prices, and that for this reason vast tracts of Iowa lands are yet unimproved which would now be settled upon and cultivated had they not thus been withdrawn from the market, it must be admitted that Iowa would have had a greater population, and greater wealth, had her railroad companies received no land grants. And what is true of Iowa is also true, as a general rule, of other states and territories. Perhaps an exception exists in the far western territories, whose gold and silver mines are in themselves an exception to the general rule, and where agriculture has but few followers. The advocates of the railroad land grant and subsidy bond system for the settlement of a country have the following to say in its favor. We quote from the _Railroad Manual_ before referred to: "One of the most remarkable things connected with the progress of this country is the construction of railroads in advance even of the lines of settlement of our people. Such result is largely due to the grants made by government of lands for the encouragement of these works. Never was a policy more wise or more beneficent." No instances can be shown where railroads have been built in advance of the line of settlement, save when the objective point could only be reached by passing over an unsettled country, as in the case of the road from the Atlantic to the Pacific states. In all other cases, railroad companies have awaited the settlement and development of the country, and followed, not led, our pioneer corps. Of the wisdom and beneficence of these grants the people can judge from their acquaintance with the workings of the system, and the wholesale robberies and frauds practiced by the companies, to some of which we have already referred. Again the author says: "The government has been greatly the gainer in a pecuniary point of view, as it was enabled to sell the land reserved at twice the established rate." It is not clearly seen how this _gain_ is made. The people, who are the government, give away one-half of their lands, and then pay into their treasury just money enough for the remaining half to make up the value of the lands they have given away. The only gain the government has made (and this is not a pecuniary one) is the reflection that the men who have received these large grants have become rich, while the people have been deprived of their lands at the original price; they must pay for one-half of them a double price, and for the residue just what they can buy it for from the corporations to whom their servants have donated it. This author says: "That the public has reaped the advantage of the construction of some ten thousand miles of railroads, that otherwise would not have been built." Is this true? In Iowa the land-grant roads were not built as fast as other roads having no grants, and the companies finally completed them because they were about to lose their lands by longer delay. And in other states and territories some of these land grant