A rapidly growing population is constantly demanding of the Government homes.

This unoccupied domain is the principal safeguard to shield the people from the hand of speculators. If this be exhausted or permitted to pass into the hands of the few, the power of the Government to lawfully enforce the principle of the equality of her citizens will be greatly impaired. The home of the citizen is the birthplace of patriotism. Upon this depends national strength, stability, and all permanent prosperity and contentment. That each should have a moderate competence is to be desired rather than the accumulation of even greater wealth in the hands of the few. In the disposal of the residue of the public domain many homes rather than large estates should be the object of the law and its administration.

CASH ENTRIES.

In 1820 the minimum price for agricultural lands fixed by law for cash entries, after an offering at public auction, was $1.25 an acre. Since that date the increase and cumulation of capital, as compared with the lands unsold, has much more than doubled.

By this mode of acquiring title the poor and those of moderate means, when in competition with the wealthy, can acquire but small amounts, while large quantities are liable to fall into the hands of single persons of wealth who, in the no distant future, may raise the price at will. To absolutely repeal this mode of sale would deny to the capitalist all opportunity to lawfully purchase. But an increase of minimum price at private cash entry would have a tendency to restrain the accumulation of large bodies in individual hands, increase the revenue of the Government from the lands thus sold, and under the beneficent influence of the pre-emption and homestead laws would do much towards the equality of distribution of the public domain among the people. I would therefore recommend an increase of the minimum price for sales at private cash entry.

MEXICAN LAND GRANTS.

A prolific source of fraud in the acquisition of the public domain is found in alleged Mexican land grants. Those which are real the Government is bound by its honor and integrity to respect. But there is reason to believe now that the fictitious largely outnumber the real, and in their support falsehood, rather than truth, is resorted to for their maintenance.

The lapse of time has, in many instances, induced a confusion of the imaginings of the witnesses with their recollections. In many others willful and corrupt perjury inspired by lust of gain are the only foundations of the grant. Such alleged grants, instead of decreasing in number, seem to be increasing, and those which have a real existence are falsely and unjustly enlarged in their boundaries. To terminate

these wrongs I recommend the enactment of a law barring the presentation of claims founded upon alleged Mexican land grants, after such reasonable time as Congress may deem best.

DESERT LANDS.

Good government seeks to secure to the citizen the undisturbed enjoyment of his natural rights. Among these is the enjoyment of his lawful acquisitions. Land, lawfully acquired, is among the most important of his possessions. Its security depends upon the certainty of its title; uncertainty, litigation, and contention depreciate its value, disturb the peace, waste the means and mar the prosperity of a community or nation. To insure certainty of title the land laws should be simple, few, and, as far as practicable, general in their character. Special and local laws, known to but few, diminish the merchantable value of land; for titles acquired under such laws are not widely known, and the range of competition on their sale is diminished and limited. Laws which in their administration are liable to abuses which exceed their probable utility, subject the Government to suspicion and often make it the instrument of knavery.

Laws exist on the statute-books which violate these principles and are objectionable. The desert-land acts are subject to this criticism. The first act on this subject was local-confined to a single county in California. By the act of the 3d of March, 1877, it was extended to the States of California, Oregon, and Nevada, and the Territories of Washington, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, New Mexico, and Dakota. Its original purpose was by irrigation to reclaim to use. fulness actual desert land. But as the law permitted an entry under these acts on unsurveyed lands, and allowed the entrymen to take up six hundred and forty acres, it has become a means in the hands of the dishonest to select from the public domain lands which are not really desert, and those not open to the public have been wrongfully obtained in larger amounts than public policy approves.

Besides, the original purpose of securing irrigation by individual enterprise has been substantially barren of good results. Fraudulent titles to good lands, rather than the restoration of desert lands, have been the result of these acts. I would, therefore, suggest their repeal.

TIMBER CULTURE.

The system of timber-culture acts, is, in substance, a subsidy paid in lands to encourage the planting and culture of timber. As a rule subsidies are very liable to abuse, and their effects in this case have not been an exception. In a few instances the system has produced its intended results, but in many more it seems to have been used as a fraudulent means of acquiring title to public lands. In many cases it has been resorted to only to hold the possession without any intent to acquire title if contest should be made.

This form of entry is thus used to obstruct the advance of legitimate settlement. The evils accruing from the timber-culture system and its administration have been proved to exceed the good derived and its repeal would be wise legislation.

TIMBER ACT OF THE 3D OF JUNE, 1878.

While the last acts considered ignored largely the principles of real progress in the making of homes, and attempted to accomplish beneficent results by subsidizing men whose own enterprise, inspired by their own interest, was thought not sufficient to incite them to properly provide for the future by irrigation and the growth of timber, the act of the 3d of June, 1878-applicable to New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Dakota, Idaho, and Montana-by its provisions ignored the im portance of the preservation of timber, which was the spontaneous product of the soil.

Its enactment was suggested, doubtless, by the fact that settlers in a new country, surrounded by wood-land, could not and would not suffer in a rigorous climate for want of fuel and shelter; that the necessary industries of a frontier would not submit to the pinchings of a famine in the midst of abundance. But while it was necessary to recognize the inevitable the recognition was not properly guarded, and waste and greedy speculation seem to have resulted from the law.

