Newspaper Page Text
STANDS STRONGLIf
FOR CONSERVATION
President Taft’s Address Before
Congress at St. Paul.
DANGER IN CONTINUED WASTE
Chief Executive Outline* Plane Which
He Believe* Should Be Adopted—
Statistic* Make Bpeech Com
prehensive to Hearer*.
St Paul, Minn., Sept s. —President
delivered hla long-expected
•peech before the National Con
servation congress here today. Sub
stantially It waa as follows:
Centlemen of the National Conservation
Congress:
Conservation as an economic and po
litical term has come to mean the preser
vation of our natural resources for
economical use, so as to secure the great
«*t good to the greatest number.
The danger to the state and to the peo
at large from the waste and disslpa
*fon of our national wealth la not one
which quickly Impresses Itself on the peo
ple of the older communities, because its
ssost obvious instances do not occur in
ttotr neighborhood, while in the newer
part of the country the sympathy with
expansion and development is so strong
that the danger is scoffed at or ignored.
Among scientific men and thoughtful ob
servers, however, the danger has always
Sbeen present; but it needed some one to
Prtng home the crying need for a remedy
this evil so as to impress itself on the
public mind and lead to the formation of
tpvbllr opinion and action by the repre
vsntallvcs of the people. Theodore Roose
watt took up this task in the last two
years of his second administration, and
well did he perform It.
An president of the United States I
feave, as It were, inherited this policy,
4Uid I rejoice in my heritage. I prize my
fcfgh opportunity to do all that an ex
ecutive can do to help a great people
guallze a great national ambition. For
conservation is national. It affects every
Juan of us, every woman, every child.
IWhart I can do In the cause I shall do,
as president of a party, but as presi-
A*nt of the whole people. Conservation
Is not a question of politics, or of fac
tions, or of persons. It is a question that
wftet'ts the vital welfare of all of us—of
wur children and our children’s children,
ff urge that no good can come from meet
ing* of this sort unless we ascribe to
(those who take part In them, and who
iarb apparently striving worthily In the
cause, all proper motives, and unless we
[Judicially consider every measure or
ttnethod proposed with a view to its effec
tiveness In achieving our common pur
pose, and wholly without regard to who
tfvoposos it or who will claim the credit
"Her Its adoption. The problems are of
'very great difficulty and call for the
• calmest consideration and clearest fore
:.«!ght. Many of the questions presented
khave<phases that are new In this coun
f*ry« and it is possible that In their solu
tion we may have to attempt first one
|way and then another. What I wish to
however. Is that a satlsfac- ,
J torj conclusion can only be reached
;prumptly If we avoid acrimony, imputa
*>tlons of bad faith, and political contro-
ls 'The public domain of the government
of the United States, including all the
cessions from those of the thirteen states
■Vtoat made cessions to the United States
and Including Alaska, amounted In all to
mbout 1,800.000,000 acres. Of this there is
Jett as purely government property out
aide of Alaska something like 700,000,000 of
acres. Of this the national forest re
serves In the United States proper em
brace 144,000,000 acres. The rest Is largely
mountain or arid country, offering some
• opportunity for agriculture by dry farm
ting and by reclamation, and containing
mrietals as well as coal, phosphates, oils,
And natural gas. Then the government
many tracts of land lying along the
.margins of streams that have water
-power, the use of which Is necessarj* in
ithe conversion of the power into elec
ilbrk’lty and Its transmission.
1 shall divide my discussion under the
•■heads of (1) agricultural lands; (2) min
eral lands—that Is. lands containing
smetalliferous minerals; (3) forest lands;
(4) coal lands; (5) oil and gas lands; and
phosphate lands.
Agricultural Lands.
Our land laws for the entry of agricul
tural lands are now as follows:
The original homestead law, with the
retirements of residence and cultivation
much more strictly en-
than over before.
The enlarged homestead act, applying
to nonlrrlgable lands only, requiring five
ansmrs’ residence and continuous cultiva
tion of one-fourth of the area.
The desert-land act, which requires on
the part of the purchaser the ownership
«f a water right and thorough reclama
tion of the land by Irrigation, and the
payment of $1.25 per acre.
The donation or Carey act, under which
the state selects the land and provides
tor Its reclamation, and the title vests in
•the settler who resides upon the land and
The national reclamation homestead
law, requiring five years' residence and
-cultivation by the settler on the land ir
rigated by the government, and payment
toy him to the government of the cost of
•the reclamation.
The present congress passed a bill of
<great importance, severing the ownership
•f coal by the government In the ground
from the surface and permitting home
stead entries upon the surface of the
land, which, when perfected, give the
settler the right to farm the surface,
■while the coal beneath the surface is re
'talned in ownership by the government
And may be disposed of by it under other
laws.
