Page images
PDF
EPUB

judgment, that the basis of participation in the 1862 grant is our representation at the time of admission into the Union, which, as has been explained to you, was five Members of the House and two Senators, making seven, or 210,000 acres of land.

Frankly, gentlemen of the committee, I do not feel that it is necessary for me to attempt to argue the question, because, as I say, it only depends on those two propositions, first, whether or not the State of Oklahoma is entitled to the grant, and, if so, upon what basis? If we can answer the first question affirmatively we have established the case, and the other part of it is easy, because Congress has repeatedly construed the act, and because I do not know of a State which has come into the Union and derived the benefit of this act since the 1866 act except upon the basis of her membership in Congress at the time of admission. Take the case of Colorado. Her membership was three. She received 90,000 acres. In that case is furnished a precedent for this sort of legislation. She accepted the benefits of this act prior to the act of Congress securing to her the grant of 1862. Bear in mind that she was admitted into the Union on March 3, 1875 (18 Stat., 474). She accepted the grant of 1862 and 1866 by an act approved January 27, 1879 (S. L., 1879, p. 174). Congress provided, at a later date, April 2, 1884 (23 Stat., 10), that the State in selecting her lands may select on the basis of membership in Congress, which was three, and provided further that she might select, instead of the minimum value land, the double minimum value land if she so chose, etc. There is a precedent for this sort of legislation.

There are two other precedents in my judgment, one in the case of West Virginia. She accepted the grant prior to the extending act of Congress, and the same is true of Arkansas. She accepted the grant on January 31, 1867 (S. L., 1866-67, p. 87).

Congress, by act of December 13, 1872 (17 Stat., 397), in part, used this language:

Whereas the State of Arkansas has complied with all the provisions and requirements of an act entitled “An act donating public lands to the several States and Territories which may provide colleges for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts, approved July 2, 1862, and other acts amendatory," etc., the Secretary of the Interior was authorized to issue her scrip calling for the number of acres to which she was entitled, based upon her representation in Congress.

Mr. TIMBERLAKE. For the reason that there were no public lands in Arkansas?

Mr. TILLMAN. In the same way we got this scrip and sold it for 80 cents on the dollar, I think.

Mr. TIMBERLAKE. You did not have any public lands?

Mr. TILLMAN. We had a vast amount.

Mr. FREEMAN. What States, if any, have received anything additional after the provisions of the enabling acts were carried out? Mr. TEEHEE. The States of West Virginia, Colorado, Nebraska, and Nevada.

Mr. FREEMAN. They came to the Government and asked for something after the provisions of the enabling acts were carried out?

Mr. TEEHEE. I beg your pardon, I did not quite understand you. Mr. FREEMAN. In Oklahoma, as I understand it, they settled everything except the provisions of the act of 1862, and they remained silent in regard to that?

Mr. TEEHEE. Yes, sir.

Mr. FREEMAN. Why did they not make their protest at that time? Mr. MCCLINTIC. If I may add, we did accept by joint resolution which was passed through our legislature, referring to the act of 1862 and 1866, believing that the Secretary of the Interior had the authority to designate this land and immediately give it to us, but the Secretary of the Interior has ruled that it would be necessary for us to come to Congress and secure a specific act.

Mr. TEEHEE. We believe that we are entitled to it, and consequently sought to get it through the department. Congress, as you know, selected the Department of the Interior for the purpose of carrying out its policies in dealing with the public lands. We think that the department should have followed the rule it followed in the case of Colorado and in the case of Nebraska. The department ruled at that time that the grant inured to the new State without further legislation on the part of Congress.

We frankly believe that that is what the department ought to have done, ought to have made the grant and issued to the State whatever lands might be in the State subject to entry under that act and then issued scrip. Of course, scrip necessarily would be used in the other States of the Union where lands might be subject to entry under the law as it exists.

Mr. MCCLINTIC. To make that clearer, the department uses this language:

The department, having concluded and decided that it can not, under existing law, recognize or satisfy the claim of the State

That is, they can not grant this particular land.

