The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-12-14
STEVENSON SAYS
HIS BILL IS GOOD
Minnesota Congressman Defends
Extension Of Communication
Privilege on Reserves.
BY w, w, Jermano,

BY w. w. Jermane. IS
Washington, Dec. 14.-Representative
Steensrson maintains that the object he
seeks in urging the passage Of bill to
settlers on the Chippewa reserves in
Minnesota is not we'll understood, and
that attacks on 1T are due to such lack
Of understanding. In order to place
himself and his plans before the people
in the light Of his own, position he to-.
day dictated the following to T b g
j ournal:
The bill only extends the communication
clause to all homestead settlers on coded
Chippewa lands in Minnesota. Two
thirds. Of these lands subject to homestead
are already subject to communication by
In the called free homes law Of May
II, 1900, and no reason exists for not
treating them all alike In this respect.
osded Chippewa Lands.
The only coded Chippewa lands opened
prior to May IT,, 1900, were in the Red
Lake reservation. On May Is, 1896,
1.0s8.SS acres were opened, and on Dot.
8, 1898, 1857, 6s4 acres, making in all 1,4O6,-
682 acres to which both the free home
stead and communication laws apply. Since
May II, 1900, there have been three orders
opening land to settlement, as follows,
Dec. H. 1900, the four townships formerly
! w
Ing 1885 acres; Nov. TO-, 1903, 76S, 1877
acresi and June Is, 1904, 24s,731 acres,
making 1,O50,SS7 acres in all. Nearly all
Of the remaining coded lands are classified
, as "pine."
We have, therefore. this condition: The
settlers on 100000 acres have the option
Of living on their lands five years and
getting them free, or committing after
fourteen months residence and paying
$1.25 per acre for them. whereas the set
tiers on one million acres opened since
the date Of the free homestead law have
to live on their claims five years and pay
s1.25 per acre at the expiration of that
period.
Sees a Distinction.
Why this distinction? Does the fact
that the latter class Of settlers are upon
''opened' after May IT, 1900, afford any
reason for this inequality and discrimina,-
ton? or the lands to which the commu-
tation clause does not apply, 1913 sections
were formerly claimed as school sections,
and are located In eighty different town
ships, and are surrounded by lands Of the
other class. Because q settler happens to
locate on one Of these sections why should
he not have the same right to commute
that the settlers on the other thirty -four
| sections In the township have?
The reason advanced for the repeal OF
the communication clause-that it is an
aid to speculation in public lands-does
not apply to this class of lands. It has not
operated that way since May II, 1900,
when it was made applicable to 14OO. OOO
acres Of these coded agricultural lands,
and there is no reason to believe that it
will when applied to the remaining mil
| lion acres.
I should like to extend both the free
homestead and communication laws tt
these lands. but such bill cannot pass
| now It seems to me the least we can dc
to equalize conditions among the settlers
is to extend the right Of communication
| This would not only benefit the settlers
but also the Indians, who have vainly
waited, 10, these many years to get the
| money promised them for these lands
| Why not expedite the payment when VIC
will injure no one? ....-s