Cbss SDg-GC Book. laced on Carey lands, farther north, at a lower elevation, which I would strongly reconnnend the (iov- ernment to do, in lieu of using them in the northern part of this particular forestry reserve where the contour lines and elevations are so extreme — where the coinitry is so rough. Reference to the map shown here and furnished by the Forestry Department would indicate that where we intend to irrigate, if the exchange is made, the contour lines are wide ai)art and the irrigation becomes much more easv. Here [indicating on map] it is rcmgher and all that ]Mr. EsTOPiNAL. Then it would be to your advantage to have this exchange made, because the irrigation would be nnich easier? Mr. HuNTFi!. Much more easy and much more within our needs. Mr. EsToPiNAL. Then you would give up the t)ther water rights in compensation for this privilege? Mr. HiNTFi;. ^'es. Well, we are giving, in addition, sir, very Valual)le timl)er lands for lands that are worthless; and I think reference to the bill itself makes it necessary for the Government to make an exchange that is equal in value. The Ciiaii;:max. And area ? Mr. IIiNTFi;. And in area. CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. Mr. EsTOPiNAL. The timber on the huid Avould l)e so much iiioi-e vahiable than on the land which yon woukl get in return? ]\Ir. HuNTEK. Oh, the Government would be getting the timber. I have used the expression, "'AH of the land north,'' but there are some exceptions that I would like to notice. They are not much, but some settlers luive gone there under contract from us along the river to make homes on strictly agricultural lands, and they are not to receive any pine timber, or if it is included in theij- contract they are to give it back; and further that I personally promised the chief engineer of the town system that we would give him at a nonnnal price — I think $7.r)0 an acre, if I recall correctly — and right of way through our entire grant in return for the town sites, four in num- ber — I think four, although it might be five — and these exce])tions, I should like to have recognized, because they Avere Mv. Haavley. So far as they are concerned, that Avould be for the Forestry Service in making exchange to count those lands as in exchange. Mr. HrxTKi;. Yes: or rather they can give them to the railway if that comes. Mr. Haweey. Or to the settlers? Mr. HuNTEH. Yes: that can be done. Uoughly speaking, approxi- mately the change Avould affect about 20,000 acres. Mr. Lafferty'. Does not the railroad company have the right of way over the Government lands by having filed on locations with the Secretary of the Interior? Mr. HrxTER. T think so: but tliey lia.ve not o\er our lands. Mr. Laffeijty. If they l)ecome Government lands by surrender to the Government, would" not the Government's right of way, then, attach immediately? Mr. HiNTER. That is (|uite probable. I merely mentioned it, lie- cause I only irave them the promise. It is verbal: l)ut I should like to have any of our assignors live up to it. if ]iossible: and I should think they would do that, because witliout a railway it is not very much good. Some mention has been made regarding the excessive prices that this company might charge for lands there on water. That, how- ever, has not been the company's policy, and will not be. We must compete: and after having proven the country a grain-growing country, Ave Avill be very glad to sell to actual farmers otir lands there on strictly i)art-payment plan, Avith some little evidence of good faith, sav, a doAvn payment of one-tenth or some such nominal sum, indicating that they mean to be bona fide settlers. iNIr. EsTOPiNAE. Do you state Avhat ]irices you Avill charge — $35. did you say ? Mr. Hunter. AVith the Avater, that is our intention to keep it below that, because the lands lying at an elevation of 2,000 and even more feet north than Avhere we are, in fruit districts, are on sale to-day in Oregon and Idaho, and it Avill be necessary for us to meet that competition. KnoAving further, as I said this morning, that in the last 13 vears the company's average sales of farming lands have exceeded 1,000 acres a day, and the average profit upon that has not exceeded 32 cents per acre. The Chairman. Average profit? Mr. Hunter. Yes: aA^erage profit. 6 CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. Mr. Pickett. Has that been net? Mr. Hunter. That is net. Mr. Pickett. After inchiding all elements of expense? Mr. Hunter. After including all elements of expense, reasonable agent's commissions were, of course, deducted first. In some instances there were no commissions. None of the officers of this company have received any salary whatever, and it is the policy of the company to establish and operate experimental stations and to procure the best cereals adapted to the country wherever obtainable. Mr. Hawley. That is, you make the experiments for the benefit of the farmers and then give them the results of your work? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Moreover, we usually adopt the system of photographing the actual farm offered for sale under a system for which we have applied for patent. Here is the system. [At this point Mr. Hunter exhibited certain photographs to the members of the committee.] Mr. Pickett. Are these all irrigated lands? Mr. Hunter. No, sir; I merely showed you those to show you our system of selling lands. A man is shown what he is going to see before he comes there. Then unless he is shown that land we are open to misrepresentation. Mr. Pickett. Yes; I understand that. Mr. Hawley. These are pictures on another tract? Mr. Hunter. Yes; I have not the particular system. Mr. Pickett. Ts this 32 cents profit on irrigated lands or these other lands? Mr. Hunter. On all lands. T am sorry to say that our experience on the irrigated lands has been one of "Irish" dividend — has been a return of a loss. Usuall,y, in every instance, the farmer, as in the instance of these Swiss, is given back his money if he is dissatisfied, after inspection, and we expect every man to inspect his land, and give them ample time — weeks or months, as the case may be. I think any farmer is an idiot who l)uys land without inspecting it. Mr. Raker. Mr. Hunter, where was this picture taken that you presented to us? AVhich tract does this represent [referring to the two photographs i^resented by Mr. Hunter to the committee for their inspection] ? Mr. Hunter. This? Mr. Raker. Yes. Mr. Hunter. That is taken in — in the State of Florida. Mr. Raker. It does not say " Florida " here. The CiiAiR^MAN. It was taken where? Mr. Hunter. In the State of Florida. Mr. Raker. That is a long ways from Oregon. Mr. Pickett. I was going to ask what that has got to do with Oregon. Mr. Hunter. I merely exhibited it to show our system. The C'nAnniAN. What part of Florida is this? Mr. Hunter. North of Lake Okecholiee. The Chairman. Osceola County? Mr. Hunter. They are all in Oscola County. CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. 7 Mr. Eakek. The first picture is marked "tract 2, section 23, town- ship 35, range 32 " : the second, " tract 32, section 23, township 35, range 32." Where is this last tract of land? Mr. Hunter. One is section Mr. Raker. The same State? Mr. Hunter. One is section 23 and the other is section 23, ex- actly the same range and township. Mr. Raker. Have you anj^ pictures in Oregon and California ? