Senate Document No. 188, Fifty-eighth Congress, second session. In this report reference was made to the magnitude of the problems and to the fact that it was not then practicable to reach definite conclusions on a number of the more intricate questions.

Since the time of making this first report many meetings of the Commission have been held and special topics have been assigned to experts for their detailed investigation. The members of the Commission have individually and collectively studied many of the subjects assigned to it. During the year 1904 each member spent much time upon the public lands, making personal inquiries into existing conditions and discussing public-land questions with public men and citizens generally.

The Commission now respectfully submits to you a further partial report.

There is in preparation an appendix containing special reports prepared for the Commission, upon which, in part, the conclusions here presented are based. The Commission desires to express to you its high appreciation of the valuable assistance and support it has received from officers of the General Land Office, the United States Geological Survey (especially the reclamation service), and the bureaus of Plant Industry and Forestry of the United States Department of Agriculture.

PROBLEMS PRESENTED.

The total area of the public lands of the United States, exclusive of Alaska, was 1,441,436,160 acres, of which 473,836,402 acres still remained on June 30, 1904. The latter figure, of nearly half a billion acres, while but a third of the original area, is still enormous. Even to see typical examples of these lands in each of the States or larger political divisions would require months of arduous travel. To obtain a full comprehension of all the physical conditions would require years of research. This fact is emphasized because it appears in the general discussion of public-land questions by hundreds or thousands of individuals that as a rule each man sees only certain phases of a group of problems and from his own view point brings argument to bear for or against any one conclusion. Specific cases are cited to show that certain land laws should be repealed or revised, or should be allowed to remain, and instances are given of the beneficial results of such action.

A correct decision must be based not upon individual cases but upon the broadest attainable knowledge of prevailing tendencies and results. In a hundred cases it may be possible to find 10 excellent illustrations of the beneficial workings of a law, and yet the remaining 90 cases show without doubt that the law on the whole is not good. It is only when large groups of facts are comprehended and analyzed that the real conditions appear.

ANTIQUATED LAND LAWS.

In our preceding report reference was made to the fact that the present land laws do not fit the conditions of the remaining public lands. Most of these laws and the departmental practices which have grown up under them were framed to suit the lands of the

humid region. It is evident that the decisions often contemplate conditions such as prevail in the Mississippi Valley and Middle West. Judging cases by arbitrary rules of evidence and considering only such facts as may be presented under these rules, there is much elementary and essential knowledge of which cognizance can not be

taken.

The changes we recommend in the land laws are required not only because some of the present laws are wholly unsuited to existing conditions, but also in part because some of these laws as originally drawn contemplated certain conditions or practices which have been gradually modified by various rulings or decisions. In short, the precedents established and which now have practically the force of law have so completely modified the apparent object of the original statute that the statute and the prevailing conditions appear to be wholly unconnected. The effect of laws passed to promote settlement is now not infrequently to prevent or retard it.

LAND CLASSIFICATIONS.

The agricultural possibilities of the remaining public lands are as yet almost unknown. Lands which a generation or even a decade ago were supposed to be valueless are now producing large crops, either with or without irrigation. This has been brought about in part by the introduction of new grains and other plants and new methods of farming and in part by denser population and improved systems of transportation. It is obvious that the first essential for putting the remaining public lands to their best use is to ascertain what that best use is by a preliminary study and classification of them, and to determine their probable future development by agriculture.

Until it can be definitely ascertained that any given area of the public lands is and in all probability forever will remain unsuited to agricultural development, the title to that land should remain in the General Government in trust for the future settler.

For example: The passage of the reclamation act (June 17, 1902) made certain the disposition to actual settlers of large areas of land which up to that time had been considered as valueless. Other areas, which are too high and barren to have notable value even for grazing, are now known to have importance in the future development of the country through their capacity to produce forest growth. The making of wells will give an added value to vast tracts of range lands for which the water supply is now scanty. In short, because of possible development, through irrigation, through the introduction of new plants and new methods of farming, through forest preservation, and grazing control, the remaining public lands have an inportance hitherto but dimly foreseen.

