The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-02-17

counties than it does for lands in Lin
coin and Pottawatomie counties, for lands
equally as good No reason can be given.
! The price of the lands in Oklahoma is
| purely an arbitrary matter. without any
reference to equity or fairness.
"Fourth-These laws are not even just
! and fair between individuals in the same
| county or district. In every county there
| is variety of lands. We have the rich
| valley lands. the level prairie lands, and
| the rough, broken, rocky lands. The
| government, however makes no distinc-
| ton. The rocky ciaina, in the eye Of the
| law. is worth as much as the rich bottom
| claim. Possibly these laws may be blind.
| II so, they were born that way. II these
lands must be paid for, they should have
| been appraised Every man should have
contributed in proportion to the value of
this land. Could not this government,
with all its force Of land inspectors and
special agents, have quickly appraised
these lands before they were opened?
Even without any appraisement the
lands could have been classified and the
price fixed according TO the class. These
laws are therefore unjust and inequit-
with poor clainl-that produces scantily
must pay as much as the settler with
a choice tract that brings forth abundant
ly. The law is no respecter of persons,
and in this case, is certainly no respec-
ter Of lands.
''Fifth-The law Is not equitable be-
tween the homesteader and the town lot
claimant. Since the first opening, in 1889,
prior to the time the lands were opened
to settlement, reservations were made for
county seat purposes. In every one Of
these towns there were many valuable
lots worth fully as much as the average
claim. The government charged nothing
extra for these lands. These lots did not
bring the government penny apiece.
The town lot claimants were required to
pay the assessment covering the expenses
Of the trustees for deciding the lots, but
not cent of this went to the govern
ment Why should the government give
to the business man a $1,000 business lot,
and a $500 residence lot, and compel the
farmer to pay $500 for a broken, rocky
quarter-section of land? II the oceu- /
pants Of these lands must pay to the
government for them, the town-Iot claim |
ants should pay their Just proportion. L
am not here advocating that the govern /
ment should charge for town lots. 1 be- /
lieve that the men who go into these /
new towns should have these lots free |
for the purpose CT business and resi- /
dence In vuiIding up new community, /
in enduring the extraordinary taxation /
necessary in such communities, and in :
many other ways, they earn these lots, (
and the government should continue to
make them free. This matter .is men
toned simply to show how inequitable, /
uneven, unfair and unjust are these laws,
under which the people have struggled
for their homes.
Il say nothing in the way of criticism,
in a personal or offensive sense. Circum-
stances, conditions and surroundings have
had much to do with the legislation per-
tanning to the lands in Oklahoma. Usu-
ally these bills have gone through as
riders to appropriation bills, during the
closing hours of congress. There was no
for discussion of the merits
of the provisions Certain influences
were at work to prevent the opening of
these lands under any conditions.
OUR POSITION.
''The congress of the United States
should know our position on this matter.
We are not candidates. We ask no spec
al privileges. We want no donations.
We seek no bounties. We plead not for
charity. We demand simple justice. We
ask that our homestead settlers shall
have their own. We demand that they
shall be allowed 70 retain that which
through industry, toll and sacrifice
hey have earned. We contend that they
shall have their homes upon precisely
he same terms and conditions granted to
settlers in all the great western and
states Of the union. We in
;iss that congress shall make the provis-
ons Of the general homestead act apph-
,able to all the public lands in Oklahoma.
We demand the repeal Of thht portion Of
he law which requires the settler to pay
he government for the land notwith-
standing the fact that he has earned his
home by five years of actual residence,
cultivation and Improvement.
TIE OLD POLICY.
THE United States has pursued two
distinct policies in regard to the disposal
# her public domain. The first began at
he inception of the government, and con-