The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1902-03-18

4 IL A6m4AR A@
of their town lots, or Offices, or
places of business we're to be con-
demned by the government and
taken for public use. / feel assured
that those whose OK is not gored are
prepared 80 bear with the greatest
philosophy and fortitude the mis-
fortunes of their country friends,
and / con slider it a very great mis-.
fortune indeed that certain land
owners r unable TO get up TO the
moral Gland of the Sky" in which
some of the Park promoters so hap
PLY dwell, and feel that il is sweet
and right to give up their homes for
their country, for the public good.
To prevent any misunderstanding I
had perhaps better say that / am not
speaking of the small home (Which
excites Senator Pritchard's tender
are and interest) but of any home
that will be practically destroyed
and ruined by condemnation pro
ceedings.
The advantages accruing TO the
public and future generations from
the establishment of a reservation
in the Carolina highlands" have
been painted out many times but
the rights of proprietors who have
invested their money in these "the
very best and richest hardwood for
ests of the United States II quote
the words of Seer etary WILSON, and
have made for themselves beautiful
and valuable homes with great ex-
pense and trouble the rights of this
class have, in a great measure been
passed over as unworthy of oonsid-
GRAFTON.
The fact that these mountains are
beautiful and will make a most ad-
mirable public playground has been
most clearly brought out but the
fact that my land and other mems
land on which have been spent
money and time, and care, and affec
tion-the fact, that our homes, our
private Fairgrounds, which we
bought in good faith and had hoped
TO leave to our children and not to
%posterity in general, are TO be taken
away from as against our wills and
strongest feelings of sediment and
association-this great and vital fact
has been passed as a thing of little
moment.
Is the condemnation of land within
the Park to be general and without
regard TO the fact that certain lands
may have too great a value for other
uses to justify their condemnation
for public service? Will no man in
the Park be allowed go own more
than two hundred acres no matter
what the circumstances may be?
The great reservations of the West
have been created out of lands that
in many instances were already
owned by the government and we're
practically uninhabited but this
scheme is unique inasmuch as the
very large area, which it is proposed
that the Federal Government shall
secure by condemnation, is in the
midst of an old and settled State,
and has been private property for a
great many years and is seems TO me
that this fact creates the necessity
fer special legislation, permitting
exemptions in special cases not men
toned in the act of cession.
Except in cases of absolute public
necessity the right of eminent do
main is utterly ~indefensible and
since the principal thing aimed at by
the Park bill Ia the preser walton of
the forests, why should those who
are using their forests intelligently
and managing them in practically
the same AMI that will be fol-
lowed by the government be dis
turbed in their possession? Would
not certain rules and regulations in
regard to the use and cutting of
timber accomplish every useful pur-
pose that would be effected by con-
domination? What will be the rights
of those who retain their holdings
within the Park? It has been repre-
sented that they have everything to
gain and nothing to lose, but it is of
course understood that this broad
statement must be taken with many
grains of allowance. The conditions
of life will necessarily be very ma
terially changed. What sacrifice will
those living within the Park he ce1Iad