Any timber for the uses named in the statute may be cut, under its provisions, by any resident of the Territory on any mineral 1 inds of the Government in the Territory of his residence without compensation. Individual avarice and corporate greed, thus invited, with hasty eagerness, vie in accepting the bounty, and unless checked by v holesome modifications of the law, will soon cause all the mineral lands to be stripped of their forests. Railroads pass through many of the Territories; along their routes wealthy companies have been organized, mills erected, and the most valuable timber accessible is being rapidly cut off. That which is "every one's property is no one's care," and waste and extravagance are the natural consequence of negligent legis lation. I would earnestly commend to Congress such modifications of the law as will provide for the sale of timber on the mineral lands, for the necessary agricultural, mining, domestic, and industrial purposes of the several Territories in the act mentioned, with provisions for the definition of the boundaries of land off which such timber is sold, and the re-enactment of penalties for trespass on public lands, as to all timber cut, except in accordance with the law.

The fifth section of the act of the 3d of June, 1878, applicable to the States of Oregon and California, should be repealed, as it is a substantial invitation to trespass on the public timber land. The invitation has been accepted with alacrity, and under its influence the valuable forests of live-oak and redwood in these States are fast disappearing.

REPEAL OF RELINQUISHMENT ACT.

An act of the 22d of June, 1874, authorized a relinquishment by a railroad company of any lands within the limits of its grant to any settler who may have been allowed to make entry under the pre-emption or homestead laws and to select other land in lieu of that so relinquished.

This enactment, which was intended for the relief of settlers, is alleged to have been so perverted from its original purpose as to make its repeal desirable. Under the provisions of the act, in case the land covered by the grant in any portion of its course should be found to pass through barren and worthless land, the railroad company, by hav ing filings placed upon the barren sections, is empowered to relinquish these lands, and in lieu thereof select others that are good and valuable. This liability to abuse exceeds the probable utilities derived from this statute.

REPEAL OF DEPOSITS FOR SURVEYS.

On the 30th day of May, 1862, an act was passed authorizing survey of the public lands for the convenience of settlers who were willing to deposit the expense of the surveying. In 1871 the deposits made under the act of 1862 were authorized to be allowed as a credit on the purchase of lands so surveyed. In 1879 the certificates of deposits for surveys were made transferable and receivable in payment for public lands.

The system thus originated and developed is productive of evil. It puts it in the power of any alleged settler to cause survey of the public lands without consulting any other interest than his own. The officers of the Land Office, who are intrusted with the care and disposal of the public lands, and who are expected in every official act to consult the good of the whole public, in this are superseded by irresponsible claimants, whose interests may be, and in many instances are, antagonistic to the interests of the public. Lands which should be reserved and not subjected to sale are brought into market at the option of the alleged settler, and official responsibility is ignored.

The system gives birth to large amounts of transferable certificates, which are made receivable for any lands in the district, and enables the speculator who often furnishes the money for the deposit to the alleged settler to enter upon and select large amounts of land, in subversion of public policy and to the great detriment of the actual settler.

The scrip certificates under this system are rapidly accumulating. As shown by the report of the Commissioner of the General Land Office, the total deposits from 1862 till 1879, a period of seventeen years, were only $368,625.69.

Since 1879 to and including 1884, a period of five years, the deposits and certificates aggregate $6,335,325.25.

The legislation referred to is objectionable on an additional ground. As the amount of surveys under this system are controlled independently of the direction of the officers of the Land Office, their amount is undeterminable in advance, and the costs of the surveying charged against the Government is often in excess of the bond given by the surveyor for the faithful discharge of his duty, in which event the Government has no security for the actuality and accuracy of the work returned and paid for. Experience has indicated that much of the work reported was never actually done in the field, but was only platted and returned. This fraud subjects the Government to the expense of a resurvey and induces much confusion. I would respectfully recommend a repeal of this whole system of deposits for survey.

SALARIES SUBSTITUTED FOR FEES FOR OFFICERS OF THE LOCAL LAND OFFICES.

The local land offices are thronged with contests between contending claimants. The General Land Office is no less burdened with appeals resulting from contests. Each of these contests and appeals involves all the contention, heart-burning delay, and expense ordinarily incident to a lawsuit, with the additional expense occasioned by the necessity of either having the local attorneys journey to the capital, or the employment of additional attorneys near the General Land Office.

That there should be some contests and appeals is inevitable, but that there should be such accumulations of this character of work in the Department is harmful. Many of the contests and appeals are fictitious, many originated for delay, others as a fraudulent means to frighten a rightful claimant out of his claim by the prospective expense. A slight negligence of the local land officers gives occasion to many, a willful misentry to some, and encouragement to groundless claims by the local officers to others. As the greater part of the income of the local land officers is derived from fees to be paid them for their services rendered in these contests and for the testimony to be taken, the personal interest of the officer is promoted by the litigation, when his duty requires him to discourage it.

The public good demands that this antagonism between the pecuniary interest of the officer and his duty should be avoided. To remedy it I would respectfully suggest, for the consideration of Congress, the passing of an act providing an adequate salary as full compensation to the officers of the local land offices, payable out of the Treasury of the United States, and the fees to be collected on contests as now provided by law by the several offices be charged, all of which fees should be fully accounted for by the officers and paid into the Treasury. By such a law, harmony between the interest and the duty of the officer would be restored, much groundless and wrongful litigation would be avoided, and the present premium paid to the officer for his negligence or his wrongful encouragement of groundless or wrongful contests would be discontinued.