The election of that year, resulting in a complete Republican victory, placed the entire control of the law-making power in the hands of the Republicans. The party was now for the first time in a position to make its views effective and enforce its policy; so that early in its exercise of power it passed the Homestead Law, in February, 1862, in substance as it now stands upon the statute-book.

Only three Republicans voted against it in the House, and only one Republican against it in the Senate.

It is distinctively a Republican measure; the Democratic party has never, in its national platforms, favored or approved the principle it embraces.

In 1856 the Democracy asserted that the proceeds of the public lands ought to be applied to national objects specified in the Constitution.

In 1860 the Republican platform contained the plank quoted above, while the Democratic platform was silent upon it, although the discussion had been earnest, in Congress and out, for the two preceding years.

In 1864 and 1868 the Republicans stood by their declaration of 1860, and the execution of the law they had passed.

In 1872 the Republicans " demand that the national domain be set apart for free homes for the people;" the Democrats, that "public lands shall be held for actual settlers:" they did not assert that they should be granted" freely," but presumably, under the Pre-emption Law, at a price.

In 1876 the Republicans re-asserted the principle of 1872, and the Democrats were silent.

There have been no changes since in the position of the parties.

The Republicans are content to see the practical workings of the system they introduced.

The official reports show the most gratifying results.

From the passage of the bill to the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 1887, there have been made 771,700 entries under this law, covering 99,030,071 acres of public land; an area capable of furnishing comfortable homes for millions of people.

During the last fiscal year more than 52,000 homestead entries were made, covering 7,594,350 acres of public land.

These areas as expressed in acres are hardly comprehensi ble, but better understood when it is stated that the gross area of homestead entries is larger than all New England, the Middle States, and Maryland combined.

The policy was established only after a long, earnest struggle, and hundreds of thousands of people, from experience as well as observation, attest its wisdom.

Indeed, so universal is the indorsement of the principle now, that efforts are being made to so amend the general land laws that the only method of disposal of agricultural lands shall be by the Homestead Law, and it is believed such action will be had in the Fiftieth Congress.

GRANTS OF PUBLIC LANDS TO AID IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF RAILROADS.

The Republican party is constantly charged, in the language of the Democratic National Platform of 1876, as "the party which when in power has squandered two hundred millions of acres of public lands upon railroads alone," etc.

The changes have been, and are now, rung upon this statement, until, possibly, some who make it may believe that the fact is as stated, and the Republican party is responsible for the legislation.

But it is an enormous exaggeration as to amount; at least debatable, even now, in the light and with the aid of experience as to its policy, and absolutely false as to the charge of responsibility.

That charge has not a shadow, even, of fact to rest upon.

The truth is, the practice of granting public lands in aid of public improvements began in 1802, when Congress made a grant to Ohio to aid in constructing roads, and from that day to this the policy of such aid has never been a distinctive party question.

A grant of public lands to aid a canal in Indiana was passed in 1824; in 1827 similar grants were made to aid the Wabash and Erie Canal in Indiana, and the Illinois Canal in Illinois; followed in 1828 by grants in aid of the Miami Canal in Ohio, aggregating nearly 2,500,000 acres, years before the Republican party was dreamed of.

The first grant of public land in aid of a railroad was made by the act of March 3, 1835, to a Florida company; this was followed by a grant of land to the New Orleans and Nashville Railroad company, July 2, 1836. But the act of September 20, 1850, was the first act of real importance of this character, and may be regarded as the initiation of the system of making grants of land to railroads by Congress.

This act gave the State of Illinois 2,595,000 acres to aid the Illinois Central Railroad Company. It was the especial work of Senator Douglas of Illinois; and he was aided by very many Democrats of prominence, among them Senators King and Clement of Alabama, and Davis and Foote of Mississippi.

This act was followed by the acts of 1856, in different States, in aid of railroads, and the policy of the government was thus settled before the Republican party began to act.

The great grants to the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads are made the principal texts by our adversaries for denunciation.

