4 PUBLIC LANDS COMMISSION. 



Under this law no residence upon nor cultivation of the tract entered 

 is required. An application is made at the local land office in the dis- 

 trict in which the land is situated to purchase 160 acres, or less, of 

 land which it is alleged is chiefly valuable for the timber or stone, as 

 the case may be, which it contains. Advertisement is made for sixty 

 days, naming a date upon which evidence will be offered before the 

 local land officers to prove the character of the land. Upon the day 

 named such proof is offered, and, if deemed sufficient and there being 

 no protest nor allegation of fraud or collusion, payment at the rate of 

 $2.60 per acre is made and final receipt is issued. This practically 

 concludes the transaction, the issuing of the patent following in due 

 course of time. 



The only grounds upon which the entry by a qualified entryman 

 would be refused are either that the land is not cliiefly valuable for 

 timber or stone, or that entry is not being made for the sole use and 

 benefit of the entryman, but for speculative purposes. As the entries 

 under this act are generally made for the timber which the land con- 

 tains, proof is seldom lacking that the land is chiefly valuable for tim- 

 ber. It is very difficult to prove collusion or that the entry was made 

 for speculative purposes, although it is apparent that many such 

 entries have been made. 



In the case of United States v. Budd (144 U. S. , 164), in a decision 

 made in March, 1892, the United States Supreme Court said (syllabus 

 quoted: 



(1) That all the act of June 3, 1878, denounces is a prior agreement by which the 

 patentee acts for another in the purchase. 



{2) That M. might rightfully go or send iuto that vicinity (the vicinity of the 

 land) and make known generally to individuals a ■willingness to buy timber land at 

 a price in excess of that which it would cost to obtain it from the Government, and 

 that a person knowing of that offer might rightfully go to the land office and pur- 

 chase a timber lot from the Government and transfer it to M. for the stated excess 

 without violating the act of June 3, 1878. 



The Commission believes that Congress did not intend that this law 

 should be used for the acquisition of large tracts of valuable timber 

 land by individuals or corporations, but it has been used for such 

 purposes. Carefulness and vigilance in its administration can not 

 prevent its being so used. A great number of such entries were 

 recently suspended, but the most rigid investigation failed to show 

 that any considerable proportion of them had been made in violation 

 of the law, and the suspensions were removed. The fact remains, 

 however, that many of these entries were made by nonresidents of the 

 State in which the land is situated, who could not use the land nor the 

 timber upon it themselves, and it is apparent that they were made for 

 speculative purposes and will eventually follow the course taken by 

 many previous similar entries and Ijfecome part of some large timber 

 holding. 



While this law is adapted to and chiefly used for the acquisition of 

 timber land, many entries have been made under it where it was 

 alleged that the land is chiefly valuable for stone. There is no doubt 

 that the land in a very large proj)ortion of such entries was not desired 

 on account of the stone which it contained, but for the purpose of 

 obtaining control of water or to add to other holdings. There are, 

 moreover, other laws under which land containing stone may be 

 entered. 



Our conclusion is that the law is defective, because even when prop- 



