| Show TUB TIIE LAND QUESTION THE decision rendered re by chief justice zane the other day on the matter pt of the application of the pr promontory OM antory stock company for an injunction to frelent prevent certain parties from crossing tracts of country purchased by it from the CP railway company in ia order to reach portions of the public domain is a reminder of what appears to have been a mistaken policy on the part of the government on the land question this is one of the most important subjects connected with the public welfare with the homestead law no 3 lust fault can be found it is constitutional tut ional in letter and spirit being based upon the theory that the people are the owners of the public domain doi naiB the preemption pre emption laws re probably in the same line out but not quite as closely the aim of these measures is to found and perpetuate a sound common wealth each citizen being accorded as near as practicable an equal opportunity to become the possessor of a portion of the soil with his fellow citi ens ans at large whenever this equality of opportunity Is broken the spirit if not the letter of the constitution is impinged 1 in n relation to the public domain the property properly of the people great care should oe be taken art to give any one class an advantage over another in the matter of becoming the proprietors that there has a lack of statesmanlike foresight in this regard is obvious the case which was recently decided by judge zane is only one among thousands of instances that exhibit this fact to a demonstration that the awarding of mammoth grants of land by the government to railroad corporations is wrong in principle ought to be clear enough if tor for no co other reason than that it breaks the equality that should be maintained among the people in re atlon to becoming the individual proprietors prie tors of that of which they are the owners in the aggregate carrying tills reasoning ning further the government is but an agency of the people and in that capacity it has haa the right to dispose of the territory and other property of the united states it is questionable that this right of congress extends to the creation of intermediate agencies of a private character between the government and the people yet that is precisely the case in relation to the enormous grants of land to railroad corporations it was not presumed that the latter would or could make individual use of the immense tracts of valuable realty conveyed to them in this way it was expected that they would dispose of them to otter parties Is it not then clear that congress has in this way surrendered to private corporations the agency tor for the disposal ot the public domain that properly only belonged to itself that is id certainly the practical effect of the tha land measures now being considered si etien a measure is wrong in inception and nature the evils that result are interminable so it appears in connection with this land grant business the corporations po rations ious to whom these immense properties have been conveyed feel under no obliga ions to consider consid erthe the popular welfare in the secondary disposal ordinary people cannot get within fifty miles so to speak of an opportunity to purchase it is much more convenient for the grantees granlees gran tees to dispose of the land kiich has been thrown into their laps to large purchasers rather than to those who wish to buy for the purpose of making luaina homes the consequence is that the property originally belon belonging glog to the people at large falls in ano 0 tile the hands of moneyed corporations hence cattle and land kings are manufactured and the extremes of wealth and poverty which have caused the fall of empires in the past are created by such a public policy the common people are measurably shut out from the benefits of what originally belonged to them in common with all others thus is a third agency for the disposal odthe of the soil established or worse still grinding and unmerciful monopolies by the least vestige of responsibility to the people are multiplied ti the wrongs resulting from a questionable tio land policy could be enumerated among these may be mentioned the numerous instances instance 9 aher in people who settled upon lands granted to corporations before the transfer trans fei s were made by the government have bei be n deprived of their homes because they through I 1 ignorance norance or comparative para tive poverty failed faced to carry a contest to the end the tact fact that congress interpolated provi provisions sious for the prote action of anch people Is not a sum dent cleat offset to the effect produced those intentionally beneficent portions of the law have proved notoriously insufficient to protect the weak against the strong and that is the highest function of government 0 others chers again have through ignorance settled upon grants subsequent to the action ot the government in favor of corporations and have been practically ruined and discouraged it may be argued on the other side that the railroads fire are a great factor in til the development dt of the country and corporations which undertake to build them should be substantially encouraged this is granted at once but it does not follow that the public aid rendered in that direction should be ot of such a nature as to produce evils that largely offset the public benefits pro deuced by the exis existence teace of the roads surely there are other methods by which assistance could be given in that line that would be much less hurtful to say the least especially when the country has a treasury so plethoric that the disposal of the national wealth has become a problem regarding which our statesmen are puzzling their br brains airis the making of enormous land grants to railroad corporations should have a complete extinguisher placed upon it it is a satisfaction to note a strong drift in that direction |
