Mr. WILLIAMS. Those settlers represented by Mr. Lafferty up west of Scappoose are on very heavily timbered land. There is a timber and logging company which had constructed a road for the purpose of getting its own timber on the even numbered sections in that locality. They were about to remove their roads, which would have left isolated these timbered sections and which would have made it hardly worth while to construct another railroad for the odd numbered sections of land. The company applied to the court for permission to buy the timber. There was no objection raised by the Government or the railroad company provided the money could be paid into court to await the outcome of the litigation. The timber on one quarter section of this land, on which a cabin stood, sold for $17,000. Down in the southern part of the grant the lands are not so very heavily timbered and not so good for agricultural purposes. Some of the best agricultural lands are now timber lands. That is, they are level and when the timber is cut off they will be valuable agricultural lands. There are about two or three hundred thousand acres that are practically worth nothing.

The CHAIRMAN. What character of land is that?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Very rough, rocky land. Some of it is valuable only for its timber. Some is valuable for timber now and will be valuable for agriculture. Some of it is valuable only for agriculture because the timber has been burned off and has not grown up again.

Mr. TAYLOR. Have you any statement or calculation as to what per cent of these lands represent these different classes?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, not exactly, Mr. Taylor. I think that 10 per cent of the land is not worth 50 cents an acre.

Mr. FREEMAN. What per cent of the timber has been destroyed by fire?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I could not tell you that. Perhaps the forest people could tell you. In one section the entire area of timber was gone.

Mr. LA FOLLETTE. A large part of the land up there in the upper part of the river, if the timber is taken off, will be good agricultural land?

Mr. WILLIAMS. It would be agricultural land now, and by agriculture I mean that it could be used for grazing. I think grazing is agriculture.

Mr. LENROOT. In these territories where the timber has been cut, did you find the land devoted to agriculture?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Nc, sir. I do not think the people of Oregon want this land for agricultural purposes now. Here and there a man would be glad to make a home on a certain piece of land, because land is getting scarce, but as a general thing the land is steep and rough, and if a man went there he would only cultivate a few acres and let his sheep or cattle run on the balance. I found a man living on a homestead with only 10 acres out of 120 acres in cultivation. That was land that his mother had homesteaded many years ago. He had acquired a competency and was living there in comfort, even owning a good automc bile.

Mr. LA FOLLETTE. If he had pastured the land but did not cultivate it, would not that be using it for agricultural purposes?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; but I mean he did not have any crops growing on it.

The CHAIRMAN. The timber is so heavy that the grass can not grow there. Is that true?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; the only things that can grow are the ferns.

Mr. LENROOT. Is this timber very large?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. I saw one tree that was 9 feet in diameter and 280 feet tall.

Mr. MAYS. Are those redwood trees?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No; it is the Oregon fir. There is a great deal of fir up there. The chief timber is fir. Now, I could tell you what the railroad company claims it has spent on these lands, but you will find thet in the report.

Mr. MAYS. This railroad company wants to be reimbursed for all of these taxes?

Mr. WILLIAMS. The railroad company has not indicated its willingness to accept anything.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you take up that Supreme Court decision and explain what it means and what it accomplished?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think the Supreme Court decision means that Congress can pass any law it sees fit to pass regarding this land grant and direct such disposition of the land as it may see fit, providing only that it guarantees to the railroad company the full value conferred by the granting acts.

Mr. TAYLOR. You mean $2.50 an acre?

Mr. WILLIAMS. The full money value conferred by the granting act was $2.50 an acre, and therefore if Congress should provide for the disposition of these lands by some department of the Government, and at the same time guarantee to secure to the railroad company the maximum value conferred by the granting act, I believe and I think the report of the Attorney General indicates that he believes that such an act would be valid. Now, this is my own view, and I do not know whether the Attorney General would go that far, but I think that the act of Congress conferring upon the railroad company the money value given by the granting act should also provide for the disposition of the land.

