Until 1883 there were two sets of acts governing the sale of school lands; one act related to the alternate sections which had been surveyed by railroad companies and other agencies of internal improvement, while the other act referred to the remaining lands. The legislation of 1879 provided that the agricultural lands in the alternate sections belonging to the school fund should be sold at not less $1.00 per acre; that not less than 160 acres and not more than one section of arable land or three sections of grazing land should be sold to any one person; and that one-tenth of the purchase money should be paid down, the balance to be paid in nine installments with interest at 10 per cent. Interest was payable on January 1 of each year, and if payment should not be made by March 1 the law stated that the land should be forfeited. The provisions in this law which related to forfeiture are illustrative of the lack of care which characterized the laws relating to the public lands. In the first place, the law of 1879, like that of 1874, made no provision for forfeiture on account of the non-payment of the principal at the time of final payment.1 In the next place, forfeiture on account of non-payment of interest took place only after proceedings looking to forfeiture were instituted by the county or district attorney; but it was not made mandatory upon these officers to institute proceedings, nor was any compensation provided for them for instituting such proceedings. The result of these imperfections in the laws was that the officers, having no pecuniary incentive to act, did nothing.1 Another and principal defect of the law of 1879 was that the county surveyor was virtually the classifier, valuer, and seller of the public lands. He was free under the act not to inspect the land or even to know its locality. He had it in his power to favor whomsoever he might, and the only central control over his actions was the rather negative power of the commissioner of the general land office to withhold or withdraw the lands from the market.2 These defects were not cured in 1881 when the law governing the sale of the school lands was amended. The changes made in 1881 were several.3 The district surveyor was made the appraiser of the value of the lands in unorganized counties, and the commissioner of the general land office was empowered to correct the valuations put upon lands by the district and county surveyors. The district surveyor was required to make an affidavit that he had personally inspected the land appraised by him. The maximum of grazing lands not within five miles of the geographical center of any county or upon any water front which could be purchased was raised from three sections to seven. The maximum amount of other land purchasable remained at 160 acres. The terms of credit also were liberalized by the provision that one-twentieth of the purchase money could be paid down and the balance in nineteen annual installments with interest at 8 per cent. Any payment of principal except the first could be deferred one or more years.

1 Land Office Report, 1898.

The provisions in the Revised Statutes of 1879 relating to the school land dealt with the lands other than the alternate sections which had been surveyed by railroads and other agencies of internal improvement. These provisions were that as soon as the lands were surveyed they should be sold, but at not less than $1.50 per acre. Appraisal of the value should be made by three disinterested commissioners appointed in each county by the governor. After valuation the sale of the lands should take place under the supervision of the county surveyor. Preference in purchase was given to actual and prospective settlers. Prospective settlers were required to promise to settle upon and improve the land within twelve months from application for purchase. Land not purchased by an actual or prospective settler within two years from date of notice of sale could be purchased by any one. The maximum amount purchasable was 160 acres, the minimum 80 acres. One-tenth of the purchase price was payable down, the balance bore ten per cent interest, and the interest and one-tenth of the principal were payable March 1 each year. Failure to pay either interest or the installment of the principal worked forfeiture.1

1 Message of Governor Ross, January 10, 1889. In 1882 the provisions for the enforcement of the contract through forfeiture were dropped; Laws of 1882, p. 36.

2 Land Office Report, 1882, p. 6.

3 Laws of 1881, p. 119.

In 1882 there was feverish land speculation. The advent of the Gould and the Palmer-Sullivan systems of railroads was a fillip to enterprise and speculation, and contributory factors in the promotion of speculation were the "Fifty Cents Law" and the imperfect land laws. All the abuses possible under the land laws made their appearance. The only object of the "Fifty Cents Law' was revenue, but this was not the only purpose in the sale of school lands. The limitation in the laws of the amount of school land which any one person could purchase from the state was in the interest of the settler; but there was evasion of the provision through the use of borrowed names and the names of the wife and children of the applicant for land, and vast tracts of lands of from 100,000 to 1,000,000 acres were acquired. "Wealthy individuals and corporations acquired these vast bodies for pasture purposes or for speculation.2 The interests of the actual settler were in this way defeated, but the other purposes of the legislation, that is, to swell the school fund and increase the basis of taxation, were accomplished.3 Another abuse during the period was that practiced by the so-called "county seat rings." The persons composing the "rings" would by the use of borrowed or fictitious names file application for the valuable sections of land in the county. The land filed on would be withdrawn from the market for ninety days, but if at the expiration of that time the "file" was not sold to a bona fide purchaser members of the ring would file anew. This practice was reprehensible chiefly because bona fide purchasers were forced to make terms with the ringsters.1 The fact that the ringsters were able to extort a bonus from intending bona fide purchasers was proof of the undervaluation of the land and of a resulting financial loss to the school fund. The interests of the school fund suffered also from the undervaluation and improper classification of the lands.

1 Rev. Civil Stats.. 1879, title 81, chap. 3.

2 Land Office Report, 1911-12, p. 26.

3 Land Office Report, 1882. The Galveston News, April 6 and 8, 1882.