Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-07-14
Concentration Of Land Ownership Is
Shown in Report by Commissioner Davis
Lsss than 1000 owners hold in fee over one.twentieth Of the land
area ~ entire United States. IN 900 timbered counties
they own one 70 venth Of the area.

depended on, together with the ma.
tiOnal forests, to supply future crops
of timber. Furthermore, some Of It
has valuable resources Of ores, oil,
gas, water power, etc.
THE second is the possibility that
these holdings, which will form q con
siderable proportion of the future
area used for agriculture In this u
try, may be retained under concen-
trated control. Formerly lumbermen
often got rid Of their cut-Over land
at nominal prices or let It 60 for
taxes. But as the agricultural posi-
bilities Of such land have become ali
parent this policy is being abandon
ed. A large part Of the present cut
over land is now of considerable, val
ue for tillage. That part Of the pres.
ent timber land which, when denud.
ed. will be arabic, will have a higher
and higher value as land the longer
the timber is kept uncut; because,
II the timber Is held for many years,
the land when finally denuded will be
in greater demand for agriculture.
Such a condition suggests the follow.
ing potential effects upon the public:
High prices for land sold TO settlers,
increase Of the tenantry system, or
direct farming by large corporations.
"The data obtained by the Bureau,
SO far as land is concerned, are not
sufficient for a study Of the land prob.
lem as o whole. They cover only one
class OF owners, the timber men, and
only part of the country. They
show conditions only at the time Of
the investigation, and do not show
whether the concentration is fncreas.
ing or decreasing. They. are not typi-
can of present conditions in agricnl-
tural communities, where the average
size holding is, of course, much small.
er. Though incomplete. these data
are nevertheless suggestive and wor.
thy of serious consideration.
Suits to Recover Grants.
Most of the land grants were made
on conditions, and it appears that. In
many cases not all of the conditions
were complied with. The government
is now attacking some. OF these grants
for alleged violation of the conditions
imposed. On July /, 1913. the de.
partment of justice obtained q decree
In the United States district court
for the District Of Oregon, adjudging
all the Southern Pacific company's
lands In Oregon ,about 2.4OO:OOO
acres, with 70,OOO,OOO,OOO feet of tim
,ber) to be forfeited to the United
States. The case is pending on ap-
peal.
Another very important suit has
been started against the Southern
Pacific company to establish the gov
ernment's title to extensive and i'm.
mensely valuable oil lands in Cali
.fornia,' claimed by that company
though mineral lands were specifi-
cally excluded from its grant. II the
contention of this suit Is established,
the same principle will be applicable
to large areas Of other grants as well.
The government is also suing for the
forfeiture Of about 100000 acres
(mostly timber land) owned by the
Oregon company and 9TH
ers.
The abuse Of the general land laws
In the past suggests that any lands
restored to the public domain by
these. or other, forfeiture suits should
not be disposed Of under the present
land laws. This principle has been
recognized in the act of August 20,
1912, which declares that the South.
ern Pacific lands in Oregon. if1event-
ually recovered, shall not be subject
to entry under any law Of the United
States. To allow such lands to be
taken up by private parties before
the revision Of the public land laws
has been completed would be to lose
much Of the public benefit from their