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Pickett (referring to photograph). This shows the Hunter Land Co., of Minneapolis. Is that your home office? Mr. Hunter. Yes. sir. Mr. Pickett. I got the impression that this was some local com- pany here in Oregon. The Chairman. I did too. Mr. Raker. The picture here [indicating] is marked, " Showing average stretch of the lightly timbered lands." That is in the Paulina district ? Mr. Hunit:r. Yes; that is this very district. Mr. Hawley. What is your relation to the Oregon Land Co. ? Mr. Hunter. I am secretary and general manager of the Oregon Land Corporation, and the Hunter Land Co., of Minneapolis, owns one-half of the shares of that company. Mr. Pickett. A subsidiary company? Mr. Hunter. Yes: we maintain an Oregon branch in Portland, Oreg., for western business. Mr. Pickett. What is the capital of your company? Mr. Hunter. I think it is $50,000. Mr. Pickett. Does this 32 cents an acre include all administra- tive charges, and everything — the salaries of your officers Mr. Hunter. That is the net profit that we make. Mr. Pickett. That is net, after all the officers salaries are paid, and everything? Mr. Hunter. No officer ever received a salary connected with our company. Mr. Pickett. Oh, he does not? Mr. Hunter. No, sir. Mr. Raker. What has been the method and mode of the exchange you speak of in regard to land where you have made this net profit of 32 cents an acre? Mr. Hunter. The exchange? Mr. Raker. Or sale — how do you do that? Mr. Hunter. Oh, we do it through agents, chiefly — through ad- vertising and all such methods. Mr. Raker. Do you have any drawing system that this 32 cents an acre is involved in? Mr. Hunter. Oh, no; I merely mentioned that that was our average profit. Mr. Raker. Well, what I meant is, you sell an acre of land through a drawing system? Mr, Hunter. None whatever. Mr. Raker. You have not used that system? 8 CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. Mr, HuxNTER. We are absolutely opposed to it. The system that we sell under chiefly is that of the jihotogTaph system of the land itself. Mr. Raker. You do not get my views of the matter. For in- stance, you have got 100,000 acres of land. Do you divide it up, segregate it, block it off, and then have a drawing? Mr. Hunter. No, sir. Mr. Raker. A man may get 10 acres, ^A) acres, or (loO acres, and a town lot by paying so much; for instance, '200 acres, $200 for his right — nothing of that kind? Mr. HirNTER. No, sir; he buys 40 acres at the same pvice as he buys (SO acres. The town lots are g•i^"en away. Mr. Raker. That is what I wanted to know. Now, come back to this particular pk)t here, which is something similar to the one we had before on the otlier hearing. The north part, which is in town- ships 24, 25, and 26, ranges 7, 8, and 9, is the north part of the tract; that is wherein your ])rivately owned lands are that you desire to ex- change for lands south of the township line, or l)etween townships 26 and 27. Is that right ? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Haw^ley. On the hatched portion. Mr. Raker. Yes. About where is this divide you speak of? It would be about the center of township 27 south ? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. And the ranges that I have given ? Mr. Hunter. And the number of sections also tallic- with what we have to exchange. Mr. Raker. The land that you desire to exchange is the hatched land. It is the luitched land owned by the Government south of this land. Mr. Hawley. No; the uiihatched land? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Tlie hatclied bind l)clongs to tlic conii)any? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Wliat is the name of the comjiany? Mr. Hunter. The Oregon Land ('or])oration. Mr. Raker. Is any of this land tliat Avas obtained from the Oregon Military Road grant? Mr. HuN'raR. It is. Mr. Hawley. All of it? Mr. Hunter. All of it. Mr. Raker. Is there any of that bind invohcd in nny litigation? Mr. Hunter. None whatever. Mr. Raker. Litigation l)etween the (io\ ci'iuuent and the original grantees? Mr. Hawley. This land was never in litigation? Mr. Hunter. This land was adjudicated many yea is ago. Mr. Hawley. But not now. Mr. Hunter. And passed tlie Supreme Coui't twice. The title is absolutely ]ierfect. Mr. Raker. On the land on the north part that the company owns, it is timberland? Mr. Hunter. I beg your jiardon. CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. 9 Mr. Raker. I will repeat it to you. Has tiieve lieen any of that land cut over? Mr. Hunter. Xo, sir. Mr. Raker. In a natural state? ]\Ir. Hunt1':r. Yes. sir; there is not a mile within -2.') miles of there Mr. Raker. Have you had any estimate made by cruising on this land as to the number of feet per acre stumpage u})on the land? Mr. Hunter. Xo, sir. Mr. Raker. How many settlers are there on your land that you have agreed to sell to — that is, north of the center of township 27 south ? Mr. Hunter. Well Mr. Raker. Approximately. Mr. Hunter. You say " settlers.*" There are some of these |)eoplc that had contracted the land, but they are not settlers yet. Mr. Raker. Well. I will put it another way. How much of that land — — Mr. Hunter. I should say Mr. Raker. North of the line designated — and when I speak here- after of north it will be north of the center of township i27 south and ranges 5. G. 7, 8, and 9 east. Mr. Laeferty. What meridian is that ? Mr. Hunter. Willamette meridian. I should >ay. roughly, :>,()00 acres. Mr. Raker. That you have contracted? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. Where does this land lie, in reference to the stream and the kind and character of the land? Mr. Hunter. It lies along the stream beds and I'iparian rights and water of some sort. Mr. Raker. Is that agricultural land? Mr. Hunter. Strictly. Mr. Raker. It w^ould still be in the exterior boundarv lines of this? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Of this national reserve? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. And also adjoining the land that you would exchimge with the Government for its land? Mr. Hunter. Yes; and little streaks along the river. Mr. Raker. How long since was it that you made the contracts? Mr. Hunter. Some of them have not been executed this year: they have been held up. Mr. Raker. Well, how long. since have you been making contracts with them? Mr. Hi'NTER. I would say since last — about the 1st of September last, some of them before w'e even acquired the land. Mr. Raker. What do you estimate to be the value at the jiresent time; that is, the actual cash value as the matter now stands, of your timber land per acre, north of the line designated? Mr. Hunter. Well, sir, I could not answer that question. I know^ nothing about timber. We do not deal in it and. except in Vancouver Island, we do not own any. 10 CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. Mr. Kaker. Could you give us au idea as to the size of tlie trees, the general average of these trees? Mr. Hunter. The general average of the yellow pine, I should say. in that district they are not particularly large. Mr. Raker. How large — from 2i to G feet in diameter? Mr. Hunter. Not as large as that, not by any means. Two and one-half feet would be neai'cr it. Mr. Raker. What other kind of timber is on the land except yellow pine? Mr. TIuxTKR. Xone — on the yellow-})ine district, you mean? Mr. Raker. Yes. Mr. Hunter. I should say none. Mr. Raker. How much of this land on the north of the line that your com]:)any owns is susceptible of irrigation — roughly estimated? Mr. Hi NTER. That is a hard question to answer — not a great deal on the north part. Mr. Raker. Would it be in the neighborhood of something like 10,000 or 15.000 acres? Mr. Hunter. Ten or twenty sections, I should say. Mr. Raker. Yes: 10 or 20 sections. I will figure it ujj — between 17,000 and 20.000. Mr. Hawley. It would run r,.000 to 12,000 acres? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. Would 3'OU figure on I'etaining the laiul that is sus- ceptilde of irrigation? Mr. Hunter. No. We think it would be. perhaps, toct costly. Mr. Raker. For you to Imild the ditch? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. ]\Ir. Raker. Or the ditch to be built j\fr. Hunter. AA"e have not made ISTr. Raker. The land soutli of the line designated heretofore that is owned by you is land that is susceptible of irrigation '. Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. And what would it produce — what kind of crops? Mr. Hunter. It will produce, we know, rye, and I saw some stub- ble of some wheat grown there. Mr. Raker. Is the Government's laud in the same condition? Mr. Hunter. Precisely. Mr. Hawley. Clover t Mr. Hunter. Well, yes; under irrigation, clover. JNIr. Raker. I understand there is an agreement betAveen you and the Southern Pacific Railroad Co. that they are to have a right of way over all of your lands, on this tract, both north and south of the line designated. Is that right? Mr. HuNiTSR. A verbal agreement; yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Well, supposing that the Government should make this exchange, would you ex])ect the Government to carry out Avith the Southern Pacific Railroad your agreement with them for the right of way across the line? Mr. Hi NTER. Well. I would like them to respect it. but Mr. Haw- le}' says they Avould get it anyway — or Mr. Latierty. Mr. Raker. There are a great many conditions that may be im- posed on a railroad company getting a right of way across a national forest. CONSOLIDATION OF FOEEST LANDS. 11 Mr. Hunter. AVell, so long as Mr. Raker. What I am figuring on is whether or not tlie thing would be in shape so that the railroad would go right over this land under the private arrangements heretofore had and which might be consunnnated by the exchange made, so that the Government would not be able to hold up some rules and regulations to other railroads seeking rights of ways across national forestry lands? Mr. Hunter. Well, so long as the Government gives us the four town sites that we are giving lots aAvay in I do not think we would particularly care. Mr. Raker. What do you mean by " four town sites "? You want the Government to exchange land up here where four town sites are now located by you ? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. You would want that land if exchanged? Mr. Hunter. I would want that kept for that purpose. Mr. Lafferty. He wants to retain those lands in making this exchange. Mr. Raker. You want the land that you have selected now as town sites ? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. And that the Government could not select that par- ticidar tract of land in making the exchange ? Mr. Hunter. Unless the Government prefers to substitute town sites someAvhere else that they would rather have us take. IMr. Raker. Has this right of way of the Government of the rail- road been surveyed ? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Located? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Tliey are building toward it as fast as they can. Mr. Hunter. T understand — I saw a clipping yesterday that they had discontinued. Mr. Raker. How near are they to the south part, temporarily? INIr. Hunter. Temporarily? Mr. Raker. How near are they working on the railroad? Mr. Hunter. The last time they were Avorking was about )1^> miles south. ]Mr. Raker. They woidd have to go through this territory to get through the objective point in the Willamette Valley? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. What is that point? Mr. Hunter. Natron. Mr. Hawley. It comes into Eugene. Mr. Hunter. Yes. ' Mr. Hawley. And it would cross over at Sprinsfeld and goes down. Mr. Raker. In the Willamette Valley? Mr. Hawley. Near Eugene. Mr. Raker. And then go from Natron to strike the main line that runs from San Francisco tip through California and the Willa- mette Valley to Fremont? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Hawley. That is right. 12 CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. The Ghajkman. How long has OregDu Co. owned this hind that 3^011 propose to exchange with the Government!' Mr. Hunter. Since the middle of November. The Chairman. Last year? ]Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. I was connected with the line prior to that time, and was })resident of the Oregon Military Land Grant Co. We sold all the lands that got these to a Kansas City outfit, and the Hnnter Land Co. retained an agency of sale on this, but did not think of putting the lands on the market until some railroad con- struction ^^■as under way. and then we repurchased from this Military Co., which I had sold entirely out — my interest in which I had sold entirely out. Mr. Pickett. I do not know as it is material: but what did you pay for that land? ^Ir. Hunter. When we bought it l)ack? Mr. Pickett. Yes. IVIr. TIuNTER. $3. (').") and certain i)ack taxe^. T do not know what they were. Mr. Kakkr. The land that vou sold to the Kansas City Co. was about 250,000 or 300,000 acres?" Mr. Hunter. Five hundred and sixteen thousand acres. Mv. Rakhr. Now, they disposed of all their land after the method that I suggested awhile ago as to the drawings, did they not? Mr. Hunter. I belie\'e they did. Mr. Raker. And did thev not make out of it in the neighborhood of $3,000,000 in cash ? ^fr. Hi'nter. Xo, sir; I do not believe they uiade a dollar. So T am informed. Thev li'ot int(> a mess and iiad to l»uild the $500,000 Mr. Ha\\'ley. Did the l>ooth-Kelley Lnm1)er Co. ever buy any of those granted lands? Mr. Hunter. Which the Military Co. acquired? jSIr. Rakkr. This will not apply net-essarily to this, but I want to show how it would work out. Five hundred thousand dollars of lands were transferred to the Kansas City })eoph'. They got the title to it: they got all their cash when the di-awing was had — cash money; and they turned over all the reclamation projects and all the other tilings to the ])eoiile that bought the land. So. it is uj) to the people to make good. Is not that right? Was not tliat the condi- tion that left them in? Mr. HiNTER. Xo. sir: their contracts were not jiaid u}) at the time they held their opening and the reclamation was undertaken and liad to be com])leted by them. Mr. Raker. By the company? ]Mr. Hx'NTER. By the comiiaiiy : yes, sir. I l)ought a number of the contracts myself, which they agreed to irrigate and which, by the way, have not yet been irrigated, but Afr. Raker. I understood — so as to bring out how it might come into this — from the people themselves that they bought for cash. Mr. Hunter. Oh, no. Mr. Raker. There were some ^i.^O came into my town on their way to this land and I talked Avith a good many of them and received some corres])ondence from some of them, and I understood they paid cash for their drawings. They all apj^eared at Lake A^iew and drew CONSOLIDATION OF FOEEST LANDS. 