisfy |
such grants. The law provided that
the certificates should be located on
s'any unappropriated public domain -
that the grantees could discover. The
exhaustion. of the public domain was
known TO the corporations seeking land
grants as soon as to the officials of the
state. They made the locations that ex-
hausted it, and when the railroads were
built. upon which the unsatisfied eertif-