The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1908-10-13
HOW THE LAND LAW
MIGHT Be IMPROVED

Editor Advertiser.-The practical ap-
plieation of law is quite sure to re
veal its defects. and so has the aPpli-
cation of the land law. The intent of
that law. the exclusion of mere speeula-
tors. was good; its purpose of Provld-
inc for bona fide settlers was so Tar
gur7. but il totally failed to take cog
nizance of the man who wants piece
of land that he can call his own, wants
enough to eventually produce salts
factory income. and wants to secure 1t
while it is to be had, but who, for
various reasons. is not able to live upon
it. 1t failed to take cognizance of the
man of limited means whose employ
ment is too far away to permit of the
daily trips to and fro, and who with
out that employment would not be able
to maintain himself, much less develop
the land. But why should such man
be denied the privilege of satisfying
the laudable desire to own that piece
of land2 or why should he be denied
the pleasure of looking forward TO the
time when the picture framed in his
mind might become gratifying realltyf
Why should he be denied the privilege
of buying for prospective as well as
for immediate use, so soon as the con-
ditions favorable to that use can be
brought about9
Notwithstanding the views to the
contrary held by many, it would seem
that the law should be liberal enough
and broad enough and elastic enough
to accommodate such cases as are above
indicated, and that it should not be
made law of encouragement by i'm
posing the burden of a long term of
actual residence, as a condition for Sc
curing the fee simple title. Indeed, it
is somewhat amazing that a govern
ment whose professed policy is the
populating of these Islands with Ameri-
can farmers should reduce the home
stead allotment to so insignificant an
area as twenty acres, and require
residence for so long a term as ten
years for the requirement of clear
title. AS a proposition for the acquire
ment of competence with freedom of
movement, the foregone conclusion may
very we'll be ventured that no Ameri-
can of any ambition for activities and
emoluments outside the limits of
twenty-acre lot, would for a moment
consiaer ii.
The speculative element could surely
be very well guarded against by re-
curing the oath recently quoted by the
Advertiser, supplemented by a forfeit
ure clause in the event of the develop.
ment of any fraudulent act. But that
purchaser should not be allowed to
sell. to one who has not already applied
for or secured other land, when change
of circumstances have made 1t desir-
able or necessary to sell, would be a
palpable injustice. The suggestion is
here offered, that residence within the
district should satisfy the requirements
of the residential clause; and the oath
that the applicant has not within the
Territory the amount of land allowed
him by law, and that he is a bona fide
applicant for himself, not for another,
should secure the desired protection
against land grabbeTs. The Federal law
permits a homesteader to take up loo
acres. The Territorial law allows 100
acres of first class agricultural land, and
an applicant should be permitted to
take up all that the law allows, under
the usual conditions relative to i'm
provements. Furthermore, he should be
permitted to apnlv in person. That he
should be allowed to take only so much
as he may be able to cultivate with his
own pair of hands, would be an I'M
restraint on laudable ambi-
ti0n and ability. Far dealing on the
usual business basis would seem to re-
quire the application of the rule: first |
come, first served, and where no mani |
fest wrong would result, the applicant |
might be allowed to make his own Sc |
lection; the title to be securable in three /
years. The present law amended on |
the lines above suggested ought to be
practicable and satisfactory. The com
missioners of inquiry did not, so far
A. known to the writer, honor this dis.
trict with a call.
KOhala, Oct 9, 1908. E. b.