13 SO much land, all the ^vay from 10 acres to 2,000 acres, ami they got a town lot Avith the drawings; that there were reclamation projects, etc.. to be carried out, and the people that got the land took over all these things Mr. Hawley. Would you let me ask a question ? Mr. Raker. Yes. Mr. Haa\'lev. Were those land drawings iu Lake View or were they of lands in this section ? Mr. Raker. Lake View, and scattered all over southern Oregon, which is a part of the Oregon Military lands. Tliis land was sold to the company at that time? Mr. HujSter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. They all understood, to show the relation of things, that there were three fine ranches in our county — Modoc County — and two or three in Oregcm. They did not put those lands in the drawings, but the company still held them out. Now. was this land in this drawing or was it held out? Mr. Hunter. It was never in the drawings. Mr. Raker. They owned it at the time, did they not ? Mr. Hunter. Yes; but simultaneously — but at the same moment that we disposed of our shares, which gave them control, they exe- cuted a contract — an exclusive-agency contract — to the Hunter Land Co. covering this particular area. Mr. Raker. At the same time they made the other contract? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. But, as a matter of fact, they held out the lands in southeastern Oregon, south and west of Lake View, known as the XL ranch. They held out the XL ranch and all its property in Modoc County, Cal., and what others I do not know, and this land involved here as well, and turned this particular tract over to the Hunter Land Co.? j\Ir. Hunter. I do not know what they did aboTit the other property. ]\fr. Raker. And the other property instead of going into the drawing was held or redeeded from the company to individuals of the company, and they now own it? Mr. Hi'nter. I do not know what connection it has with this thing. i\Ir. Raker. I am going to get at it in a few moments. Mr. Hunter. I Avill say from my own recollection of it that the XL property was included. Mr. Raker. The people thought it was, but it was not. They bought out the XL ranch, and I do not know, but about 7,000 head of cattle, and both the Oregon land and the California land. Mr. LIunter. I am almost certain it was included. Mr. Raker. They own the land now and are renting it? Mr. Hunter. I do not know what their methods are, Judge Raker, and I am not in sympathy with them, and never have been. Mr. Haw^ley. You have no connection with them? Mr. Hunter. No possible connection with them, except in the court against them. INIr. Raker. All I was trying to do was to show what connection and how thev got this land out of them. X4 CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. Mr. Pickett. Who did you get this land from— this Kansas City concern? Mr. Hunter. This particuhir hmd was acquired by me personally from the Booth-Kelley Lunibei- Co. — from the Oregon Land and Livestock Co.. a Eiigvne or San Francisco corporation — I think San Francisco. Mr. PiCKE'rr. What year? Mv. IIuNTKR. 1906. ' Here is a prospectus about the whole business. ]\Ir. Pickett. When was it transferred the next time? We can not put the prospectus in the record, you know. Mr. Hunter. About 1909. Mr. Pickett. To wdiom did you sell them then ? Mr. Hunter. To the Oregon Valley Land Co. Mr. Pickett. Who did they transfer to, and when ? Mr. Hunter. The particular land in question? Mr. Pickett. The particular land in question. Mr. Hunter. It was at the same time given to the Hunter Land Co. to resell for that company. Mr. Raker. The Oregon Valley Land Co. held all the land— 560,000 acres — which included this. Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Eaker. Then, at the time of the drawing or just before, this land was sold by the Oregon Land Co. to the Hunter Land Co. ? Mr. Hunter. No; years before. Mr. Pickett. Sold or just given the agency of it? Mr. Hunter. Given exclusively the agency — given, oh, a long time before. Mr. Raker. Where did the people remain when the Oregon Land Co. got it ? The Oregon Land Co. got the title to this ? Mr. Hunter. No; I do not think they did. I think it remained in the Oregon Military Land Grant Co. Mr. Raker. They did not. when they bought it, take the deed? Mr. Hunter. No. Mr. Pickett. When you speak of the " Oregon Co." do you mean the Oregon Valley Co.? Mr. Raker. The Oregon Valley Co. bought over the 500,000 acres. Mr. Hunter. The Oregon Valley Land Co. really never acquired this at all. Mr. Pickett. So nuiny names are confused. The Oregon Valley Land Co. — that is the name of it? Mr. Hunter. The Oregon Valley Co. Mr. Pickett. They acquired it? Mr. Hunter. They acquired it from the Oregon Military Land Grant Co. Mr. Pickett. When did the Oregon Land Grant Co. transfer the title to somebody, and to whom? Mr. Hunter. The Oregon Valley Land Co. never transferred this land at all. I think they defaulted to the Oregon Military Co. re- garding it, and the Oregon Land Corporation acquired this title from the Oregon Military Land Grant Co. Mr. Pickett. That was last fall? Mr. Hunter. The original purchase. Mr. Hawley. That was never consummated. C0NS0L1DA.TI0N OF FOREST LANDS. 15 Mr. Hunter. No. Mr. Raker. Let us see right there. The}' had an option on all the land. Mr. Pickett. Who? Mr. Raker. The Oregon Valle}^ Land Co. They had an option on all the land that the Oregon Military Road Co. had. Mr. Hunter. I think they had. Mr. Raker. About 560,000 acres. They took a deed to some 250,000 or some 300,000 acres. The title then went to the Oregon Vallev Land Co.? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. The balance of it — but they did not take the title. Mr. Hunter. That was after my regime as president of the Mil- itary Mr. Raker. To the balance they did not take the title, and then when the matter was disposed of, however it was done, this ])articular land involved here, the deed then was made by the Military Road Co. to the Oregon Land Co. Mr. Hunter. Xo; the agency, which is a matter of record in Klamath County, from the Oi*egon Valley Land Co., which defaulted to the Military Co. Mr. Pickett. Were you connected with the Oregon Vallev Land Co.? Mr. Hunter. Xo; in no way whatever. Mr. Pickett. Were vou connected with this Oregon Militarv Road Co.? Mr. Hunter. I was president of it. Mr. Raker. However, tliey defaulted. How did the title come from the Militarv Road Co.; and if it did. where is the title now to this land ? " Mr. Hunter. The Oregon Corporation acquired the land by pur- chase. Mr. Raker. They got the title ? Mr. Hunter. Xo; under contract. Mr. Raker. Contract; but the Oregon Military Road Co. still held the legal title? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. And the Oregon Land Co. had a contract foi- it? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. But, whatever arrangement, whether agreement be- tween them or default, when the matter was disposed of this par- ticular tract of land now involved went to the Oregon 3Iilitary Road Co. for further disposition? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. And did thev transfer it then to anvone — give a legal title? Mr. Hunter. To the Oregan Land Corporation, imder bond for deed — warranty deeds. Mr. Raker. I wanted to finish this up. I will get that straight. It will take me but a moment. Mr. Pickett. If you can, all right. Mr. Raker. Well, we will get it straight. Mr. Pickett. There are so many of these different names. Mr. Raker. Let me get the names, and then I can ask questions. 