Mr. TIMBERLAKE. I do not see how they came to that conclusion. Mr. MCCLINTIC. They did, and that is the reason we went to the Secretary of the Interior first, but they say:

The matter of whether such claim is one that should be allowed or recognized is for the consideration of Congress. Should Congress determine that such a grant should be made to the State of Oklahoma, I believe it would be inadvisable to undertake to issue scrip therefor, but believe the State would secure more benefit, and both the United States and the State be involved in less expense, if the State were given $1.25 in cash for each acre of land to which Congress finds the -State entitled.

Mr. TIMBERLAKE. Under the provisions of the new bill you provide for the full amount to be paid in cash. It has been suggested here that you have 42,000 acres of Government land. Would the State be willing to take all of the land, in order to clear that up, and the balance in cash?

Mr. MCCLINTIC. I am sure that an arrangement of that kind would be satisfactory, but having talked to some of the officials of the department and also following suggestions made here, inasmuch as some of those tracts are 1 acre and 2 acres, small tracts, they thought that it would involve a great deal of trouble and expense. We have 42,177 acres in the State.

Mr. TIMBERLAKE. If the State was willing to do that, it could clear up all the public lands. In my judgment the State could do better than the National Government with those small isolated tracts, and it would be a mighty nice way to clear up the public lands.

Mr. MCCLINTIC. The reason the amended bill was presented is I thought that the department rather favored an appropriation to be

made on the basis of $1.25 an acre in a lump sum and settle this entire proposition with one legislative act. However, I do not think the members of the Oklahoma delegation would object if the committee thought best to follow the procedure you have enumerated. Mr. TIMBERLAKE. I think it would be received better in the House, because it would clear up all the public lands in the State.

Mr. TEEHEE. I want to say this in concluding my desultory remarks, that if, after this committee has read this entire record, the brief that was prepared in the former proceeding, the decision of the Secretary of the Interior, the brief showing the theory on which the other case was presented, and the decision showing the theory on which the case was decided, not denying the claim of the State, but merely holding that the acts of 1862 and 1866 were a pledge to the new States, dependent upon other legislation for its effectuation; if, after you have gone over the whole record, carefully reviewing in detail each act of Congress that deals with the grants to new States, you can reach any other conclusion than that we are entitled to this grant, then I frankly say to this committee that we ought not to have it. I feel like saying to you gentlemen that Oklahoma is not asking anything at the hands of Congress except what she believes she is entitled to under the law. We think the law gives this to her. We think the law was a conditional grant. We have accepted that grant. We have complied with every condition that was surrounded by the grant, in the first place, by the acts of Congress, and by force of this acceptance it has resolved itself into a solmen compact, we think, between the State and the Federal Government, and it only remains. now for the Federal Government to finally say, "You have complied with the requirements of this law; here is your property." I think this bill covers all that is necessary.

I thank you for your kind attention to my desultory remarks. Mr. MCCLINTIC. I would further suggest that about six months ago the Land Office gave notice to the people of Oklahoma in regard to the number of acres of public land yet remaining undisposed of and the Secretary, having that in mind, calls it to the attention of this committee in this language:

Doubtless some of this area has since been entered under the homstead law. It is also possible that some other tracts have become vacant through the relinquishment or cancellation of homestead entries, but it is clear that there is no public land in the State sufficient in area to satisfy the claim presented by the State. This would involve either permitting the State to select public lands in other States, or issuance of scrip, which could be located only on public lands subject to private entry.

By which he intends to convey to this committee the idea that it would be a pretty hard matter for us to determine, with any degree of accuracy, the exact number of acres now available, and following the suggestion he has made I have prepared an amended bill which simply takes care of the whole 210,000 acres of land on the basis of $1.25 an acre in order to keep from having controversies with people who are now owning the land and who have filed applications and proved the same up by making homestead entries. I am trying to get around any complications or any difficulties that might arise. At the same time, it seems satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior to handle the matter in this way.

(Thereupon the subcommittee adjourned.)

[ocr errors]
[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]
[graphic][subsumed][subsumed]
« PreviousContinue »