67 



their orchards, crops, and buiklings, especially if they be assured by the 

 law which controls the titles of all that it is a fixed principle, by which 

 all must be governed. Apart from the considerations of interest involved 

 in these suggestions, how much would such a state of things add to the 

 beauty and character of a State? The idea that one-tenth of its lands 

 was covered with growing and thriving timber, producing every year 

 an amount equal to all the wants of its owners, and yet not diminishing 

 in area, would give an eclat to a whole State in which such a system 

 I^revailed, and add immensely to the value of its estates. Lauds thus 

 kept in timber are not lost to the productive industry of the country, 

 for, if properly cared for, there are certain grasses which grow profusely 

 in the woods, and afford an amount and quality of pasturage which 

 would be quite as profitable as any other part of the farm. In every 

 point of view in Which this subject may be looked at, it i^resents the 

 strongest reasons why this most vital interest of the country should be 

 guarded through the instrumentality of the power of Congress when 

 disposing of the public lands. It should be a stipulated condition of 

 all grants that ten per cent, of the land granted should be kept in 

 timber. 



There is one other subject, which pertains to the disposition of the 

 public lands, to which attention should be attracted. By the act of 

 Congress of July 2, 1862, there was donated to the States about ten mil- 

 lions of acres of the public lauds, and the principle of distribution was 

 to each State in proportion to its representation in Congress — 30,000 

 acres for each Senator and Representative — whereby Minnesota was en- 

 titled to 120,000 acres, whereas New York was entitled to 990,000 acres, 

 the latter having an area of about thirty-two millions of acres, while that 

 of Minnesota is about fifty millions. This basis of 2}ro rata Avorks such 

 manifest injustice, whatever may be the object of the grant, that it should 

 never again be allowed to control that just equality which is always 

 sought to characterize the action of the Government. Its injustice is 

 made the more manifest by the consideration of the facts that in 1850 

 the cultivated area of Minnesota did not exceed two thousand acres, 

 whereas in 1868 it was about one million three hundred and eighty 

 thousand- acres; and what was unjust in 1862, when the law was passed, 

 has already become more than doubly so in 1872, because of its increased 

 and continually increasing population. This comi^arison is used as an 

 illustration of what is equally true of all the Western States and Terri- 

 tories. 



It is not an easy subject to say what would be a proper basis of 2^yo 

 rata division, such as would reconcile itself to our sense of justice. Area 

 of territory naturally suggests itself. But this, too, would manifestly 

 work inequality and injustice, for many reasons which readily present 

 themselves. All legislation is for the common benefit. It is to do the 

 greatest good to the greatest number, and not to the greatest jjart. And 

 while the time may come when Minnesota may equal or double the pop- 

 ulation of New York, that time is yet very distant, and time is an ele- 

 ment which should occupy a prominent place in any investigation of 

 such a subject. Again, in some of our States and Territories there are 

 large areas which are not susceptible of either population or cultivation 

 to any great extent. In such cases, to measure a division upon such a 

 basis, would be without the sanction of any principle of right. It is 

 much easier to tear down than to build any structure ; but naturally 

 striving to give to each of these conflicting elements their due weight, 

 a compromise between them suggests itself. In the councils of the nation 

 territory is comparatively silent and weak, while population is loud and 