16 CONSOLIDATION OP FOREST LANDS. Mr. IIiNTEi;. JiuliiC. 1 will give yon all that data _v»>u want. Ml'. Kakf.i;. Xow, tlie Oregon — what is this matter of Oregon ]\Iilitary Eoad Co.: that is the original is it not? Mr. Hi'KTER. Original? Mr. Kakek. Yes. Mr. Ill NTEK. Yes. sir; Land Orant Co. Mr. Kaker. Oregon Military Road Co.? Mr. HuNTEK. Xo; Land Grjint Co. Mr. Hawley. Oregon Military Land (Irant Co.? Mr. liAKEH. Oregon Military Land Grant Co. A^ry well. Now, tliey made an arrangement to dispose of all their land, about .')G0,000 acres, to whom or to Avhat company? Mr. Htnter. To the Oregon Valley Land Co. Mr. Raker. All right. Are there any companies which have got anything to do with that land except those two — the title of it? , Mr. IIi^nter. The Oregon Land Corporation now. that is The CiiAiR^NiAN. The present owner? Mr. Hunter. What? The Chairman. The Oregon Land Corporation is now the })resent owner. Mr. Raker. Let us see, the Oregon JSIilitary Land (irant Co., by ^neans of various conveyances, got all of this land, about 560,000 acres, and held the legal title to it in about 1009? Mr. HrNiT:R. Yes. Mr. Raker. They made a contract with the Oregon Valley Land Co. to deed them this land? Mr. Ill ^TER. Yes. Mr. Raker. They did deed alxait .".00.000 acres of this, or about that, and the Oregon Valley Land Co. disjxjsed of that land? Mr. Hi nter. Yes. Mr. Raker. There was al)ont 2r>0.00() acres of land that the Oregon Military Land Grant Co. agreed to sell to the Oregon Valley Land Co. Tliat was not consunnnated. and by some arrangement, what- ever it might l)e. the Oregon Military Land Grant Co.. after default or other arrangements, whatever they might be. with the Oregon Valley Land Co.. turned around and made a deed of the land that was consummated Avith the Oregon Valley Land Co. — with and to (he Oregon Land Corporation: and the Oregon Land Corporation is tlie »ine now holding the land which is involved here. Mr. Hawley. Xot the T.OO.OOO acres? Mr. Raker. This particular tract. Mr. Hunter. The Oregon Land Grant Co. owned by purchase of these lands. I was then ])resident. We contracted the lands to the Oregon Valley Co. Shortly afterwards, then, the president of the Oregon Valley Co. said. '' I wish to l)iiy the control ami all the shares of the Oregon Military (\)." Mr. Pickett. Wlio said that? Mr. Hi NTER. R. (t. ]Martin. the then president of the Valley Co. I said. "All right, the Hunter Land Co. wall sell you its shares," whicli re})resented 02^ per cent of the entire issue — when I say Hunter I^and Co. I mean myself and my brother — but in making that sale to you you must give me back, or give back to the Hunter Land Co., the exclusive right to sell the 50.000 acres in question before this committee. CONSOLIDATION OF FOEEST LANDS. 17 ]Mr. Lafferty. Pardon me. May I ask a question? The Chairman. Sure. Mr. Lafferty. Sell at a certain price ? Mr. Hunter. Certainly. Mr.' Lafferty. Then you obtained an option to buy it back? Mr. .Hunter. Certainly. For a period of three years as tliis Valley outfit Avas constituted they did not include this land in the opening, because there were no railways anyAYhere near it. Very well. The Oregon Valley Co. failed to live up to their agreement > Mr. Pickett. That was after the president of the company had all the shares in the Military Road Co.? Mr. Hunter. It was. I stated that he did. I do not know that he ever did. In case I parted with my holdings and no longer be- came identified with the Military Co. Mr. Pickett. You parted with them to him? Mr. Hunter. To him. Mr. Pickett. Yes. Go ahead. ]Mr. Hunter. They broke their contract and we intended to sue them for damages — for breach of contract. The purchase by the Oregon Land Corporation, which is half OAvned by the Hunter Land Co.. Avas a compromise arrangement to avoid litigation. Mr. Pickett. What breach of the contract did you complain of? Mr. Hunter. They claimed — the Valley Co. — that it had failed to pay a loan of something and had lost, and that the lands had reverted to the Oregon Military Poad Co.. and that they Avere no longer oAvners of the land, which Ave did not believe, but I could give you. Judge Raker, all this matter. I do 'not see Avhy we are encum- bering this record here. I can give you the whole history. Mr. Pickett. That is what Ave want in the record. Mr. Raker. That is Avhat we want: to get it in the record of the subcommittee. Mr. Hunter. The title to those lands is as absolutely near perfect as auA' lands in America. Reference to the records of the Supreme Court, and subsequent al)stracts brought doAvn to date. There can not be any question raised by anyone regarding the titles of these lands. Mr. Raker. We have given full credit to your statement. The record would show AA^herethe title was. What strikes me as peculiar is, if the Oregon Valley Land Co. did not get absolutetitle how could they convey title to anybody? Is not that right? Mr. Hunter. The Oregon Valley Co.. I believe, conveyed title to any lands they ever did liaA^e. Mr. Raker. Then those they put in the drawings they get title to— - deeds ? Mr. Hunter. I presume they did. j Mr. Raker. They had to convey legal title, did they not? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. There were certain parts of the land they held back and did not get deeds from the Oregon Military Roads grant? Mr. Hunter. I can not ansAver that. I Avas not identified Avith the company. Mr. Raker. That had to be, I think, unless the Oregon Valley Land Co. got the title to all of it. Is not that right? Now, what 43749—12 2 18 COXSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. I want to know is. liow did the Oregon Land Co. get title from the Oregon Military IJoad Co.. or is the contract still out lietween the Oregon Valley Co. and the Oregon Military Koad Co. '. Mr. Hunter. It is not. The records in Klamath County show a perfect title to-day. Mr. IvAKEi;. Are there any suits pending between these various companies ? Mr. IIuNTER. Xoue wliatever. Mr. liAKER. The conti'act has expired? Mr. HuNTEi;. It has: cleaned up by quit claiuis and other necessary instruments. Mr. Kaker. AVere tliese contracts recorded? Mr. Hunter. Tliey were made a uiatter of j-t'cord. Mr. Raker. I see. The CiiAHniAN. ^^dlat is the uauie of the gi;antor in the deed to ihe present com})any^ Mr. Ht'ntei!. The ( )regon Military Land Gi/ant Co. The Chairman. The original company that owned the lanf land on Exhibit A would flow south. I find now. from examina- tion of" the niiip, tliat that is not correct, and I am going to ask a few ^luostions on it. Coming from Fish I.iake, on this Exhibit A. the %'ater flows south and east. That is right, is it not? Mi\ Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. There is a stream marked here on the north i)art known as the " East Fork of Deschutes " that flows north and east? CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. 19 Mv. IIiNTER. