The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1893-04-13
THE SURVEYOR-GENERA APOL-
OGY.

eral Reichert has manifested an interest
N the effort made by the RECORD UNION
to prevent fraud in the exercise of the
lieu right which was wholly uncalled for
on the part of that officer. We have
given him every assurance that we cared
nothing whatever for individuals, for at
torneys, or public officers; that the OBJ
Ject of the exposures we sought to make
was simply to disclose to the California
public the fraudulent system whereby
land spectators are enabled to take the
lieu right which belongs to the actual
settler, and sell the land located thereby
located, and acquire the difference be-
tween the 81 25 per acre paid 10 the State
and the value of the land located by ex-
ercising lieu. This ought to be plain to
the meanest comprehension, and we call
Surveyor-General Reichart's attention to
The fact that it will be an exhibition of
barriers or obstacles to the exposure of
these frauds.
When this matter was first introduced to
the public attention, it was only after re-
peated rumors of the method by which
frauds were accomplished. We said
nothing about these rumors. We re-
specially called the attention of the Gov
ernor, the Attorney-General and the Sur
veyor-General to the statements that
were made. 1t was stated that large
number of applications affecting the
lands of the State were in the Surveyor
Generals safe and we asked the privilege
of publishing their contents. We were
absolutely refused, and the Surveyor
Generals ostentatious exhibition of ex-
hibiting these applications to the repre-
sentative of the Chronicle and the repre-
sentative of the RECoRD-UNIoN was a
mere pretense. He made no exhibition
whatever.
When the people who presented those
applications, or whatever they may be,
offered them. the Surveyor-General
should have accepted them as applica-
tons, and recorded them, charging the
fee. Declining to accept them as applica-
tons, he had no business in the world to
take them into his custody and place
them in a vault belonging to the State, re-
main in ignorance or supposed ignorance
of their contents, refuse to receive money
which would be the property of the State
in any event, and enter into an agreement
with attorneys who file them that their
contents should not be exposed to the
public.
Mr.. Reichert's loud exclamation, his
appeals to God, his reference to his long
service with the United States and the
State of California, and all things relating
to his personality, are wholly irrelevant.
The question at issue is one of public adj
ministration, and all persons interested.
be they high or low, are notified that the
whole matter will be pursued to an ulti-
exposed. If its exposure shall show that
Mr.. Reichert, or anybody else, has been
true to the duties and obligations i'm
posed upon them, so much the better for
them. If it shall prove otherwise, the
consequences are unavoidable. The
Chronicle correspondent states that Mr..
Reichert made a formal demand upon the
State Controller several weeks ago for an
investigation of his Office. Why was
such an official investigation necessary?
He is supposed to know his duty better
than others. He is well advanced in his
second term as Surveyor General Yet
when applications covering the entire
lieu right of the State are made to him.
they are placed in his safe, and under an
agreement between Mr.. Reichert and
those who placed them there, the public
are refused a knowledge of their con-
tents; and yet this very public is pro-
prietor of the lands to be affected by
them.
There is no point in the disparity of
statement as to the number of the appli-
cations; whether there are 500, or 5000, or
$4,000, is not material in this matter. The
Surveyor-General admits that there are
500. If they represent 800 acres each, they
cover 100000 acres; if they represent $40
acres each, they cover $4,000 acres. But
whatever acreage they cover they cannot
cover less than all the lieu right to which
the State has now become entitled. The
question then arises, what figure are they
to cut in the system? Here are old APP
plications seeking amendment that were
frauds in their inception and they remain
frauds to-day. If they allege false basis,
they are not applications at all; they were
void from the beginning. The question
we have asked the Surveyor eneral,
and ask him again, is in what respect do
the papers filed in his safe, and the con-
tents of which he guards with such jeal-
Gus care, affect the applications on file, if
they are.hereafter to be filed, and what is
the true reason for refusing them place
on the public records, where their true
meaning and intent might be known