74 UNITED STATES FOREST POLICY 



FRAUDS UNDER THE TIMBER AND STONE ACT 



Since the land must be "unfit for cultivation," no settler would buy 

 it for the purpose of cultivation, and, since 160 acres was too small 

 a plot for economical lumbering operations, larger tracts must some- 

 how be obtained. Under the generally lax administration of the land 

 laws this was easily accomplished. Large operators had their em- 

 ployees and other persons make the necessary affidavits, enter the 

 lands, and then convey to their employers or principals. Irrespon- 

 sible persons — loggers, mill hands, sailors, etc. — could be hired for 

 from $50 to $150 or even less, and witnesses could usually be found 

 to swear to the proof of the entry for $25 or less. A special agent 

 reported finding records to prove that one such party had acted as 

 witness in thirteen final proofs in seven days, although he had prob- 

 ably never seen any of the land. The agent reporting this estimated 

 that three fourths of the entries under the act were fraudulent.^^ 



The annual report of Commissioner Sparks in 1886*" gives an in- 

 teresting account of frauds perpetrated under this law among the 

 redwood lands of the Humboldt district in California. A large timber 

 firm in this district employed expert surveyors to locate and survey 

 the lands, and then hired a number of agents to go upon the streets 

 of Eureka and find persons to sign applications for land, and trans- 

 fer their interests to the company, a consideration of $50 being paid 

 for each application secured. No effort seems to have been made to 

 keep the matter secret and all classes of people were approached and 

 asked to sign applications. Sailors were caught while in port and 

 hurried into a saloon or to a certain notary public's office. Farmers 

 were stopped on their way to their homes, and merchants were called 



timber land were more valuable proportionately than small tracts, that 160 acres 

 was more valuable as part of a large tract than it was by itself, and that, there- 

 fore, when such lands once found their way into private hands, they inevitably 

 gravitated into large holdings. McRae of Arkansas was one of the first men in 

 Congress to point out clearly that the lumber business demanded tracts larger than 

 160 acres. "Any man who knows anything about operating a saw-mill," he said in 

 discussing the Holman bill, "at least in the southern country, must know that no 

 man can afford to establish a saw-mill if he is limited to 160 acres of land. Such 

 a restriction would simply invite evasion of the law." 



^^ Reports, Land Office; 1883, 9; 1884, 8; 1886, 79-97: Report, Sec. of Int., 1885, 

 213. 



40 p. 94. 