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. And also from Crescent Lake that flows practically eastward ^ Mr. Hi XTER. Yes. sir. Mr. Raker. And the two branches join on the northeastern corner of the land. That tract on the north would be irrigated by ditches taking- water from these streams and the ditches would l)e taken from the water which would flow north. Is not that right? Mr. Hi NTER. That would be the natural way for it to go, unless you run your uuiins around along the sides of the hills, and let the water flow in a diflerent direction ; for instance, some of these streams do run this way. The Coral stream runs about in that direction, southeast again. Mr. Raker. You would have two systems if you handled it all — • two irrigating systems!! Mr. Hunter. Certainly. Mr. Raker. Separate, complete, and distinct? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Had you contemplated irrigating the north part from the two branches of the Deschutes River? Have you completed this? Mr. Hi XTER. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Have you made any ditches? Mr. Hunter. No. Mv. Raker. Made your surveys? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. And designated on the ground where they shall go? Mr. Hi^xTER. Not deflnitely. ^Ir. Raker. Xot definitely. Well, have you ap})roximately desig- nated on the ground where it will go? Mr. Hawley. Just a moment. Let me show you these maps. I do not think you have seen them yet. They were sent to me from Ore- gon by the representatives there. They show the approximate location. Mr. Raker. The large blue-print map? Mr. Hawley. Two of them. This is Xo. 1. Mr. Raker. Which is the north half? T After a pause:] The bhie i^rint Xo. 2 is the north lialf of the land involved and the blue j)rint marked Xo. 1 is the south half. Are the red lines marked on blue print Xo. 2 approximately as you have your system for irriga- tion ? Mr. Hunter. I believe so. Mr. Raker. And that one on Xo. 1 for the north half the same? ^Ir. Hawley. South half. jNIr. Raker. South half — the same. Is that right, Mr. Hunter? Mr. Hunter. I believe so. Mr. Raker. Xow, when did you make your application for your water rights on this? Mr. Hunter. I do not remember. Mr. Raker. Approximately. Mr. Hunter. A year or two ago. Mv. Raker. Take the south half, now. Have you complied with the law, with the intention of using this water for irrigation pur- iioses on your land, as you understand it? Mr, Hunter. Yes, sir. 20 CONSOLIDATION OF FOEEST LANDS. Mr. Rakek. Up to date what have you done? Mr. TTuNTER. Well, made the surveys as shown here on the inai)s. Mr. Rakeij. Have you made any applications to the Sei-reta ry of the Interior for rio-ju of way across the (Jovernment land? Mr. Th NTKK. Except with the local Government office at Orciion, I supi)ose it is. 1 do not think we have. Mr. Raker. Then neither to the south half nor to the north half have you made any survey or maps or jdats for application to tlie Secretary of the Interior to go over the Government lands with ytiui- canals and ditches for the purpose of irrigating your land? Mr. Hunter (to Mr. Hawley). Is that so? I am not certain. I do not know absolutely about it. It may be that we have not. ]Mr. Rakkk. AVliat right do you claim to this water on the north? What makes you claim that? ]\Ir. Hunter. Filing. ]\fr. Raker. Just making the filing and making some of the |)re- liminary siu'veys. I.- that right? Mv. Ill N TKR. We made an absolute survey, meandered the lakes, and measured tlie water, and filed upon it, and paid the fee. ]Nrr. Raker. You have not meandered the ditches yet, actually, have you? Mr.HiiNTER. I belifve xi. These nuips show that. I dou't know- much about this engineering business. That is under somebody else's management. Mr. Raker. Have you done the saute to the south half? Mr. Hi'NTER. I believe so. Here are the maps [indicating]. ]\Ir. Raker. You have not done any work oti either so far as tlu^ actual excavation of the ditches is concerned? ]\Ir. HuNTEi:. I do n((t think so. ]\rr. Raker, liuilt any dams for the juirpose of imi)oun(liug the water? Mr. Hunter. No. sir. We are not recpiired to do that nor to roui- mence it until April 1 of this year. Mr. Raker. I was seeking for information. You would not !)e giving the Government anything, then, by virtue of that exchange, so far as the water right is concerned, Avould you? ]Mr. Hunter. I would be giving about four years of my efi'orl and several thousand dollars in expense in the preliminary work. ]Mr. Raker. ITnless the Government then took up and continued the irrigation system that you have planned out. wdth your surNcys and maps and ))lats. it would be no good to the Government, would it? Mr. Hunter. I should think the water rights would be, certainly. ]Mr. Raker. The Government could ha\'e no water rights unless it proceeded to utilize them. ]Vrr. Hunter. Xot — is not necessarily along our lines, would they, Judge ? ^li'. Lafferti'. M;iy 1 a-lc ;•, (|nestion tliei'e? ]Mr. Raker. Sure. Mr. LaI'T'erty. Was this water to the north in a forest reserve when you filed on it at Salem Avith the State engineer ov outside of the forest reserve? Mr. HtTNTER. I could not answer that. Mr. Laffei!tv. You s])oke about relinquishing. If you should re- linquish to-day. could not John Smith file on it to-morrow? CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. 21 Ml". Hunter. Certainly. Mr. Lafferty. How could 3^011 give the Government anything by relinquishing- it? But I do not believe John Smith could file on it to-morroM', if it is inside of the forest reserve. I think you must have made your filing before — put in the forest reserve. Mr. Hunter. As I recall my filings they were prior to the present Oregon law. Mr. PicKE'n\ Can you not give the year or month your filings were made? Mr. Hunter. The papers will show that. I do not recall now. Mr. Pickett. Where are all these papers? Mr. Hunter. At Salem : our copies. I presume. [To Mr. Haw- ley :] Are they there ? Mr. Haweey. They would be in the State engineer's office of the State of Oregon. MV. Raker. I see that the Government has particularly included in this reserve this lake and clear out around for the purpose of including the boundaries within the reserve. You do not know whether this re- serve was created before you started to work or not, do you? Mr. Hunter. I do not. I think that my filings were made prior to the present Oregon water-rights law. but I do not remember the date. Mr. Pickett. Do you not know — pardon me — it seems to me you ought to know, if you do not know, whether you made them last year or the year before last or the year preceding the year before last; it seems to me you ought to know within a year you made them. ISIr. Haavley. Were they made by you or the other representatives of your company? Mr. Hunter. Bv me; and I think thev were made vear before last. Mr. Pickett. That would be 1010? '' Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Eaker. As to your right to the water and the water rights that you may have obtained by virtue of your filings and your work, is it not a fact that under the Oregon law they would revert and be open to any subsequent filing -by anybody the moment that you fail to comply with the law at a certain date? Mr. Hunter. Yes, sir. Mr. Raker. Then, if the Government look a transfer of these water rights that you now claim, it would have to proceed under the Oregon law to consunnnate and complete this system, the same as vou have started it, or they would lose the rights, would they not? Mr. Hunter. I presume so. Mr. Raker. Well, now, is it advisable, is it a worthy project, or one that a man could expend money on individually or that the Gov- ernment could spend money on to continue that and to have it for the irrigation of this land, "in the north of this tract of land ? Mr. Hunter. I should say that the Government could use it to ten times better advantage by using it on lands lying farther to the north and at a much lower elevation. Mr. Raker. Wlw could not you? Mr. Hunter. Because we do not own the land. Mr. Raker. Who does? Mr. Hunter. Either the Government or some Carey Act company. 