OCR Text |
Show GENERAL GRANTS TO STATES 325 Swamplands" 1 2 3 Area reported Area selected Area patented in 1849 to 1860 to 1966 Ohio____________________________ 303,329 54,438 26,372 Indiana___......_____.......____ 981,682 1,354,732 1,259,271 Illinois______________....._______ 1,833,412 3,259,852 1,460,164 Missouri_________________________ 1,517,827 4,409,492 3,432,521 Alabama_________________________ 436,450 2,595 441,666 Mississippi_______________________ 2,239,987 3,070,645 3,348,013 Louisiana__________________...... 2,266,987 11,310,103 9,584,412 Michigan________________________ 4,544,189 7,273,724 5,680,312 Arkansas_________________________ 4,807,673 8,652,112 7,686,575 Wisconsin________________________ 1,259,269 3,449,238 3,361,283 Iowa____________________________ 33,813 2,579,976 1,196,392 Florida__________________________ 562,170 11,790,637 20,326,708 California________________________ _________ _________ 2,193,965 Minnesota_______________________ _________ _________ 4,706,591 Oregon__________________________ _________ _________ 286,108 Total________________________ 20,785,336 57,127,544 64,910,353 a California, Minnesota, and Oregon were not included in the estimate of 1849. Probably not much more than half of Florida was surveyed at that time. Column 1 is from Senate Reports, 31st Cong., 1st sess., No. 19 (Serial No. 565); column 2 is from S. Doc, 36th Cong., 2d sess., Vol. 1, No. 1 (Serial No. 1078), p. 84; and column 3 is from Public Land Statistics, 1966, pp. 7-8. Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida were slow in making selections and California, Oregon, and Minnesota are not even listed as having made any selections by 1860. of the land eventually passed to the state The slowness with which the swampland under the Act of 1849. business was conducted is shown by the fact Three states-Michigan, Minnesota, and that 5 years after enactment less than 10 per- Wisconsin-elected to use surveyors' field cent of the ultimate total had been patented; notes in making their selections and as a in 10 years only 48 percent had reached the result were to have much less controversy patent state. The delay in completing selec- with Federal officials. Yet their swampland tions, gaining approval and patents was much selections were not small as seen in the table more marked in those states which were using below. The other states entitled to receive their own surveys. Five of these states finally swamplands, except California, elected to gave up this practice and used the Federal make their selections on the basis of their field notes in the hope of concluding the long own surveys and as late as 1888 had not been drawn out process.17 able to get their claims finally adjusted. California, because of the difference in the terms Opponents of the Swamp Land Act had of its grant, was able to combine both pro- warned that the vague and indefinite term cedures for making its selections.16 "swamp and overflowed lands unfit for cul- 16 The Act of July 23, 1866, sanctioned the previ- tivation" would make the act difficult to ad- ous selection of swamplands in California before the minister. Their forebodings proved more TCtS ^ been surveyed, accepted surveys by the than ^^ ^ f ^^ State of California or those made under its laws, the . . sale of such lands by the state and confirmed all such Commissioner of the Land Office and the actions and authorized the delivery of patents to the ~ state, 14 Stat. 209. No matter what the basis of " House Reports, 50th Cong., 1st sess. Vol. 2, No. selection all such tracts were thus made legal. 347 (Serial No. 2599), Feb. 8, 1888, pp. 2-5. |