In doing
this, it gives a preference preemption to certain other uses of the
public land, by excluding such land from liability to ordinary
preemption. Among the uses thus privileged, and to which precedence in
preemption is accorded, are, 1. "Sections, or fractions of sections
included within the limits of any incorporated town;" 2. "Portions of
the public land which have been selected for the site of a city or
town;" and, 3. "Land actually settled or occupied for the purposes of
trade, and not agriculture." Now, it is not easy to see any good
reason why, if individuals may thus take voluntarily for the purposes
of agriculture,-- they may not also take for the purposes of a city or
town. The statute assumes that the purposes of a city or town have
preference over those of trade, and still more over those of
agriculture. Yet individuals may take for either of the latter
objects: a fortiori they may take for a city or town.
Why should it be assumed that individual action in this respect is
prohibited for towns any more than for trade or agriculture? It does
not concern the Government whether two persons preempt one hundred and
sixty acres each for the purposes of agriculture, or for the purpose
of a town, except that the latter object will, incidentally, be more
beneficial to the Government.
Pages:
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253