Waiving any discussion of the merits of the action here, remarking, however, that the knowledge that comes only after the fact is never specially important, history proves that the Democratic party first, then jointly with us, aided in all possible ways to forward the enterprise.

The agitation of the question of a transcontinental line of railroad began as early as 1838 in Iowa, and in 1845 petitions came to Congress for a grant of one hundred millions of acres of land to aid in the construction of a railroad to the Pacific Ocean.

The same year Senator Douglas proposed a scheme for a road to the Pacific, aided by grants of public land; and from that date to 1862 numerous plans were submitted to Congress on that question.

The Republican National Convention in 1856 declared in favor of such road; and repeated this declaration in 1860, in which year, in national convention, one wing of the Democracy, at Charleston and Baltimore, asserting the necessity of the construction of such a road, said: "The Democratic party pledge such constitutional government aid as will insure the construction of a railroad to the Pacific coast." The same

pledge was made by the Breckinridge wing at its conventions in April and June, 1860.

Moreover, all the Presidential candidates in 1856, Buchanan, Fillmore, and Fremont, placed themselves on record for the plan of government aid; and Mr. Buchanan, after his election, more than once officially indorsed the giving the aid in grants of public land.

So that all parties were thoroughly committed to the principle; and when the act was passed incorporating the Union Pacific Company, and making direct grants to it and the Central Pacific Company for a complete line, it was supported by the leaders of both parties, in compliance with prior party committals and pledges.

And so with every other grant of this character. Not one was ever passed as a party question, nor under special support by either party, but carried by the united action of leaders in both parties in every case.

Credit or blame for the action must attach as it shall be judged to be well or ill advised.

Another question is raised, growing out of these grants, de serving notice.

All the legislation provided that unless the roads were constructed within the period named in the act, the right of the companies as to the lands, respectively, should, under varying circumstances, cease.

.

Many of the roads granted aid were not constructed in the time required, some not yet completed and thus the question of the status of "unearned lands" and the reclaiming them by the government has been raised.

There were involved in all the grants made, as appears by official statement of the Public Land Commission, necessary to fill and complete all grants to railroads, if completed, 155,504,994 acres.

The data upon which this computation is made is not complete, owing to imperfect reports in the General Land Office, etc.; and the amount stated is believed by the writer of this to be too small; but the authorities are content with it.

Of the "unearned lands" granted to these corporations, there have been reclaimed, by acts of Congress declaring for

feiture of the same, 50,482,240 acres to this date (first session, Fiftieth Congress); and bills are now pending for forfeiture of large areas still, claimed by roads whose cases have not been reached.

Of these, bills involving about ten million acres more will pass without opposition, there being no question, as to these, either of power or policy as to such action.

Now, the Democracy are claiming the credit for this restoration of "unearned lands" to the public domain as party action, and impliedly, if not directly, charging the Republicans with opposition to such action.

In a word, this claim can be disposed of: every bill that has passed Congress since this agitation began was prepared and introduced, or based upon a bill prepared and introduced, by a Republican, both in the Senate and the House; and party lines have never been drawn in either the discussion or passage of these bills.

*

The act against “alien ownership" of real estate is claimed by the Democracy, and great credit is taken by them for its preparation and passage.

The act was reported from a conference committee of the Senate and House, appointed on the passage by the Senate of a bill prepared and introduced by and passed under the charge of Senator Plumb, and on the passage by the House of a similar bill prepared and introduced by and passed under the charge of Mr. Payson of Illinois.

The report of the conference committee made by Senator Plumb to the Senate and Mr. Payson to the House is the act now in the statutes.

It therefore clearly appears that on all these matters of land-reform, so earnestly approved by the people of the Union, the Republican party has not only been abreast of public sentiment, but successful in all its endeavors; and equally clear is it that the claim of the Democracy to any share of the credit for the initiation of these measures is utterly without foundation.

* These bills were prepared by Senator Plumb of Kansas, in the Senate, and Mr. Payson of Illinois, in the House.-EDITOR.