The CHAIRMAN. You think the two ought to be coupled together? Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; because the railroad company can not operate through undeveloped territory. I think that the act making the grant contemplated that the grant should be settled and developed, so that the railroad company would acquire business and the revenue from such business. While, therefore, I have no doubt whatever of the validity of an act of Congress which would guarantee to the railroad company the maximum value conferred by the granting act, and which would also authorize the disposition of the land within a reasonable time, there may be some doubt as to the validity of an act of Congress which would merely give the railroad company its money value and nothing else.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, under the decision of the Supreme Court, has Congress the power to bring about an accounting between the railroad company and the Government, having in mind these breaches of the three conditions and the money that they have already derived from the land away beyond what was contemplated by the act? Mr. WILLIAMS. I think so.

The CHAIRMAN. For example, as I understand it, they ignored freely not only the provision of the granting act with respect to the maximum acreage and the provision as to the price, $2.50 per acre, by selling the land for as much as they could get for it, but they broke another condition by not selling to actual settlers. Now, is it your opinion that in order that this act should be valid we would have to pay the railroad that money without exacting an accounting for what they have already had?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir; but I think if we exceed in generosity the company can not complain. In other words, if we give it $2.50 an acre for each one the railroad company could not complain.

The CHAIRMAN. But that would not be just to the Government. Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir; but I think Congress could authorize the Attorney General to institute proceedings for the purpose of having the courts determine the full value conferred by the granting act; that is to say, by taking the total area, multiplying it by $2.50 an acre, you would get something like $8,000,000, and then have the courts determine what part of that value had already been secured by the railroad company. In other words, the question of how much of this surplus should be charged to it.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, would that require further litigation?

Mr. WILLIAMS. That would require a suit at once which would determine the validity of the act in every respect, and that is in line with the report of the Attorney General to the Senate Committee on Public Lands.

Mr. FREEMAN. Who would be liable for the payinent of the back taxes if Congress should reimburse the railroad at the rate of $2.50 an acre? Who would pay these back taxes in that case?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think the Government should pay them, because people would not buy the land until the taxes were paid.

Mr. MAYS. Are the taxes really due?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; they are levied and due.

Mr. MAYS. Do you think that the average price that the railroad company has received for the land which they sold has been more than $2.50 an acre?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Oh, yes. I do not think it; I know it.

The CHAIRMAN. There is no question about that.

Mr. WILLIAMS. For the 820,000 acres that it has sold it has received over $4,000,000.

Mr. MCCLINTIC. Do you think the Government, in reimbursing for taxes, should reimburse for more than $2.50 per acre?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think, to avoid all possible question, that it should be done.

Mr. CRAMTON. Of course, these taxes are only levied on lands which have been patented?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.

Mr. CRAMTON. What portion of the lands that we are discussing are patented?

Mr. WILLIAMS. More than 2,000,000 acres have been patented.. Some 200,000 acres have not been patented. We do not know exactly. Now, I have here a table showing the acreage and assessed valuation by counties for 1915 taxes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that the unsold land?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And those values that you are about to give have no reference to the lands that have been sold?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that all of those suits have been compromised except four or five.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. So that they do not figure in this case at all?
Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And the figures that you are going to give as to the value are only with reference to the unsold lands involved in the Supreme Court decision?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.

Mr. MAYS. They have been compromised so far as the persons are concerned but not as to the railroads?

The CHAIRMAN. They compromised both ways, as I understand it. It was this way, Mr. Mays. The railroad sold the lands to settlers and the Government brought 46 suits against the purchasers. In 1912 Congress passed an act authorizing the Attorney General to compromise with these people who were bona fide purchasers-at least the committee thought that they were entitled to their fees, notwithstanding the provisions of the original act. Therefore, Congress passed that act which gave them their title clear and free from any controversy. I understand there are only four or five of those suits yet remaining.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think I can explain it to you. The Attorney General suggests, in his report on the Chamberlain bill, that a court of competent jurisdiction should determine what part, if any, of the excess moneys already received should be charged against the railroad company as a part of the "full value" conferred by the granting act. Mr. MCCLINTIC. Who made these valuations? Mr. WILLIAMS. The county assessors. It is the assessed valuation. I will read the highest one and the lowest one.

