How we cite our quotes: (Section)
Quote #1
That any person who is the head of a family, or who has arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and is a citizen of the United States, or who shall have filed his declaration of intention to become such, as required by the naturalization laws of the United States, and who has never borne arms against the United States Government or given aid and comfort to its enemies, shall, from and after the first January, eighteen hundred and. sixty-three, be entitled to enter one quarter section or a less quantity of unappropriated public lands[… ](Section 1)
This is the big one. "Any person" is the key phrase there. This meant women, Blacks, and immigrants all had the opportunity to own federal land. Of course, some restrictions still applied, like the citizen or nearly clause and the whole no treason thing.
But Blacks and naturalized immigrants weren’t awarded citizenship until 1868 and the 14th amendment, right?
Well, that little phrase "intention to become such" was a bit of a loophole. Both groups could file their intention to become citizens. At that point, it wasn’t federal law (the 1866 Civil Rights Act was the first law to overturn the Dred Scott decision, followed hastily by the 14th Amendment). Also, there was a war on, which included abolition as a striking point, so the three years between the enactment of the Homestead Act and the Civil Rights Act were a bit hectic.
Quote #2
[…]Provided, That any person owning and residing on land may, under the provisions of this act, enter other land lying contiguous to his or her said land, which shall not, with the land so already owned and occupied, exceed in the aggregate one hundred and sixty acres. (Section 1)
Not only was the application process equal—or at least an attempt at equality—the actual process and amount of land was too. Nobody, but nobody, was allowed to go over the one-quarter section maximum.
Sure, a homesteader could claim less, but that was by their own choice. The government laid out an equal amount of land per claim, with no caveats or extra requirements to get the full amount of promised land. It was entirely up to the homesteader to take advantage of it.
The fairness even extended to allowing more land to be annexed later on, if the homesteader managed to make a go of it and hadn’t already taken their fair share. This was an awesome law that really did provide all sorts of fair deals to the person brave enough to go after them.
Quote #3
[…]That the person applying for the benefit of this act shall, upon application to the register of the land office in which he or she is about to make such entry, make affidavit before the said register or receiver that he or she is the head of a family, or is twenty-one years or more of age, or shall have performed service in the army or navy of the United States, and that he has never borne arms against the Government of the United States or given aid and comfort to its enemies, and that such application is made for his or her exclusive use[…] (Section 2)
This is just a repeat of the reqs from Section 1, but let’s take a minute to enjoy that use of "he or she" and "his or her." Ah, how refreshing. A lack of institutional misogyny in a government document.
Of course, being 1862, the military clause is strictly "he," but the impact of female landowners in an era where women couldn’t even vote was definitely felt. Okay, so this only applied to women without a husband. If there was a man of the house, everything was in his name. But an act that didn’t automatically exclude women who were single, widowed, or even divorced? Inconceivable.
Quote #4
[…] That no person who has served, or may hereafter serve, for a period of not less than fourteen days in the army or navy of the United States, either regular or volunteer, under the laws thereof, during the existence of an actual war, domestic or foreign, shall be deprived of the benefits of this act on account of not having attained the age of twenty-one years. (Section 6)
Ageism is a prejudice, too. If they’re old enough to serve their country, they’re old enough to go cut a life out of the wilderness. The Homestead Act was quite progressive all the way around. Of course, letting the young soldiers have a glimpse of the future in the midst of war was pretty savvy. Also, once the war was over, this had the added benefit of taking young soldiers without jobs back out of the city and keeping unemployment and homelessness down. Never let it be said the government can’t multi-task.
Quote #5
That nothing in this act shall be construed as to prevent any person who has availed him or herself of the benefits of the first section of this act, from paying the minimum price, or the price to which the same may have graduated, for the quantity of land so entered at any time before the expiration of the five years[…] (Section 8)
Of course, being the government during an expensive war, they certainly weren’t going to exclude anybody who happened to have the cash to pay for the land and just got bored with playing farmer. Equal rights for all…especially if they’ve got the cash to hand to buy their homestead and support the war effort. Not the typical type of equality, but boy, does the Homestead Act have it all.