<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>

<!-- <!DOCTYPE TEI PUBLIC "-//UNL Libraries::Etext Center//DTD TEI.dtd (Nebraska Press)//EN" "include\TEI.dtd" [
]> -->

<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="egp.ea.024">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title level="m" type="main">Land Laws and Settlement</title>
<title level="m" type="sub"></title>
<author>David J. Wishart</author>
<editor>David J. Wishart</editor>
<respStmt>
<resp>Project Team</resp>
<name>Katherine Walter</name>
<name>Laura Weakly</name>
<name>Nicholas Swiercek</name>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<editionStmt>
<edition>
<date>2011</date>
</edition>
</editionStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<idno>egp.ea.024</idno>
<authority>Encyclopedia of the Great Plains</authority>
<publisher>University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln</publisher>
<distributor>
<name>Center for Digital Research in the Humanities</name>
<address>
<addrLine>319 Love Library</addrLine>
<addrLine>University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln</addrLine>
<addrLine>Lincoln, NE 68588-4100</addrLine>
<addrLine>cdrh@unlnotes.unl.edu</addrLine>
</address>
</distributor>
<date>2011</date>
<availability>
<p>Copyright &#169; 2011 by University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln, all rights reserved. Redistribution or republication in any medium, except as allowed under the Fair Use provisions of U.S. copyright law, requires express written consent from the editors and advance notification of the publisher, the University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln.</p>
</availability>
</publicationStmt>
<notesStmt>
<note type="project">

</note>
</notesStmt>

<sourceDesc>
<bibl><author n="Wishart, David J.">David J. Wishart</author>. <title level="a">"Land Laws and Settlement."</title> In <editor n="Wishart, David J.">David J. Wishart</editor>, ed. <title level="m">Encyclopedia of the Great Plains</title>. <pubPlace>Lincoln</pubPlace>: <publisher>University of Nebraska Press</publisher>, <date value="2004">2004</date>. <biblScope type="pages">239-240</biblScope>.</bibl>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>

<revisionDesc>
<change>
<date>2008-02-09</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Nicholas Swiercek</name>
</respStmt>
<item>Model Encoding</item>
</change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
<text>
<body>


<div1>
<head type="main">LAND LAWS AND SETTLEMENT</head>

<p>In both Canada and the United States, the federal
governments acted as huge real-estate
dealers transferring the public domain to settlers
who would, ostensibly through their labor,
enrich both themselves and their respective
nations. The problem with these
land-transfer systems, at least as far as the
Great Plains was concerned, was that the basic
160-acre settlement unit was devised for a
humid environment, not for a subhumid environment
where agriculture was a more
extensive&#8211;and more precarious&#8211;enterprise.
There was also the problem of speculation,
which held land out of actual settlement;
many of the land laws were easily manipulated
for such a purpose and some seemed to be
actually designed for it.</p>

<p>The United States' system had its origins in
the Land Ordinance of 1785 which, after subsequent
modifications, established an orderly
procedure for the alienation of public lands:
acquire the lands through cessions from Native
Americans; survey them into townships of
thirty-six one-square-mile sections, each containing
quarter sections of 160 acres; reserve
sections 16 and 36 for future sales to support
schools (such lands are still being sold off
for this purpose); and sell the remaining land
to settlers through public auction or through
regional public land offices. The exception
to this general land alienation system in the
Great Plains was Texas, which kept title to its
own public lands when it entered the Union.
There, the land was sold as a source of revenue
and disposed of in land grants for various social
purposes. Texas did, however, adopt the
same survey system.</p>

<p>Before the Homestead Act of 1862, the main
type of sale was through preemption, which
was codified in the Preemption Act of 1841. By
the terms of the act, an adult could settle on
the public domain and secure title to 160 acres
by improving the land and paying $1.25 an
acre within twelve months. Preemption and
the much-abused military bounty land warrants,
which were designed to provide soldiers
with homes but were transferable and could
therefore be amassed in bulk by speculators,
were the principal methods of acquiring land
in areas of eastern Nebraska and Kansas settled
before 1862.</p>

