The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1897-04-24
Senator Pettigrew's Minority Re-
port Declares Them Unlawful.
EVIDENCES OF BOLD FRAUD
No Effort Ever Made by the Per-
rines to Comply With the Terms
of the Grant, But Quite the CoI-
trary-Action Of the Land Office
Beyond Comprehension.


majority report made by the committee
in the matter of the Perrinc land grants
in Florida. The investigation was held in
the closing days of the old Congress, and
Senator Pettigrew's minority report has
been delayed in preparation until now.
He asserts in the minority report that the
action taken in generating the land Of
flee from all allegations of irregularity in
the issuance of the Perrine claims is be-
yond comprehension. He says he does not
see how il was possible that a ma lority of
the committee should have reached any
such conclusion from the evidence Eub-
united to the committee at the hearings.
Senator Pettigrew asserts that the eSi
dence offered before the Public Lands
Committee in the last Congress demands
the immediate attention OF Congress He
says that no honest public officers could
have passed what were submitted as
proof of compliance with the demands Of
the terms of the grant. This Ferrinc case
has been frequently referred to in the
columns of The Times; and the testimony
taken last February by the Public Lands
Committee was at the time printed i'll
extenso in these columns
senator Petugrew's report is very
vigorous one. He says: After careful
consideration of all the evidence, the
minority are of opinion that the facts
in the case do not bear out the conclusions
drawn by the majority. but that, on the
contrary, no compliance on the part Of
the Perrine heirs with the provisions of
lent pretended compliance patents have
been secured to nearly $4,000 acres of
the public domain, in fraud of the rights
OF the people of the United states and
without any consideration whatever
The admitted ia cts in connection with this
grant are stated to be that July Z, 1888,
Congress passed an act granting to Dr.
Henry Perrine and his associates, in the
southern extremity of the peninsula Of
Florida, at a point south OF the twenty
sixth degree of north latitude, body Of
land six miles square, to be located within
two years from the date Of the grant,
and TO be surveyed under his direction
by the surveyor of Florida The title
passed TO Perrine for each section of SAID
land when really occupied by bona Tide
settlers actually engaged in the prepaga-
ton or cultivation OF valuable tropical
plants.
''Dr PerTine never entered upon the
tract, or in any way undertook to comply
with the conditions OF this grant On
February IS, 1871, Congress passed an
act granting to his widow and children
the same privileges with regard to
coTrpl yiug with the terms of said grant,
and extended the time for compliance TO
eight years after the time when the
present Indian war in Florida shall cease
and determine. There is no evidence 10
show that the widow and children OF DR..
Perrine ever made any effort whatever TO
comply with the terms or this grant Onthe
contrary, there is much evidence TO show
that they never made any effort ia that
direction. Several years ago some settlers
went upon these lands and claimed them
under the homestead law, and they have
remained and resided upon the lands TO
the present time, making valuable improve
ments thereon. The settlers applied TO
Congress to have the grant forfeited for
noncompliance with its conditions, aud to
allow them to enter the land under the
homestead law.
Iheiniprorements made by these settlers,
according % the evidence, are the only real,
valid, bona fideimprovements upon the tract
today"
Accompanying the report are extensive
extracts from the testimony carrying out
the view taken by the minority of the com
mittce The report is very long and volumi-
GUS 1t states that the homestead settlers
were the only people who had valuable inn
provements, and they cannot in any way
he considered as settlers under the Perrine
grant, for they did not so there for the
purpose of accomplishing that object.
The minority contends that there has been
no compliance whatever with the terms Of
the grant, hut, on the contrary, a fraudulent
effort, which finally succeeded, to secure
patents and not the equitable title to these
lands. tits the duty of the Congress OF the
United States to declare this grant for
feited and the duty of the executive de-
partment of the Government TO begin an
immediate action to cancel the patents
already issued and punish the offenders
The minority dissent from the opinion
of the majority that neither criticism
nor blame canproperly attachtothe officers
of the Government in approving and issu-
ing the patents; and that there does not APP
presentedto the committee any evidence of
either fraud or mistake OF fact or law"
In the opinion Of the minority, there is both
fraud and mistake of fact and law on the
part of the officers Of the government in
issuing these patents Protests had been
filed in the General Land office against
issuing these patents, and that there were
settlers upon these lands was well known TO
the officers of the land department. These
settlers protested that the grant should he
forfeited and that they should he allowed
to file their homestead entries. A bill TO
forfeit this grant was pending in Congress,
which fact was also well-known.
The fact that no effort had been made to
comply with the terms of this grant until
May or June, 1896, and that no successful
test of the growth OF tropical plants could
be made upon ground that had been un-
broken and uncultivated previous to that
time must have been known to the Off
GERS of the Government. The haste, also
with which the patents were issued, says
the minority report, indicates collision On
the part of the officers of the Government
in helping along this nefarious and fraud
ulent transaction.
Neither can the minority consent to the
statement of the majority that ''an the
facts tseing considered, the case of the heirs
OF DR.. Perrine, as presented to the com
mittee toy the testimony and the record,
hears every evidence of merit and good
faith On the contrary, the admitted
state CT facts, as cited in the ina iority re
pert, shows that, all the facts being con
sidered, the case of the heirs of Dr. Per
rine, as presented to the committee by the