Mr. MCCLINTIC. Give us the total acreage by counties and the total value.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, give us the figures for all the counties.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Benton County, 54,000 acres, $816,000, or an average of $15.08; Clackamas County, 95,000 acres, valuation, $1,100,000, average per acre, $11.64; Columbia County, 18,000, $726,000, average valuation, $40.25 an acre. That is the highest in the State. Coos County, a small county, 121,000 acres, $1,442,000, or $11.92 an acre; Curry County, 12,000 acres, $120,000, $10.82 an acre; Douglas County, the largest area in the State, 640,000 acres, valuation nearly $6,000,000, $9.24 per acre; Jackson County, 446,000 acres, $4,297,000 valuation, $9.53 per acre; Josephine County, another small county, 187,000 acres, $1,754,000 valuation, $9.38 per acre; Klamath County, 43,000 acres, $423,000, $9.85 per acre; Lane County, 301,997 acres, $3,356,000, $11.12 per acre; Lincoln County, 16,000 acres, valuation, $103,000, $6.47 per acre; Linn County, 63,000 acres, $752,000 valuation, $11.94 per acre; Marion County, 32,000 acres, $390,000 valuation, $12.19 per acre; Multnomah County, 9,000 acres, $205,000, $22.08 per acre; Polk County, 37,000 acres, $621,000 valuation, $16.58 per acre; Tillamook County, 30,000 acres, $164,000 valuation, $5.51 per acre. That is the lowest valuation in the State.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that burned over land?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not know; I did not go over that. That is twice as much as the value conferred by the granting act on the railroad company.

Mr. LA FOLLETTE. That is more inaccessible than the other counties?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes. Washington County, 19,000 acres, $170,000 valuation, $8.83 per acre. Yamhill County has a large burned area: 30,000 acres, $194,000 valuation, $6.40 per acre.

This is from the report that I made of my investigation. Some of the figures I got from the assessors, some from the State tax commissioner, some from the railroad company, and some from reliable official publications.

The CHAIRMAN. What method do you have of assessing the land values? How are the values assessed in Oregon? Are they assessed the full value? Some States do and some do not.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think they do. Mr. McArthur or Mr. Hawley could answer that.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the law out there? full value?

Mr. SINNOTT. The law says the full value.

Does the law require

The CHAIRMAN. What is the practice? Do they adhere to that at all?

Mr. SINNOTT. In my county they do not. I do not think they do in other counties.

The CHAIRMAN. We have a law in my State that says that every species of property shall be assessed at full cash value, but they never pretend to do that at all.

Mr. TAYLOR. They have that law almost everywhere, but they never assess full value.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the practice in Oregon?

Mr. MCARTHUR. They are supposed to assess at full value, but they do not do it.

Mr. WILLIAMS. None of this land is assessed as high as $40, except one piece. I saw some land at Wilhoit Springs that the postmaster said he would be glad to buy for $40 or $50 an acre. That was in Clackamas County.

The CHAIRMAN. Some of that land contains $25,000 worth of timber on a quarter section, does it not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. It depends upon the price of the timber. Right now timber is very low.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, some of it has sold for that?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.

Mr. TAYLOR. It depends upon the demand for the timber.

Mr. WILLIAMS. If timber should go up it would be worth twice as much.

Mr. TAYLOR. In other words, there is 20,000,000 feet of timber at $1 a thousand feet?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Twenty million feet of timber. At $1.50 it would be $30,000. One quarter section sold for timber alone at $17,000. Mr. MAYS. The average price charged by the Government for stumpage is $1 a thousand.

Mr. WILLIAMs. I do not know that.