<p>That year, the Homestead Act inaugurated
the era of virtually free land for the settler,
providing 160 acres for a minimal registration
fee and the promise to live on the land and
improve it for five years, at which time a patent
was issued. After six months settlers who
wanted to secure title could purchase the land
at $1.25 an acre (perhaps to sell at a profit
later). Settlers soon had other options for securing
Plains land. Following the 1862 Morrill
Act, which allocated public lands to the states
for the purpose of supporting agricultural colleges,
settlers could purchase scrip, which then
could be used to buy land at $1.25 an acre.
Again, speculators acquired large amounts of
the scrip and bought considerable acreages in
the Plains, which they held until land values
rose and then sold for a profit. Settlers also
had the option of adding to their holdings
by locating in railroad land grants, which
were given to railroad companies to subsidize
construction. By the acts of 1862 and 1864,
for example, the Union Pacific Railroad was
granted all the odd-numbered sections in
every township in a twenty-mile zone on either
side of the tracks. Clearly, land near the
railroads, the connection to markets and supplies,
was in great demand; free homestead
sections in the land grants were taken first,
giving the characteristic checkerboard settlement
pattern, until filled in by the later purchase
of railroad sections.</p>

<p>In the Canadian Plains, the Dominion
Lands Act of 1872, which followed the Canadian
government's acquisition of Rupert's
Land from the Hudson's Bay Company, was
modeled on the American land survey and
free homestead system. The same 640-acre
section and thirty-six-section township survey
was adopted, and so the rectangular grid
came to dominate the entire Great Plains,
with profound and inestimable effects on
ways of living ever since. A similar free homestead
system was inaugurated, but with a
"proving-up" time of only three years. Also, as
in the United States, two sections (11 and 29)
were designated school lands in each township,
and following its 1881 charter the Canadian
Pacific Railway was given the oddnumbered
sections in a land grant extending
twenty-four miles on either side of the tracks
across the Prairies. "Indemnity selection" allowed
the Canadian Pacific to go outside the
forty-eight-mile strip if there was not sufficient good land within it. Significant differences
from the United States' system were evident
in the provision of 160 acres of lands, or
$160 in scrip, for Métis, who had preceded the
survey, and the reservation of lands&#8211;section 8
and three-quarters of section 26 in each township,
amounting to more than seven million
acres in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta
&#8211;for the Hudson's Bay Company as compensation
for the relinquishment of Rupert's
Land. The Canadian government, determined
to attract immigrants to the Prairies, also
made block settlement grants to ethnic groups
such as Russian Mennonites and Icelanders, a
practice that was not endorsed in the U.S.
Great Plains.</p>

<p>Even before John Wesley Powell, in his 1878
<title>Report on the Lands of the Arid Region of the United States</title>, drew attention to the unsuitability
of the standard land system for the
country west of the 100th meridian, new land
laws were being specifically adapted to the
Great Plains. In 1873 Congress passed the Timber
Culture Act, which was designed to promote
the planting of trees in the Great Plains
and also, theoretically, to increase rainfall by
accelerating transpiration rates. The act stipulated
the planting and cultivation of forty
acres of trees (later reduced to ten acres) over
a period of ten years (later reduced to eight),
after which the settler would receive a patent
for 160 acres. Most timber claims were filed in
the Central and Northern Great Plains. (After
1873, therefore, the Plains settler could legally
acquire 480 acres of public domain through
the Homestead, Preemption, and Timber Culture
Acts for only $200.) However, the fact
that only a small proportion of timber entries
were carried through to patent indicates the
difficulty of fulfilling the provisions of the act
in a subhumid environment, but it indicates
even more the convenience of the law for the
small-scale speculator: settlers could use 160
acres rent-free and tax-free for ten years with
no intention of acquiring a patent. At the Cheyenne
Land Office in Wyoming Territory, for
example, 290,278 timber filings had been made
by 1888 but only 65,265 were ever patented. The
flawed legislation was repealed in 1891.</p>

