State Agricultural Society. 17 



referred. These, then, are the facts, that very nearly all the lands in 

 the State have, in one way or another, passed from the ownership of the 

 Government to that of private parties, and that the prices of these lands 

 are advanced considerably above the Government prices for public 

 lands in this and in other States. These are the facts, and this is the 

 length and breadth of the land monopoly in California. These are the 

 present facts with which we as a people, and with which the State of 

 California have to deal. It is unnecessary now to complain of the legis- 

 lation that ojsened the way to this state of things. It is a fruitless labor 

 to inquire into the management of our State and National Land Offices, 

 which has encouraged the accumulation of these lands in a few hands 

 and in large bodies, rather than in the hands of small farmers, except 

 to prevent the continuance of such management. We have to deal with 

 this question as it now exists, and the best way is to look at it in a 

 practical common sense manner. It interests the people and the State 

 now mostly and almost wholly as it relates to and has an immediate 

 bearing upon another question of great importance — the question of 



immigration. 



There seems to be a universal ojjinion in California that the increase 

 of population by the introduction of an industrious, working, thriving 

 people, would add greatly to the general prosperity of the State. This 

 opinion we believe to be well founded, and that it is to the general 

 interest of all as well as the duty of all to encourage the immigration 

 to our State of that class of people. 



Does the fact that the millions of uncultivated but rich and fertile 

 lands of the State belong to individuals instead of the General and State 

 Governments, change this general interest and this general duty of our 

 people? Both the General Government and the State have sold their 

 respective portions of these lands, and have received the full price 

 demanded for them, so that we as a people have no longer any direct 

 interest in these lands or in their ownership. But we have an interest, 

 and a vital one, in their cultivation and improvement, and in the addi- 

 tional wealth and prosperity we have shown such cultivation and 

 improvement will bring to the State. 



Will the fact that the sale of these lands at advanced rates over the 

 Government prices brings riches and wealth to some of our enterpris- 

 ing citizens injure any of us as individuals, or detract from the great 

 benefits that will thus accrue to us as a people or State? On the con- 

 trary, will not the wealth of these individual citizens add so much to the 

 general wealth and taxable property of the State? Will it not be 

 equivalent, indeed, to just so much additional capital put in circulation 

 among us, to develop our latent resources and add to our general pros- 

 perity? Who, then, will be wronged by the encouragement of such 

 immigration, even at the expense of some of the public revenue? Will 

 not all the lands within the State the title of which is in individuals be 

 compelled to bear their portion of such expense? Most certainly they 

 will. If, however, these titles were still in the General Government 

 and State, they would be exempt from taxation for the purposes of 

 encouraging immigration, as well as for all other purposes. Then, so 

 far as our people or State is concerned, is it not rather a benefit and 

 advantage than an injury that these lands are private property, and 