22 CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS, Mr. Eaker. If tlie Carey Act company owns the land now, it W(Mi1(1 not do the Government an}^ good to get the water right, wouhl it t Mr. HiNTEij. I do not think the Carey xVct companies do. Mr. ITawley. I do not think there are any Carey-Act companies in that conntry. I think they are generally public lands lower down in the Deschutes Eiver — thousands of feet lower elevation. Mr. Eaker. If you completed your water system you wouhl lia\e it for these lands below whether Carey-Act Government land or private individuals, would you not, just the samei' Mr. Hunter. I do not know. Mr. Eaker. Why not? Mr. HuNTEK. If that is true, why do we have to give our pre- liminary and definite surveys in order to hold it? jNlr. Eakek. That is under the Oregon law. Mr. Huntek. Oh. Mr. Eaker. That is a very comprehensive and expensive statute of Oregon showing what a man must do to get a water right in Oregon, and he must do such things: is not tliat right? Mr. Eakei!. Under the Ignited States law, getting a right of way over I^nitcil States forestry lands, or over the Government lands, you have to take u}) the same matter with tlie Government and get per- mission to cross the Go\ernment land through the Secretary of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture. That, I mulerstand, you have not attempted t(» do if Mr. lIi'NTER. Kxcept that I remember speaking to the local for- ester, and he said that it would be all right and it was unnecessary at this time. Mr. Eaker. Why unnecessary^ ISIr. Hunter. I do not know. Mr. Eaker. Do you not know, frou) your examination and the advice of your counsel — have they not ad\ised that you can not cross a foot of land or get one single right thei-e until the Govei-nment has given you that permission? Mr. Hi'NTER. 1 spoke to the State engineer of Oregon ou lliat very subject — at least that is my best recollection now that he said it— certainly. I have carried it with me all this time — that if we Itought with the State, under the present water law. that there is an understanding with the Goverinnent that Ave will be saved. The subject came up. liecause a man from Boise, I think, filed The CirATR:\iAN. I do not see how this is going to help this com- mittee. jNIr. Eaker. If there is such an understanding. The CiTAiRMAX. He is talkinir al)out a man from Boise who filed Mr. Eaker. If there is such an miderstanding between the oflicers of Oi'egon and the Land Department I want to know it. as a member of this committee, and I want to know why the same understanding is entered into with the same States upon (he stuue matter. I realize that in the State of California we have our water law and we nnist (•omi)ly with the State law. and. in addition to that, we must conijily literally with the Government — national acts to cross the reserves and under the rules and regulations of the Department of the In- terior and the Department of Agriculture. CONSOLIDATION OF FOEEST LANDS. 23 The Chairman. The idea I had in mind was that what somebody told him in Oregon of the understanding was not the best evidence of the understanding. That ought to be a matter of record here. Mr. Hunter. Except, Mr. Chairman, that the man who made tlie statement was our State engineer that we seem to run to in such matters. The Chairman. The committee would have to go to headquarters on a matter of that kind. Mr. Hunter. Whether our title as yet to the Avater has been ap- proved I am not prepared to state. From what you gentlemen say I should think it was not, but we wnll expect, of course, to conforis. to the Government regulations. Mr. Raker. It would never be perfect except you used it for bene- ficial purposes? Mr. Hunter. Certainly. Mr. Raker. And complied with the law. both State and National. Your title is always dependent upon l)eneficial use. Tluit is right. is it not ? Mr. Hunter. Yes. Mr. Raker. Pass on to another matter. Why can not you go ahead and carry out your project just as yf botia water rigiu- and land ? Mr. Hunter. It would. Mr. Raker. And the people that bought would then have to go in together and maintain it? Mr. Hunter. Yes. INIr. Raker. They would each own a certain right in the water? Mr. Hunter. Priority of right in their ditch. Mr. Raker. Yes. Now, is there enough water — i^an there be enough water developed for the south half to irrigate it alF^ Mr. Hunter. I doubt it very much. Mr. Raker. Well, then, why do you want tlie land? Mr. HiTXTER. P)ecause we propose to •^ell it where we irrigate one- half, if necessary. Mr. Raker. How is that ? Mr. Hunter. Here is a country that is level. A man can irrigate the north half of his 80-acre piece. Mr. Raker. Yes. Mr. Hunter. This year. ]\Ir. Raker. Yes. 26 CONSOLIDATION Ol' KOH.KSl" LANDS. Mr. IIiNii;!;. And plant it in cIonci'. Thoiv is not -ullicicnt water l(( injo-aie his wliolc SO-aciv piece. Ilei-e lie could apply the walei' (-h Ml fact to -successfully farm this 10.000 acres!' Mr. lIiNTJoi!. If you use the word '" i'ai-ni '' 1 say emphatically yes, Itecause these ii-ri^itors ima_u-ine that plants are laru-ely aijuatic; they (h'own them out. They would he better oil' if they had half as much water as they June, and that is just the wvy reason. \'erv ii'ood ve- sults may he had hy wcltiiiif i( e\cry second yeai'. I am lirudy con- vinced that is sudicient. Ml'. Uakki!. I f you Completed your plant nt)\\ you would liaxc an ahnndaiM-e of water for the I'O.OOO acres that vou now own? Ml'. IIiNTKi;. 1 hope so. Mr. Kaki:i;. A\'ell. do yon not feel certain!' I\[r. IlrNTKi;. I feel it; yes. sir. Ml-. 1{akki;. .\nd williiiii' to i:'<» further t(> think thai you liave enoniilt to irriii'ate the other I'O.OOO acres now owned l>\' the (Jovern- iuenl and to have siillicient water to successfully farm it!' Mr. IIrNi'i:i;. "^'es. sir. Mr. Kakf.i;. If that is the case, you people would not he injured in iiny way, shape, or marnier: it would he to youi' a(hanta,i»;e if von went n^ht ahead and com]>leted yctur ii'i'ia'ation system ami ,i!;ot your ditciies o\-er the land, and the (Joxcrnment would he compelled then ((* throw ojK'ii this land to settlement ( Mr. IIi-NTKi;. Will \{ ( Mr. Rakkh. Woidd it not '( Mr. IliNii-.i;. If il will, do not le( u^ discuss ihis any moi'e. he- cause w( aic not lioiiiii; to stand here to eriv as you do. \ ou would have some idea as to its value. 28 CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. Mr. Hltnter. We buy Innds, Mr. Pickett, in large areas for settle- ment, and put farmers upon it. and if in areas Ave ac(iuire there are timber tracts we usually sell it to some timber outfit. Mr. Pickett. Yes: l)ut where there is any large percentage of timber tracts yon mu>^t form some opinion as to the value of your tract. ]Mr. Hunter. We never have had it cruised. Mr. Pickett. What is the relation to the total }n'ice you are pay- ing ? Mr. Hunter. We have not had it cruised, nor have we had time yet. Mr. Pickett, ^'ou s}joke a little while ago of its being valuable land. I want your idea of it. jNIr. Hunter. I am using the Government's cruisers and experts' report as to that. Mr. Pickett. What do they say about that ? j\Ir. Hunter. If you refer to the hearings. Mr. Whistler states that the value would be alwut $3.50 per 1,000 feet— a little over $5 a thousand close to the railway — when the railway is there. As to how many thousand feet. I have not the remotest idea. 