In view of these facts it is of the first importance to save the remaining public domain for actual home builders to the utmost limit of future possibilities and not to mortgage the future by any disposition of the public lands under which home making will not keep step with disposal. To that end your Commission recommends (see p. 12) a method of range control under which present resources may be used to the full without endangering future settlement.

After the agricultural possibilities of the public lands have been

ascertained with reasonable certainty, provision should be made for dividing them into areas sufficiently large to support a family, and no larger, and to permit settlement on such areas. It is obvious that any attempt to accomplish this end without a careful classification of the public lands must necessarily fail. Attempts of this kind are being made from time to time, and legislation of this character is now pending, modeled on the Nebraska 640-acre homestead law, which was passed as an experiment to meet a certain restricted local condition. This act (33 Stat., 547) permits the entry of 640-acre homesteads in the sand-hill region of that State. Whether in practice the operation of this law will result in putting any considerable number of settlers on the land is not yet determined.

Your Commission is of opinion, after careful consideration, that general provisions of this kind should not be extended until after thorough study of the public lands has been made in each particular case, because to do so controverts the fundamental principle of saving the public lands for the home maker. Each locality should be dealt with on its own merits. Even if it should ultimately appear that this law has worked beneficially in Nebraska it would by no means follow that such a law might be safely applied to other regions different in topography, soil, and climate. No arbitrary rule should be followed, but in each case the area of the homestead should be determined by the acreage which may be necessary to support a family upon the land, either by agriculture, or by grazing if agriculture is impracticable. Until such acreage is determined for each locality, any new general law providing a method of obtaining title to the public lands would, in the opinion of your Commission, be decidedly unsafe.

LIEU LANDS.

Careful study has been given by your Commission to the subject of forest-reserve lieu-land selections. These selections have given rise to great scandal, and have led to the acquisition by speculators of much valuable timber and agricultural land and its consolidation into large holdings. Furthermore, the money loss to the Government and the people from the selection of valuable lands in lieu of worthless areas has been very great. There has been no commensurate return in the way of increased settlement and business activity. Public opinion concerning lieu-land selections, by railroads in particular, has reached an acute stage. The situation is in urgent need of a remedy, and your Commission recommends the repeal of the laws providing for lieu-land selections.

A partial remedy by Executive action has already been applied by carefully locating the boundaries of new forest reserves, and thus limiting lieu-land selections to comparatively insignificant areas. The last annual message to Congress declares definitely that

The making of forest reserves within railroad and wagon-road land-grant limits will hereafter, as for the past three years, be so managed as to prevent the issue, under the act of June 4, 1897, of base for exchange or lieu selection (usually called scrip). In all cases where forest reserves within areas covered by land grants appear to be essential to the prosperity of settlers, miners, or others the Government lands within such proposed forest reserves will, as in the recent past, be withdrawn from sale or entry pending the completion of such negotiations with the owners of the land grants as will prevent the creation of so-called scrip.

There are now lands in private ownership within existing forest reserves, and similar lands must to a limited extent be included in new reserves. Therefore, a method is required by which the Government may obtain control of nonagricultural holdings within the boundaries of these reserves. Your Commission recommends the following flexible plan: Upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture, when the public interest so demands, the Secretary of the Interior should be authorized, in his discretion, to accept the relinquishment to the United States of any tract of land within a forest reserve covered by an unperfected bona fide claim lawfully initiated or by a patent, and to grant to the owner in lieu thereof a tract of unappropriated, vacant, surveyed, nonmineral public land in the same State or Territory and of approximately equal area and value as determined by an examination, report, and specific description by public surveys of both tracts, to be made on the ground by officials of the Government. When exchange under these conditions can not be effected, lands privately owned within forest reserves should be paid for in cases where the public interest requires that such lands should pass into public ownership. The Secretary of the Interior should be authorized to take the necessary proceedings as rapidly as the necessary funds are provided.

