Year: 1860

cede what he could concede, and only insist on that without which he could not support it, and without reference to politics at al. It is very probable that 1t may not m, ct with the concurrence of some; but I will point out sincerely the points of difference that there are between this bill and the ori ginal homestead measure. When l have presented it, shall regret to think that there may be those who will not agree to this measure; yet 1 am satisfied that 1t Is the wisest and best bill we can pass, as to its main principles and policy. Of course, the details may be altered in some respects and wisely so, no doubt, for no man can make an entirely perfect measure.

 l will proceed to explain the differ ence between the House bill and the bill which is now reported, and which is before the Senate and first, in regard to the per sons who are to have the benefit of the act. The House bill conferred this benefit on all heads of families, and also on all other per sons over the age of twenty one years.-- This bill secures the land to none but the heads of families That is the first differ ence; and it is wide differencei in the class of persons who are to have the benefits of the bill l addressed question to the Com- missioner of the General Land Office, and from the information received from him, based on the actual experience of the de- partment under the pre-emption and dona- tion laws, it is found that this provision alone makes difference of about fifty per cent in the number of persons who will be en- titled to claim the benefits ofthe act 1know q, |, tbo of the other side of the House, if they are disposed to insist on all they want. At the same time 1 can say to them that it Is better that we test these matters as the bill stands, before an extreme step is attempted; and if 1t be afterwards determined to be proper that those who are not the headsW families ahodd come in, certainly the same power that does this now can bring forward another measure. and make that alteration. But at present the committee reject any class except those who are absolutely heads of families and citizens of the United States. The House bill grants the lands to heads of families and to all persons over twenty one years of age. There, the Senate will perceive is an important difference between the two propositions.

 In the next place, this bill requires the payment of twenty five cents per acre for the laud The House billrequires nothing, the House bill makes gratuitv. This bill, as presented to-day by the member of the committee who reported it, requires that the actual cost of the land shall be paid back to the government of the United States. That cost is estimated to be about twenty-five cents an acre. It IS reported, and in common circulation, that 1t Is thirty cents The Land Office itself does not say that it Is thirty cents, but that it is frac- tion under it. The Land Office makes mp its estimate to show the actual cost, and, in doing so, brings into the account many points that I think will not bear discus sion at all. I will say to the Senate frankly that I have no idea that the original cost of the public lands is twenty-five cents an acre; but, as showing can be made on a statement of the accounts which would put it a little beyond twenty five cents, and nearly up to thirty cents an acre, 1 am willing to concede that twenty five cents is about the cost; but 1 do not know that 1t may not be necessary to bring forward that account at some time before this bill is disposed of, and show the fact which I think can be fairly shown-that twenty-five cents is largely over the actual cost of the lands.

 In the next place, this bill requires five years actual residence, and the payment of the price peremptorily at the end of the five years, or else the party forfeits his rights under the provisions of this incep- tive homestead bill The House bill, on the contrary, requires five years of consecu- tive settlement, anl then gives two years more, making seven years before the party need take out a patent for the land-thus granting seven years possession; and during the last two years 1t does not require that he shall live on the land at all; nor does it require that he shall not sell and dispose of it to others. There Is a difference between five and seven years, and difference be- tween the acquisitions as to actual settle ment, whilst the object of the bill is, in fact, to confer benefits upon those who break the cane who enter the forest, who erect the first cabins and dig the first wells, who are the first that are there to meet the tra- veler on his way, and give him bread and drink.

 Next, the bill before the Senate confines the sale of the land--I call it sale and not gift when the full cost of the land is secured to the United States; do not call 1t home stead in the shape of gratuity--t the bill con- fines the homestead benefits to lands which have been already offered at public sale, and which are subject to sale at private entry. Thus, under the terms of the bill, none but those lands which have been first surveyed, and then offered at public sale to the high est bidder, will be subject to its provisions; and only after that can the parties come forward to avail themselves of it. That saves the public lands before they have been surveyed and offered for sale, from being, as 1t were, robbed, seized upon, emasculated of their real value, their greatest worth.

 This bill is confined to lands subject to sale at private entry. The House bill, on the contrary makes gift of the land, a gratuitv, and no return to the govern ment of any of the original cost, and makes that gratuity apply to all lands that are subject to pre-emption. That extends to all the lands that are open to settlement- ana the whole domain Is open to settle ment-and they can live there until the time whenit becomes liable to pre- -em ption; and they come in with their privileges be- fore it is offered for sale, and they prove up. and pay for 1t before the day of sale, and there is no limitation in regard to it. So the House bill extends the gift to all lands subject to pre-emption, and absolutely goes so far as to make it apply to the reserved alternate sections in the grants that we made for railroad purposes to the States. The Senate must see, with programme like chat of the Honse of Representatives, home steal bill, what the effect will be upon our past legislation. by which we had promised to return to ourselves all the benefits that we granted, by charging for the alternate sections an amount which would compen- sate for the grant that we made. The leg islation proposed by the House bill undoubt edly sacrifices those provisions which go- verned, and which were acknowledged as the consideration upon which railroad grants were made by Congress. This bill of the c, or,oh