'J'he CHAiR:\rAN. Your company has had no valuation placed on it? INIr. Hunter. Xone whatever. The Chairman. Are there any further questions? IVfr. Raker. You woidd have to cross the Government land to make the ditches here, would you not — in the south part? Mr. Hunter. Yes. sir^ Mr. Raker. Wcdl. then, you could not do anything without cross- ing their hind ( Mr. Hunter. I do not see how we could. Mr. Raker. If it was one of their conditions that yon must sell Avater to other applicants as well as furnish it to yourself, the ap- plicants going in there to file on this land wonld be entitled to the water after paying you for it just the same as those upon your land. W(add they not '. ^Ir. Hunter. Certainly: if we have a supply sufficient to give ii to them. The Goverument need not impose that, for we will agree to give it frankly, and at the same rate precisely, making allowance for the value of the land, as the other settler pays. The Chairiman. Ai'e tliei'e any other (juestions? jNIr. PIawley. Mr. Chairman. I woulcl like to make this one sug- gestion : Just south of this is the Klamath project, where the people had the right to go in and file on the land, and got the land from the (iovernment on the usual terms of homesteading, and the Avater right on the land I think now is $35 an acre, and if this land is opened u]) to settlement and soM at the prices they state they will sell it for. the ])eople wlio go wp liere and settle will be. if they sell at $30. which they hope to. at an advantage over the Government project, and I am very much interested, of course, lieing a ISIember froui the State of Oregon, in having just as many settlers come into our lands as pos- sil>le. and if these were the only lands left open to settlers, so that it was down to a point of saving every acre by having them irrigated, if ]iossible. and throwing them open to settlement, it would he a CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. 29 ilitl'crent proposition; there are millions of acres of land in Oregon (.pen to homestead settlements. I can take people out. to my certain knowledge, to good lands open for homestead settlement, and they will have to come in competition with all that, and if we can get 40,000 acres here, settlers along the line of the new road, raising- crops and putting people in there, it will ]>e for the benefit of our section of the country, and the whole country. It will provide homes for a very large number of people coming in from the outside, be- cause very few people from Oregon will go over, but mostly people from outside, and it will provide homes on most favorable terms for a large number of people. The Chairman. This is in your district ( Mr. Hawley. This is in my present district. After the next Con- gress it will be from the third district, but at the present time I represent this portion of the State. The Chairman. Are there any further questions. [After a pause. I (Some one else spoke here, not the chairman.) I would like to ask one more. Judge Eaker. if I may be permitted. All this bill proposes to do is to authorize the Government through its I)ei:)artment of Agricultui'e to exchange certain lands that are now of very little value, according to Mr. Potter's testimony given heve before the committee, to the Government, for lands that are \ery valuable to the Government, on the ground that it is pro- ducing the best kind of timber growing on the eastern side of the (^ascades, and the Government, from the standpoint of the way it stands now, will make an advantageou- exchange. If the company gets anything out of it at all. it assumes the risk and the burden of uiaking it profitable, and the State of Oregon and the country will have the advantage of making ready for settlement some 40.000 licres of land. The Government will be advantaged by that, because it will provide homes for people, and the Government has already the ;;dvantage of getting some very valuable pine land and consolidating its forest holdings and getting its land for settlers out of land not so > aluable. Mr. Hunter. And improving fire limits <»f hre control. Mr. Lafferty. I just merely want to say that I am in sympathy with the careful investigation that has l>een made by the Public r.ands Committee as to This, and from all that has been developed I am of the opinion that it ought to be passed, in the interest of the Government, because the Forestry Bureau seems to think it is proper, and I do not see any harm that could possibly come to the Government. It is only a small body of land, as ^Ir. Hawley says, it was the area opened to homestead entry in Oregon. Mr. Hunter I lia\ e known for two or three years. He is known as a remarkable land man. He is a genius in his line, and I think thoroughly honest and reliable. This grant of this Southern Oregon Military Wagon Eoad Co. of thousands of acres, years ago. was contested in the courts — but Mr. Hunter had nothing to do with that — on the ground that the wagon road was never l)uilt. and anolb.er contention — I believe that some Indian rights conflicted with it. Before Mr. Hunter -howed up on the scene the Supreme Court had decided that the Southern Oregon Military AYagon Road Co. ac(|uired the title under 30 CONSOLIDATIOX OF FOREST LANDS. the grant. There were no restrictions like in this raih'oad grant that we have, reijuiring sales t<^ the settlers; it was absolutely a simple grant. The title has come on down in the }>ast live or six years to this Oregon Land Grant Co.. and the Oregon Land Grant Co.. of which Mr. Hunter was president, sold its stock and trans- ferred its lands to a Kansas Gity company — that from the (|uestions of Judge Eaker I should assume i)romptly they were guilty of some shar}) practices in disposing oi their lands, and may have made some niisrei)resentations. ]\[r. Baker. Let me interrupt. I nii(l Corpora- tion, by H. A. Hnntor ami C. .M. Hysl^ell. will l)e extemleil until the close of the present session of Congress. .ToiiN TI. Lewis. Stair Kiiijiiiccr. Before that date, if the exchange be made, it nmst actually begin ]>liysical construction of this, and I would like to oifer this and urge the committee to take the action it does take immediately, if the exchange is made, so that they can begin work on the lower half: and if no exchange, that they can begin such o})erations as will pro- tect them in their rights. Mr. Raker. Referring to the Kansas City com^iany and the ex- change of land in southern Oregon. I was not making any accu- sations against anyone, but just giving a statement as I had under- CONSOLIDATION OF FOREST LANDS. 31 stood it. Whether all true or not I could not say, and I was trying to find out the j^resent status of the land involved here, and to see why tlie Oregon Land Co. did not turn over all of its land in the drawings that it had at Lake View, with the balance that it turned over at Lake View. The Chair^iax. If that is all, the committee will stand adjourned. We can not act on this, of course, until we get the report of the hearing. Mr. LLvwLEY. AVe are very grateful to you. gentlemen, for coming out this afternoon. Thereui)on. at .') o'clock p. m.. the committee stood adjourned.