The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1893-04-07

crease The population and advance the
| development of the State.
Mr.. Plllsbury-Your idea was to at
tract population to the cheap land?
Mr.. Singer-I was called here that way.
am not very public-spirited man
only in small way. l am Mr.. Mills
attorney, and L came here rs his repre-
! sentative.
General Reichert-Instead of me as
Surveyor-General being criticised, l
thlnk L ought to be commended. This
indemnity remains in the hands of the
State. 1t is yet to be determined, and it
| Is tor that purpose we are holding this in
vestigation, and l am asking legal advice
what to do. Had [ any other interests,
this perhaps would have been used
months ago, but it has not yet been used,
ana 1t is still in the hands of the State.
think instead of being criticised l should
be commended.
MT. Slnger-My opinion is that when
an application was presented to you that
your advisers might enlighten you as to
lne law, but when it was presented it was
either filed or it was not.
General Reichert-Had I acted arbi-
trarily in this it would all have been gone
to-day. 1t is for these gentlemen to de-
termine what disposition shall be made,
and how this basis shall be made. II I
had desired to act arbitrarily it would
| have been gone months ago. L do not see
what L am going to do, and these gentle
! men will lear me out that l have never
spoken a single word to either of them as
to my opinion, what l desired, or what l
desired about the law in the case. Am l
right, Mr. Waters?
Mr.. WATERSHEDS.
General Keichert-Have L to you, Mr..
Pillsbury?
Mr. Pillsbury-No.
General Reichert-General Hart?
General Hart--Nnt CT,
General Reichert-I have not spoken a
word to either Of them as to what | desire
about it.
Mr.. Singer-If you may now under
their advice file those papers, you did in
TACT and in law file them when you laid
your hands upon them.
GEORGE E. BATES
Sald the first proposition was whether the
indemnity granted by the Act of 1851
should be availed OF by the State as mat
ter OF policy. He thought the reservation
within the sixteenth and thirty-siXth
sectlons were Tor watershed purposes,
and he regarded them as of very tritIing
value. If, therefore. the State can get
good lands in lieu thereof, it would be
GOOD proposition to take it and thus add
10 The taxable wealth of the State. Many
OF the lands are high in the mountains
ana not available for use. He had no
doubt as to the States right to accept
other lands within the reservation. I'm
DER the indemnity Act of Congress the
State may await her privilege of select
lug lands in lieu of the sixteenth and
thlrty-sixth sections.
Mr.. Bates said that IN his judgment the
State Surveyor-General, under Section
539o OF the Political Code, is made the
general agent of the State for the selec-
ton of indemnity lands and has the
option OF making selections within the
reservation.
j. w. Shanklin said the law originally
1883 made it compulsory for the Sur
Veyor-General to select lieu lands; the
present law leaves it optional with him.
Resuming, Mr.. Bates said that whether
it is the law or not, the proper policy was
for the SurVeyop-Generalt to go ahead and
make the selections, instead of waiting
for the termination of the grant, for he
did not question the Surveyor-G eneraPs
right to do so. If undesirable lands are
allowed to stand and better lands not Sc
lected therefor, the settlement of the
country is delayed just to that extent.
Commissioner Hart asked Mr.. Bates
what right the rveyor-General had to
permit the amendment of an application
of lieu lands. He replied that there was
no legal authority for the officer to do so,
but none is necessary.
In reply to questions by Commissioner
Waters, Mr.. Bates said the purpose of
amending an application was to allow the
applicant to be placed in possession of
lands in lieu of others on which he may
have filed but which were of no value to
the State, or the basis not good.
Commissioner Hart asked Mr.. Bates to
mention any law that gives the Surveyor
General the right to allow such amend
ments to applications. but Mr.. Bates adj
mitted he knew of none. OF course, no
amendment OF an application should be
oil n6
good basis, but he believed the time
would yet come when amendments
would be allowed ON applications made
upon
THE SWAMP BASIS.
Congress gave the swamp land grant
to California in 1850, and the school land
grant was made three years later and
provided certain indemnity therefor.
Other indemnities were provided from
time to time, the last being in February,
1891, which latter, he claimed, gives the
right to the State to select lands than
swamp which had been otherwise dis
posed off, in the meantime. The State
got its swamp land grant in trust for the
purposes of reclamation if that grant had
been subsequent to the school grant the
latter would have covered much of the
swamp land, and the State would have
got less of the latter.
In reply to statement by f. A. Hyde.
Commissioner Hart said that title to the
swamp lands rests in the State and the
latter can dispose of them.
Mr.. Bates, resumlng, said the law of
1891 gives the State indemnity for all
swamp land that had been lost,
Commissioner Hart ask ed if an amended
application were preferable to new APP
plication, and Mr.. Bates endeavored to
show why he thought it was. If an ap-
plicant were allowed time-say, a week
he could make new application.
Commissioner Hart asked if, in case a
man makes an application on void basis,
and while it was pending, some other
person should make an application
ON A SOUND BASIS,
On the same land, the former applicant
should be permitted to come in and, by
amending his application, ante-date the
other applicant who had applied on q
sound basis.
Mr.. Bates argued that the original APP
plicant should have the benefit OF the
sound basis.
f. w. Lake argued that when the Cen
eral Land Office decides that an appli-
cant's basis is not good. then the Sur
veyor-General has the right to make it
good by allowing the application to be so
amended as 10 include lieu land.
Commissioner Hart-l have been try
ing to find out where there is any law au-
thorizing any such action. II one can be
shown, then the whole case is settled.
GENERAL REICHERT's EXPLANATION.
General Reichert-An applicant comes
in with his application for 100 acres of
Government land, naming as a basis
swamp, what we believe the Government
ought to allow the State. We accent that
application in good faith, believing we
are entitled to the indemnity by reason
of the six teenth and thirty-sixth sections
being lost. The State is interested in
this. 1t accepts the 80 fee, we place it on
our records and send to the United States
Land Office our triplicate asking that We