OCR Text |
Show 638 HISTORY OF PUBLIC LAND LAW DEVELOPMENT the mining states of the West could only be met through irrigation of the arid lands and that larger units of entry than could be obtained under the Homestead and Preemption Acts were necessary to make their production feasible. In that year Congress was persuaded to authorize settlers to purchase tracts up to 640 acres in the high arid country east of the Sierra Mountains in Lassen County, California, to reclaim them by irrigation. After "making satisfactory proof of the reclamation" of the tract by conducting water to it, citizens, or persons who had taken the first step toward citizenship, could enter the land at $1.25 an acre at the end of 2 years. Timber, mineral, and grass lands were excluded and only desert lands that could not produce a crop without reclamation were eligible for entry.3 The experiment in encouraging desert farming in Lassen County through reclamation seems not to have attracted much attention, for the Commissioner of the Land Office did not later allude to it, except when called upon for information by the Senate Committee on Public Lands. He then reported, in 1877, that no complaints had come to his attention about the measure and that "settlers were availing themselves of its provision, and that a large amount of otherwise worthless land is being fitted for cultivation."4 Williamson's statement to the Committee on Public Lands is somewhat difficult to reconcile with his conception of the desert lands as expressed in his report of 1876. There he said that nearly all the desert land capable of being easily irrigated by the water of small streams had already been improved by "individual enterprise or small corporate capital" and that henceforth large aggregations of capital would be necessary to utilize the water of the Platte, the Weber, the Bear, the Jordan, and the Humboldt in sufficient iGLO Annual Report, 1875, pp. 6-7; 18 Stat. 497. *Cong. Record, 44th Cong., 2d sess., Feb. 27, 1877, p. 1965. volume if large areas of arid lands were to be brought into cultivation.5 The Desert Land Act Whatever Williamson's views were regarding the efficacy of the Lassen County Desert Land Act, Senator Aaron Sargent of California and Representative LaFayette Lane of Oregon thought well enough of it to bring into Congress in 1877 a measure to extend provisions of the Lassen County Act to California, Oregon, and Nevada and to the Territories of Washington, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Dakota (only Colorado was excluded). Instead of making the payment due in 2 years after the initial filing and proof of improvement had been offered, the enlarged bill provided that on the filing of the application a payment of 25 cents per acre was to be required, 3 years were to be allowed for the completion of the improvements at the expiration of which time the balance of $1 an acre would be due. One or two minor safeguards were included in the very loose measure that emerged from the House: individuals could make only one entry and the 640 acres selected were to be in reasonably compact form. Discussion in the Senate scarcely touched upon the need for tightening the bill to avoid the pitfalls that usually appeared in settler-oriented legislation, and the House passed it without raising any queries. The Desert Land Act thus joined the Timber and Stone Act, the Timber Cutting Act, and the Timber Culture Act as one of the four significant measures adopted ostensibly to aid settlers in gaining ownership of land and timber they needed, but which were commonly used by larger economic interests always glad to appeal to pro-homesteader sentiments to gain their ends. All four of the measures were enacted without careful consideration by the Committees 6 GLO Annual Report, 1876, p. 7. |