Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1907-03-15

nioiC thdH lOV acres nor less tnan flVe
acres, he or they are occupying and are
desirous OF continuing to occupy, which
shall embrace all lands upon which such
occupant has made improvements, and
II it is his only home the said occupant
shall upon complying with the provi-
slons of this act be entitled to retain the
possession and occupancy of such lands
until the time of its being offered for
sale or lease as provided in this act upon
such terms as the board may provide"
Here is q striking evidence in the
laws OF the first State Legislature of
the complete diversity of policy
adopted by the State in the handling
of two different classes of it's State
lands. The squatter on tide-lands
was given the exclusive right to pur-
chase. The squatter on improved
agricultural lands was fired uncere-
moniously whenever sale or lease was
made. The tide lands were set aside
as the personal prerogative of prefer
ential purchasers, but the farming
fand was to be put up to the highest
bidder.
The tide-land grabbers had strong
combination, they were influential in
public life, they were represented in
the Legislature by elected members
and surrounded the Legislature with
their lobby to look after the passage
OF their measures.
The farmers titled their crops, vot-
ed the ticket, and saw the heritage
of their school children looted while
the tide-land grabbers participated
in the profits of the looting. And
while Legislatures have come and
gone and lobbyists have come and
gone and tide-land grabbers have
come and gone. the same spirit of
selfishness on the one hand and civic
Indifference on the other has come
down through all the history of the
land laws of the State to the present
day.
A gleam of almost human intelli-
gence and touch Of public indigna-
ton was thrown upon this situation
by the Populist Legislature of 1897,
which provided that tide-lands re-
naming unsold might ha leased
The Intention of this provision ap-
pears to have been good, but it was
perverted SO as to provide for thirty
year leases without any requirement
that the lands be improved, or limit
ing the price at which leased, or
providing for leasing them to the
highest bidder, so that it actually re-
suited in remedy being applied
which was worse than the disease.
Under it Robert Bridges, then Land
Commissioner, sought to preserve
the valuable tide-lands to the State
by leasing them for thirty-year per-
iods instead of selling them, and the
leases were gobbled up by speculat-
ors at lease prices, which in some in
stances will not in thirty years pay
for the bookkeeping cost of keeping
track of them. Under this law and
practice some two hundred valuable
State tide-land lots in the railroad
terminal area OF Seattle have been
leased at rentals ranging from $1.4
to $40 a year each, less than one
tenth, in some instances less than
one-hundredth of what they would
pay in taxes if privately owned.
AS an indication of the extent to
which the State has been buncOed
by the tide-land grabbers in the sale
of these valuable lands it is pertinent
to note that the total amount re-
ceived for all tide-lands sold in the
States history up to and including
1904 was but 81 $3.50, 1926, while last
year the Union Pacific Railroad pur-
chased q narrow ribbon of right-of-
way across former State tide-lands at
Seattle at q cost of approximately
Sc, 900, 600. On the basis of the
prices paid by the Union Pacific the
tide-lands in and about Seattle alone
Uf which tho State hos haan- -rnhhod
are already worth from $50, 600, 900
to $50, 600, 600.
Farming lands, on the other hand,
have been almost invariably sold at
auction to the highest bidder, and in
most instances under such circum-
stances that the bidding aroused has
been sufficiently spirited as to bring
the full value of the land to the
State. At times there have doubt
less been instances of cOllusion by
persons making the sales and at
others combinations among bidders,
but there is amble proof that the
State has been well paid for its farm
ing lands sold in the fact that the
average price received for such lands
during the 81 months prior to Jan.
II, 1906, was $21.1 Is per acre, while
in the leading agricultural counties
of Eastern Washington this average
was even higher. This is a higher
average price per acre than the
State received for it's third-class tide
lands, or for it's oyster-lands, many
tracts of which are worth from ST.
900 to %, 900 an acre.
The 1907 Legislature, like all OF
those which have preceded it, was be-
sieged with persons endeavoring to
induce it to pass still further laws
providing for the disposition of its