TIMBER AND STONE ACT.

The recommendations made for the repeal of the timber and stone act in the previous report are renewed and emphasized. Additional facts showing the destructive effect of this law have strengthened the belief of your Commission that on the whole its operation is decidedly harmful. This law has been made the vehicle for innumerable frauds, and the Government has lost and is still losing yearly vast sums of money through the sale of valuable timber lands to speculators, and hence indirectly to large corporations, at a price far below their actual value. From the passage of the act, June 3, 1878, to June 30, 1904, 55,372 claims for 7,596,078 acres of timber land were patented under its provisions, and on last date 7,644 claims for 1,108,380 acres were pending. Many transfers of land patented under this law are made immediately upon completion of title, often on the same day, to individuals and companies. In this way a monopoly of the timber supplies of the public-land States is being created by systematic collusion. Under the existing rules and practices of the courts it is difficult to prove this collusion, except in cases of open fraud, and it is therefore practically impossible to secure conviction. Furthermore, under bona fide compliance with_the_actual provisions of the law the effect is almost equally bad. The law itself is seriously defective.

It has been urged in behalf of this act that it enables poor men to enjoy the bounty of the Government by obtaining tracts of timber which they can afterwards sell with advantage. A careful study seems to show, on the contrary, that the original entrymen rarely realize more than ordinary wages for the time spent in making the entry and completing the transfer. The corporations which ultimately secure title unusually absorb by far the greater part of the profit.

In addition to the direct loss to the Government from the sale of the lands far below their real value, timber lands which should have

been preserved for the use of the people are withdrawn from such use, and the development of the country is retarded until the corporations which own the timber see fit to cut it. The bona fide settler who comes into a country, the timber resources of which have thus been absorbed, may be very seriously hampered by his inability to secure timber except from a foreign corporation. All of the timber land has often passed beyond his reach, and the development of his farm may be retarded and his expenses greatly increased because he can no longer obtain the necessary supplies of fuel, rails, posts, and lumber.

As in the case of other laws, instances of the beneficial operation of this act may be cited, but when it is considered from the point of view of the general interest of the public it becomes obvious that this law should be repealed.

SALE OF TIMBER ON THE PUBLIC LANDS.

Necessity for the enactment of a law authorizing the sale of timber on nonreserve public land is becoming more evident, and the recommendations made in the preceding report of this Commission are reiterated. For the best use of the public lands it is absolutely essential to hold public timber for sale when needed and in quantities necessitated by the continuous growth of prevailing industries. Provision should also be made for a limited free-use right by miners and actual settlers.

COMMUTATION CLAUSE OF THE HOMESTEAD ACT.

In the preceding report a statement was made that our investigations respecting the operations of the commutation clause of the homestead law were still in progress. We were not at that time prepared to recommend its repeal. Investigations carried on during the past year have convinced us that prompt action should be taken in this direction and that, in the interest of settlement, the commutation clause should be greatly modified.

A careful examination of the districts where the commutation clause is put to the most use shows that there has been a rapid increase of the use of this expedient for passing public lands into the hands of corporations or large landowners. The object of the homestead law was primarily to give to each citizen, the head of a family, an amount of land up to 160 acres, agricultural in character, so that homes would be created in the wilderness. The commutation clause, added at a later date, was undoubtedly intended to assist the honest settler, but like many other well-intended acts its original intent has been gradually perverted until now it is apparent that a great part of all commuted homesteads remain uninhabited. In other words, under the commutation clause the number of patents furnishes no index to the number of new homes.

To prove this statement it is only necessary to drive through a country where the commutation clause has been largely applied. Field after field is passed without a sign of permanent habitation or improvement other than fences. The homestead shanties of the commuters may be seen in various degrees of dilapidation, but they show no evidence of genuine occupation. They have never been in any sense homes.