The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-01-14

heSioux. the Chippewa, the Crow, the Nee
Perez. the Colville, and other Indian res
ervations have been acquired by the Gov
eminent, In round numbers, about e1,-
600, 900 acres. or this aggregate above
one-tbird, or 7,s19,O2e acres. has been
opened to settlers at only so cents an
acre, inc most Of the remainder at
sl.25 and e1.5O an acre, small frac-
tions OF excellent or more costly land be-
ing put at Sc. so and s3.75 an acre. The
total receipts OF the United States, should
the lands all be sold at the rates fixed by
law. is estimated by Commissioner LAMo-
REAUx at over $50. 900 900 on these north
ern lands, n at s35, 7s9, 263 on these and
the Oklahoma lands combined.
The argument for the pending bill Is that
II involves no new principle OF legislation,
since rs long ago as 1862 what was sub
stantially n free homestead law was passed,
and remains on the statute book, with some
alterations, to-day. In the case OF the re-
cent purchases OF Indian lands, however.
the settler enters under the homestead laws,
and in addition has to pay for his land after
all. In other words. now settlers are treated
worse than the pioneers Of former years.
As to the estimate OF loss to the Govern
ment by the bill, 1t is argued that 1t ought
to be reduced by a half. as much OF the land
will never bring the price fixed for it.
On the other hand, 1t is pointed out that
there is no parallel between the old lands to
which the Homestead law of 1862 applied
aud these new Indian lands. To say nothing
OF the original ownership OF the United
States, by REIMBURSEMENT Of State rights,
the lori purchase from France in
1903 cost only 3 3-5 cents per acre;
the purchase from Mexico, in 1s4s.
outside Of the Gadsden purchase, only AZ
cents per acre; even the purchase from
Spain, only Ill cents per acre. A House
report on this pending bill declares that
the entire public domain up to 1880 had
cost a. cents per acre" or course, then.
there Is no comparison between such lands
and those that were bought from the Indians
Mt 81 80 an acre or more, the authorization
Of these purchases being obtained from Con-
Rress on the express assurance that the mil
lions so expended would be more than made
up by the sale Of the lands to the settlers
who urged their purchase.
And, in fact, although il Is OF course true
that some land is so poor that 1t will not be
taken up at the price, yet other lands are 80
valuable that for weeks together the tracts
to be opened were lined with settlers eager
to rush in. Some of them found they had
made n good bargain by agreeing to pay
what they did; but, naturally, they would
now like to make a better one by paying
nothing ut all.
OF the So 52, 5i1 acres coded by the In
dians 2S, 81 ,632 nave been opened to set
Element, the remainder being reserved for
schools and so on. The total amount paid
for the cessions is s25, 2oi ,93s; while So
600, 600 must, it is thought, be added for
the Sioux trust fund, making s2s, a6l ,93s.
And this last sum does not include over
sig, 800, 900 more, to come out of receipts
from disposals OF the lands. Finally, II
from the fixed prices already spoken Of, ag-
gregating s35, 7S9, 263. is deducted $40
256, paid on the lands up to June 80, 1898,
the sum OF $35, 343,O 07 remains as the
possible net loss.
Summing up the whole matter, the main
argument for the bill is that homestead
settlers on these Indian lands ought to be
treated like homestead settlers on previously
acquired public lands. The main argument
against it is that this bill establishes the
wrong principle Of buying lands with the
money Of all the people in order to give
them to a few; and that it does this by
releasing those who wanted the lands, and
still want them. from their promises to pay