86 BULLETIN 1295, U. 8. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 
States and of the methods employed. The various aspects of the 
problem of land settlement have been considered largely from the 
standpoint of private land-settlement agencies. It is now in order 
to appraise this process of land settlement from the standpoint of 
the public interest. 
It is obvious that in doing this we leave the ground of facts some- 
what behind and enter the domain of opinion. Naturally, different . 
people will have different attitudes according to their concept of the 
function of the State. Those who look upon the State as merely an 
agency for police protection will view this process of land set- 
tlement in a different light from those who lean toward the organic 
conception of the State and its functions. Those who have the lat- 
ter point of view will not be concerned only with eliminating fraud, 
but will judge the methods of land settlement according to whether 
they make for efficiency in the use of the natural and human re- 
sources of the nation and for the welfare of those who are con- 
cerned. With due recognition of these differences in point of view, 
the authors venture to indicate certain conclusions which seem to 
be indicated by the facts brought out in the present study. 
Certain types of agencies have been described which are purely 
parasitical in their aims and methods. Such are the concerns that 
have been engaged in deliberately selling worthless land by methods 
which, if not technically fraudulent, are very close to the boundary 
line of fraud and fall well within that territory when viewed from 
the standpoint of motive. There can be little question as to the de- 
sirability of instituting some more effective machinery, either State 
or National, for the purpose of eliminating this element in the 
business of land settlement. 
Perhaps the greater part of the land sold at retail in the unde- 
veloped portion of the Lakes States has been disposed of by agencies 
which probably, in most cases, did not formally assume any respon- 
sibility for the establishment of the settler on the land. Their con- 
cern was sale, not settlement. However, there were great differences 
among these concerns. Some have sold land of the best grade; others 
have priced their lands according to quality, letting the purchaser 
buy whatever he desired, following the ordinary standard of busi- 
ness ethics in the representations made concerning the land, but 
largely operating according to the doctrine of caveat emptor. Some 
of these firms have pushed the sale of land by extensive advertis- 
ing and arrangements with local agents, while others have pro- 
ceeded more slowly. Some ofthese concerns, although not assuming 
any formal responsibility for establishing settlers on the land, have 
actually made a practice of selecting settlers and aiding them in 
various ways. Some of the agencies have sold their lands at unduly 
high prices; others, at very reasonable prices. In short, there were 
found in this general class both good and bad types of concerns. 
From the standpoint of public interest, it would appear that 
concerns of the type which sell all classes of land, irrespective of 
whether it is economically supermarginal or submarginal, are not 
operating entirely in the general welfare, and that some method 
should be employed to prevent the sale of land not physically or 
economically suitable for settlement. The same general conclusion 
would seem to apply to the sale of land even of good quality at 
unduly high prices. It should be recognized that in many cases 
these high prices are the outgrowth of competition in the sale of 
—— 
