, 1904-01-21
\ LAND LAWS.
Congressman F. W. Mondell Says There
is no Crying Need for a Radical Change.


in the land laws at this session of
Congress. For the first time in
our history we see an active and
well-organized lobby in Washing
ton supported almost entirely by
contributions of great corporate
landscrip owners. These unscrup-
ulous fellows have been industri-
ously and persistly magnifying
every irregularity and local abuse
Of our land laws by sending broad
cast the most grossly misleading
and untruthful statements as to
the volume and effect of the trans
fer of government lands into the
hands of private individuals The
most persistent of these represent
tations is regardingthe disposition
of lands under the timber and
stone act, the desert land act and
the communication clause of the
h'ihcotedu dSt. Iut VI
lands disposed of under these acts
the last few years has been gross
ly exaggerated. In the last five
years the government has parted
title to only 1858, $50 acres of land
under these laws.
Another argument used by the
lobbyists who. in the interest of
large corporate holders of land
and scrip, are DESTROYS of having
most of the public land laws re-
pealed is based on the hypothesis
that the present alleged rapid dis
posal of public lands will interfere
with the operations of the nation
al irrigation act. This plea rather
loses its force when they say that
the desert land act is the only law
compelling irrigation. 1t is adj
mitted even by those who favor
repeal that by it more lands have
been irrigated than under all the
other land laws combined. mas
much as lands taken under the
timber and stone act are unfit for
agriculture there remain only the
lands committed under the home
stead law within the arid region
as the area which, accepting the
most extreme statements of the
repealers, passes from public into
private ownership without being
reclaimed.
At the present time approx
mately 100000 acres of land are
reserved under the national irri-
CATION act. none of which a be
entered according to the laws in
question. In view of the under
taking by the reclamation service
of the Salt river irrigation enter
prises, covering land entirely in
private ownership, as one of the
first two projects inaugurated, it
appears that those in charge of
work under the national irrigation
act do not consider that the pass
ing of land into private ownership
seriously interferes with under
takings under the act. The fact
is that the three laws in question
furnish nearly four-ffths of the
entire reclamation fund and their
repeal would mean the side track
ing of the national irrigation law
after the S20.000,000 now in the
the treasury was exhausted. The
The desert land act properly adj
m~inisiered is the best land law on
the statute books. The final en-
tries under it amounted to only
264 ,593 acres in the last year out
eff the estimated $4,000 900 acres
of irrigahle lands on the public
domain. There can be no doubt
that in some localities the law has
been abused but this is a matter
for administrative not Legislative
action.
The Communication clause of the
homestead law is utilized to but a
limited extent in the strictly arid
portions of the country. It's prin-
cipal employment seems to have
been in the semi-arid region where
constant effort is being made to
make more productive the lands
hich in their natural state are of
but little value and which by rea-
son of lack of water supply cannot