The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 30, July 1926 - April, 1927 Page: 51
330 p. : maps ; 23 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
The Mineral Land Question in California, 1848-1866 51
mining rights which had grown up in the mining regions, Com-
missioner Edmunds believed that no wise policy could be devised
until the whole question had been more carefully investigated by
the government.''
There was, however, a prevailing belief in Washington that
the time had come to abandon the policy of non-interference. On
July 9, 1865, Julian, Chairman of the House Committee on
Public Lands, reported a bill providing for the sale of the gold
and silver mines in small tracts, at the minimum price adjusted
according to the size and value of the deposit. It limited the
quantity which one individual could buy to forty acres, and it
prohibited combinations among the different bidders. In an elab-
orate speech Julian denounced the non-interference policy as
"financial profligacy," "legislative madness." "How long," he
exclaimed, "will the people thus sport with their resources and
bear with the public servants who are thus recreant to the public
good?" Moreover, the sale of these lands, he argued, would
benefit also the mining districts, for under the system of tenancy
at will permanent settlements were impossible, and the popula-
tion was nomadic, dispensing with home life and public life.
"It is a conspiracy against the establishment and sacredness of
the American home !" he exclaimed. The bill was recommitted."
To gain more information on the subject, several members of
Congress visited the mineral regions of the Pacific coast.
Attitude of California. Public opinion in California was di-
vided on the mineral land question. The quartz miners, the ag-
ricultural and commercial interests, generally favored a policy
which should confer titles in fee to the miners. Such a policy,
it was argued, would induce people to settle down and make im-
provements on their claims, and would result in the equalization
of taxation. But the placer miners were opposed to any change,
fearing that any system devised by Congress would be inimical to
the interests of the miners. "The mining interest of the Pacific
States and Territories is destined to receive too much affectionate
attention at Washington this winter," said the Sacramento Union.
The Union argued that the nomadic character of the mining pop-
ulation was due not to the want of titles in fee simple, but to the"4H. Ex. Doe., 1, 39 Cong., 1 Sess., 38-43 (1248).
"See Cong. Globe, 38 Cong., 2 Sess., 7, 684-7.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 30, July 1926 - April, 1927, periodical, 1927; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth117142/m1/59/: accessed April 26, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.