<p>Other acts enlarged the size of the holdings
that settlers could obtain cheaply or without
cost. The Desert Land Act of 1877, which applied
to the territories of New Mexico, Wyoming,
Montana, and Dakota (and more generally
throughout the West), allowed settlers
to file on 640 acres for a payment of twenty-five
cents an acre. Title could be obtained in
three years for an additional payment of $1 an
acre and proof of irrigated cultivation. Only
one-fourth of the entries in the Great Plains
resulted in titles. In 1904 the Kinkaid Act offered
settlers in the Nebraska Sandhills 640
acres on homestead terms, and in 1909 the
Enlarged Homestead Act increased the free
acreage more widely to 320 acres. Under the
stimulus of the 1909 act, the plains of eastern
Montana in particular filled up with farmers
hoping to make a future by dry-farming
wheat on their 320 acres. More homestead entries
were made there in 1910 alone than in all
of the preceding three decades. Montana and
the High Plains states of Wyoming, Colorado,
and New Mexico were also the main targets of
the Stock Raising Homestead Act of 1916, by
which settlers could acquire 640 acres of non-irrigable
land for the purposes of stock raising
and the cultivation of forage crops. But often
the settlers had no experience in farming, and
almost always they were undercapitalized. In
Montana the drought of 1918 put an end to
the dreams of many, and many others who
"stuck" through that crisis failed in the 1920s
and 1930s.</p>

<p>In the Prairie Provinces also, attempts were
made to ensure that settlers could acquire a
320-acre holding rather than the clearly inadequate
160 acres. Successful settlers were allowed,
through "preemption rights," to file on
an adjacent quarter if it was not occupied. Settled
farmers, having accumulated some capital,
were also encouraged to buy Canadian Pacific
Railway lands, and many did, especially
after 1908 when the remaining odd-numbered
sections were put on the market at reasonable
prices. Still, by 1910 in much of the Prairie
Provinces and elsewhere in the Plains, even
320 acres was a small holding and hardly adequate
for efficient production.</p>

<p>The rate of failure in both the Canadian and
U.S. Great Plains points to the overextension
of farming that the liberal land laws had encouraged.
The gap between the number of
land entries and the number of patents issued
was glaring: in the Dominion Lands, for example,
only 40 percent of homestead entries
culminated in a title, and an unknown portion
of those that did quickly passed into the
hands of speculators. The end of the Dominion
policy came in 1930, with the completion
of transfer of remaining lands and resources
to the provincial governments. In the United
States the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 withdrew
from homesteading virtually all the remaining
desirable land, though the 1862, 1909, and 1916
acts, which had drawn so many settlers to the
Plains, were not repealed.</p>

<p><hi rend="italic">See also</hi> <hi rend="smallcaps">EDUCATION</hi>: <ref n="egp.edu.027">Morrill Act</ref> / 
<hi rend="smallcaps">TRANSPORTATION</hi>: <ref n="egp.tra.027">Railroad Land Grants</ref>.</p>

<closer>
<signed>David J. Wishart<lb/>
University of Nebraska-Lincoln</signed>
</closer>
</div1>

<div1>
<bibl>Gates, Paul W. "Homesteading in the High Plains." <title level="j">Agricultural History</title> 51 (1977): 109–33.</bibl> <bibl>Martin, Chester. "Dominion
Lands" <title level="j">Policy</title>. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart
Ltd., 1973.</bibl> <bibl>McIntosh, C. Baron. "Use and Abuse of the
Timber Culture Act." <title level="j">Annals of the Association of American Geographers</title> 65 (1975): 347–62.</bibl>
</div1>


</body>
</text>
</TEI>