OCR Text |
Show DRY FARMING AND STOCK RAISING HOMESTEADS, 1904-1934 517 suitable for irrigation, had no trees, but provided good forage. Such portions of them as were suitable for stock raising homesteads should be so classified and opened to entry in 640-acre units. Taylor conceded that the breakup of the range-lands into grazing homesteads would not be to the advantage of big stockmen, but the stockmen had been using the public lands as a grazing common, had paid no taxes on the land they used whereas the stock raising homesteads would become taxable when title passed to the entrymen. Thousands of people were just waiting to take advantage of the government's bounty. His measure would bring them into the West in swarms and permit that section to gain its greatest goal, "more people, more homes, and more property on the tax roles."49 The western demand for homesteads to attract population drowned out the pleas of the stockmen for protection of the range.50 The Fergusson bill was offered to Congress as the unanimous recommendation of the Committee on Public Lands. So successfully had support been built up that there was no effective opposition. Neither was there any useful discussion of the views that Kent and the livestock interests had presented to the committee, no analysis of the economics of the move, no attention to how landless people just waiting for the adoption of the measure to enter the livestock business in a small way would find the capital to do so. A reading of the debates would scarcely alert one to the fact that there was an adverse interest that in the past had been most sensitively treated by members of Congress. Most of the discussion centered on efforts to assure those who had homesteaded under earlier taCotig. Record, 64th Cong., 1st sess., Jan. 16, 1915, pp. 1126 ff. 60 Fergusson was now dead, being replaced by an equally insistent advocate of the 640-acre measure. legislation that they would be entitled to enter additional land. The Stock Raising Homestead Act authorized the establishment of 640-acre homesteads in reasonably compact form on land that was "chiefly valuable for grazing and raising forage crops," contained no merchantable timber, was not susceptible to irrigation from any known source of water, and was of such character that 640 acres "are reasonably required for the support of a family." Only lands "designated" (not classified, for the West disapproved of the term) by the Secretary of the Interior (which meant the Geological Survey, not the Department of Agriculture) as suitable for stock raising were to be opened to entry under the measure. Permanent improvements to increase the value of the land for stock raising-presumably fencing or the digging of wells-were required to the extent of $1.25 an acre. Coal and other min eral rights were to be retained by the government and no commutation was to be allowed. Water holes and access lands needed for stock driveways were reserved. Persons who had homesteaded before under the Acts of 1862 and 1909 were allowed to make additional entries of contiguous land or land within 20 miles of the original entry that might bring their total to 640 acres. The only concession to stockmen was the authorization for the withdrawal of public lands from entry for stock driveways.51 News of the 640-acre free grant measure circulated quickly and by June 30, 1917, 61,909 applications for 23,962,456 acres had been made. This was almost as much as the entire number of filings for homesteads made the previous year, including 160-acre homesteads, 320-acre homesteads, and Kin-kaid homesteads in Nebraska. Unfortunately, Congress had not appropriated the necessary funds for the classification of the lands and none of the entries could be ac- 51 Act of Dec. 29, 1916, 39 Stat., Part 1, p. 862. |