d. Advantage is taken of such fluctuations in rainfall as occur from year to year and at more or less regular periods, ten to twelve years apart. During the wet years the country is boomed; at dry times the people move out and industry wanes. These ups and downs are recurring features on certain areas not permanently suited for farming. The process works havoc with the misguided settlers, hurts a State that encourages it, and brings no lasting beneficial results to land men who manage the operation.
Apparently, Nature is no respecter of persons, especially so on the dry, sandy lands. It is coming to be known that there is no permanent change for the better in rainfall, frost belts or any thing of the kind. Some lands are better suited for grazing than for ordinary farming and should be so managed.
The speaker is pleased to be the servant of a State that stands strongly against misrepresentation of land values. Such a policy works out the greatest good in the long run. It breeds a healthy demand for a fact basis of development and minimizes the tendency to “stand up” for the home State by unwarranted “boostings.”
Land Schemes in General.—There are many other land projects. The public has invested largely in small tract propositions in Florida, Texas, and other States. Much of this promoted land has considerable value, but some of it is over-estimated, and many investors are quite apt therefore to lose all or nearly all of their money. Certain kinds of land look more inviting during one season of the year than at another. For example, there are places in Texas and Mexico to which the promoters take their victims in the dry season and to other lands during the wet season. This year the speaker heard a Texas representative declare, in a national meeting, that many of the small tract propositions, together with certain other land schemes of his State, are filled with fraud. He criticized northern people for promoting Texas. This should serve at least as a warning to unthoughtful investors. The good agricultural propositions of Texas and elsewhere are handled by responsible land agents.
The movement for the reclamation of the so-called abandoned lands of some of the older States is quite apt to be hurt by unreliable promoters.
Misrepresentation and Overvaluation.—Not only do some promoters misrepresent propositions for the purpose of receiving gain therefrom, but they often advance the sale price unduly. Many examples of this kind have come to my attention. Two weeks ago I received a prospectus from Oklahoma, advertising lead and zinc land for sale at $6.00 a block, twenty feet square, making 1,089 blocks in the tract of ten acres. This would be $6,534 for the land. I happen to know the region and own land close to the small tract. The fact is that one can purchase such a place at $10.00 or less an acre, or at not to exceed $100 for ten acres. So the difference between $100 and $6,534 is too much of an advance for those who invest. What do you think of such a deal? The persons handling it use the general statement of a geologist which recites the fact that the geological formation that contains zinc and lead in the Joplin District, some thirty miles distant, extends through the promoted land. This statement has no specific importance, but is sufficient for persons who accept the “get-rich-quick” bait. It is my judgment that Oklahoma should not permit such a clean-up. (Applause.)
The public craze for land makes it easy for promoters to do their work. Many farmers, dominated by a spirit of consideration for their children, accept the “spiel” and assurance of the “dopster,” sell in agricultural regions and move onto nearly worthless land, believing that it will become about like the old home place in time, and that each child will then have a farm and home. May we not say that he who deceives a family in this way is a mean man? (Applause.) Can you think of a worse service to a community? Certain railroads are not free from blame in that they promote this traffic. The farmer who accepts the bad “dope” is also to blame. It has taken a long time for the people to learn that mere belief, opinion, and sentiment are not strong enough forces to overcome the influence of land not suited for agriculture.
If our land seekers could realize how important and far-reaching is this matter of choosing favorable places for home building, they would be less easily led astray. They would consider soil, climate, water supplies and other necessary conditions of success, as they actually exist, and be governed less by the old arguments and slogans so often used for land development in general. They would pay less attention to deceptive literature written for the special purpose of securing emigrants and sales. They would inquire into the methods whereby this phase of the land business is carried on, and avoid being carried off of their feet, especially when on “home-seekers’” excursions and worked by a well-organized plan.
Formerly, the newer States encouraged the work of grafting land men. Time has shown, however, that this was bad business and really a drawback to permanent development. The present trend is to conserve the interests of those who go onto and manage the land, making it easier for them to succeed. They are assisted by the publicity of useful facts and the censure of fraud. Furthermore, it is coming to be recognized that State emigrant agents, agricultural experiment stations, soil surveys and Conservation Commissions should not lend their support to any interest other than that which brings the best results to the people of the State. They should stand for the policies that insure permanent development and do so as their plain duty. Do you know how public men are urged and tempted to further the interests of promotion concerns and that there are plenty of opportunities to sell one’s influence? That it requires diligence and courage to rightly serve the State? Happily, our public-spirited citizens who have at heart the best and largest interests of their States, stand strongly against misrepresentation whether unintentional or not. They claim that doubtful promotion serves only in closing deals, and in directing settlers to the land, but that in the long run the process works a positive harm to the misguided people and to the State as well, if the land is not suited for habitation. Fortunately, most States are coming to this viewpoint. They have learned that it pays to tell the truth when transplanting a population and directing the permanent development of a State.
Where do you delegates stand on this proposition, and what is to be the attitude of your States?