Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1917-08-06
LETTERS
Mn. MOORE ON THE LAND LAW
.ditor Honolulu star-Bulletin.

| burgh has emphauCally denied thai
the bill introduced in congress IN. b
1922 was fostered by the island sugar
| interests.
Now the essential point about this
bill is that the power OF the people
! TO compel the officials to homestead
government, as now contained in the
| Organic act, is 10 be taken away
| demonstrating is to be forced over II
| the lands not suited for cane, and the
cane lands are to be leased without
the homestead withdrawal clause, fol
| long terms to the plantations. The
bill may not provide Just that, but
that is its object The bill has the
same purpose as had senate resolu
! ton "a. which was defeated by the
house The sugar interests would gain
an immense advantage at the eX
pense Of the ultimate welfare Of Ha'
wall If this bill were TO become Law,
and the sugar men in the senate voted
solidly for it.
Remember these circumstances h.
p. l2N. Homestead Lease with Rem,
tai, which was introduced TO prevent
fake, demonstrating. encourage le-
gitimate demonstrating, secure a Citi-
zen rural population and provide rev
enue from the public land. was de-
feated by the senate without argu-
ment against it, but 10 make way for
senate resolution H. Although H. B.
12S was introduced early in the ses-
sion, remember how this senate res
OlutiOn il was sprung very late in the
session. Remember how the senate
killed H. B. "a, the farm loan act, the
companion bill to II. B. 1913, the two
Of which in operation would have Sc
cured legitimate demonstrating Of the
cane lands, and broken the hold Of
the sugar interests and the money
lenders on the small farmer and home
steader. Remember the announce
vacation trip" Remember that no
news OF this H. B. 4722 (senate reso-
luton IA under a new name) was sent
to the islands or allowed to get about
in the islands before the public hear
ing OF the committee on territories
at which the land commissioner ap'
peared.
submit that these facts, with all
the unsavory odor of the parliament
tary tactics used in the senate and
the secrecy surrounding the visit OF
the commissioner to Washington, con-
stituted appearances warranting what
l said. If our officials want no er-
honeous conclusions drawn, let them
be open and above board in their do
ings
But let US not allow the real is
sue to be overloaded by personal
matter. Put me down as anything
bad you please to call me, but do not
allow the following facts to be over
looked:
a. There is a move on foot to take
away from the people the power to
compel the homesteadinG OF the pub
lie land.
b. There is a move on foot 10 lease
the best. agricultural land in the ter
ritory, still owned by the government,
TO plantations for terms as long as 20
years, with no chance for any kind OF
even the best, to get
On that land for a generation.
V c. Those back of this movement,
whoever they are, are clouding the
real issue and befogging the public
BY advancing certain things that are
not true, in this connection, for ex.
ample:
1t is contended, was so stated by
he commissioner at Washington, that
agriculture must be prac
Used in order to have legitimate home.
steading-the implication being that
cane land is net suited for homestead
ng so well as land where miscellan-
eous crops could be grown. There is
lot a particle of substance in thai.
Under proper regulations and home. |
stealing conditions legitimate home |
stealing can be practised on cane |
and and on other land, and under
he present conditions and the lack |
If enforcement of what regulations |
we do have, fake demonstrating will |
De practised on both kinds. Any |
with sense will grow that
,rop which is most profitable, having |
lue regard to the permanent fertility
# his soil. The United States, through
What amounts to a sort of subsidy
he tariff-has made cane growing the
urest and most profitable crop here,
nd legitimate homesteaders have,
therefore,, a better chance on cane
and than on any other land
Again, it is contended that in order
o prevent fake homesteading &c must
ave q board to pass upon a1pli-
ants. Well, let US grant foy ;N~ sake
t the argument, that Ne sNHmi J. Thcy H
10 in New ZEALAND. l ha?!.H 90 ioink
hat if land were hCmeSt', "'' my H
nder the terms of H. t. y i.lrrp
would be no need of the lo.I.'. a
one but legitimate honest, d"rs
1ould take up the proposition What i
as that got to do with taking the
over to compel demonstrating of the
ublic land away from the people?
Dr, with leasing land irrevocably to
for a generation? We can
ave the board to pass upon appli-
ants, if it is thought to be a good
hing, without changing the Organic
ct.
Again, it is contended that we must
.ase the land irrevocably to the plan
atoms to get money to meet the
onded debt. There isn't a shadow
? truth in that contention. We can
the land and still derive
,venue from it. II. B. 12S provided
" that. But suppose the territory
Id not get a cent of revenue from
=