234 ANNUAL REPORT. 



enterprise. Between this neglect of some, the mistakes of others, 

 we would naturally' expect to find many tree-claims below the 

 standard of excellence due to good management, at the time of 

 claiming title, and some that should be rejected as failures. 



I consider the present law chiefly defective in its failing to- 

 require, that land once entered for tree-culture should thereafter he 

 subject to no other form of entry. It has been a practice very prev- 

 alent in some land districts, for persons to enter timber-culture 

 claims who did not intend to plant a tree. If located in a region 

 that was filling up with settlers, they might reasonably expect,, 

 before the time for planting, to find some person who would be 

 willing to pay them one, two or three hundred dollars to abandon 

 the claim, when the purchaser would stand ready to enter it as a 

 homestead, or to purchase it at the government price. 



This custom has been practiced upon thousands of occasions,, 

 and the country has lost the benefits that should have resulted 

 from the plantations. In other instances entries have been made, 

 to acquire temporary possession for pasturage, or in anticipation 

 of the location of a line of railroad, or of a town site. The adven- 

 turer in these cases, only risked his chances for a year or two by 

 the payment of the oflice fees, and might strike a success. If he 

 failed to sell, only these fees would be lost, and he might go else- 

 where and do likewise. 



Of course, no law could be framed, that would compel a man to 

 do what he was not able to accomplish, nor would it be just to 

 deny him the privilege of selling his improvement, and his oppor- 

 tunity to enter another, or to deny the purchaser the benefits of his 

 purchase. But it is certainly quite within the power of congress, 

 and [ regard it as their duty, to enact, that land once entered for 

 timber culture, shall be held thereafter by no other title; — and 

 furthermore to enact, that this proportion of woodland shall be 

 maintained upon the land there ever after, as a condition of the 

 title. It need not be the identical area first planted, but I would 

 have at least one sixteenth part of the quarter-section always after 

 in woodland, under penalty of forfeiture of the title. Should such 



requirement ever be enacted, it should of course provide for 

 unavoidable losses, as in case of fires, where a reasonable time 

 should be allowed for re-planting, and for exceptional cases, where 

 it might be inexpedient or improper to insist upon the maintenance, 

 as where a village or a town might spring up upon the land. 



I regard the present law as also defective, in its not providing 

 any certain means for ascertaining at the several land ofiices, and 