There is no crying need for radical re
fbrrn in the methods of disposing of what
Are really agricultural lands. The pres
*nt laws have worked well. The en
larged homestead law has encouraged the
smccessful farming of lands in the semi-
Arid regions. Of course the teachings of
fra© agricultural department as to how
-these subarld lands may be treated and
•the soil preserved for useful culture are
«®f the very essence of conservation. Then
conservation of agricultural lands Is
•shown in the reclamation of arid lands
tay Irrigation and I should devote a few
words to what the government has done
And is doing in this regard.
Reclamation.
By the reclamation act a fund has been
created of the proceeds of the public
Sands of the United States with which to
construct works for storing great bodies
*a€ water at proper altitudes from which,
by a suitable system of canals and ditch
es, the water is to be distributed over the
Arid and subarld lands of the government
do be sold to at a price sufficient
*4© pay for the improvements, primarily,
■dhe projects are and must be f6r the im
provement of public lands. Incidentally,
where private land Is also within reach
the water supply, the furnishing at
cost or profit of th!* water to private
owners by the government is held by the
federal court of appeals not to be a
usurpation of power. But certainly this
ought not to be done except from sur
plus water, not needed for government
land. The total sum already accumula
ted in the reclamation fund is $60,273,-
258.22. and of that all but $6,491,955.34 has
been expended. It became very clear to
congress at Its last session, from the
statements made by experts, that these
30 projects could not be promptly com
pleted with the balance remaining on
hand or with the funds likely to accrue
in the near future. It was found, more
over, that there are many settlers who
have been led Into taking up lands with
the hope and understanding of having
water furnished In a short time, who are
left In a most distressing situation. I
recommended to congress that authority
be given to the secretary of the Interior
to Issue bonds In anticipation of the as
sured earnings by the projects, so that
the projects, worthy and feasible, might
be promptly completed, and the settlers
might be relieved from their ‘present in
convenience and hardship. In authorizing
the Issue of these projects, congress lim
ited the application of their proceeds to
those projects which a board of army en
gineers, to be appointed by the president,
should examine and determine to be
feasible and worthy of completion. The
board has been appointed and soon will
make ita report.
Suggestions have been made that the
United States ought to aid in the drain
age of swamp lands belonging to the
states or private owners, because, If
drained, they would be exceedingly val
uable for agriculture and contribute to
the general welfare by extending the
area of cultivation. I deprecate the agi
tation in favor of such legislation. It is
inviting the general government Into
contribution from its treasury toward en
terprises that should be conducted either
by private capital or at the Instance of
the state. In these days there is a dispo
sition to look too much to the federal
government for everything. I am liberal
in the construction of the Constitution
with reference to federal power; but I
am firmly convinced that the only safe
course for us to pursue is to hold fast
to the limitations of the Constitution and
to regard as sacred the powers of the
states. We have made wonderful prog
ress and at the same time have pre
served with Judicial exactness the re
strictions of the Constitution. There Is
an easy way in which the Constitution
can be violated by congress without
Judicial Inhibition, to-wlt, by appropria
tions from the national treasury for un
constitutional purposes. It will be a sorry
day for this country if the time ever
comes when our fundamental compact
shall be habitually disregarded in this
manner.
Mineral Lands.
By mineral lands I mean those lands
bearing metals, or what are called metal
liferous minerals. The rules of owner
ship and disposition of these lands were
first fixed by custom in the west, and
then were embodied in the law, and they
have worked, on the whole, so fairly and
well that I do not think it is wise to
attempt to change or better them.
Forest Land*.
Nothing can be more Important In the
matter of conservation than the treatment
of our forest lands. It was probably the
ruthless destruction of forests in the
older states that first called attention to
a halt In the waste of our resources. This
was recognized by congress by an act
authorizing the executive to reserve from
entry and set aside public timber lands
ns national forests Speaking generally,
there has been reserved of the existing
forests about seventy per cent, of all
the timber lands of the government.
Within these forests (Including 26.000,000
acres In two forests In Alaska) are 192,-
000,000 of acres, of which 166,000.000 of
acres are in the United States proper and
Include within their boundaries some
thing like 22.000,000 of acres that belong
to the state or to private Individuals. We
have then, excluding Alaska forests, a
total of about 144,000.000 acres of forests
belonging to the government which Is
being treated in accord with the princi
ples of scientific forestry.
Tbe government timber In this coun
try amounts to only one-fourth of all the
timber, the rest being in private own
ership. Only three per cent, of that which
Is In private ownership Is looked after
properly and treated according to mod
ern rules of forestry. The usual de
structive waste and neglect continues In
the remainder of the forests owned by
• private persons and corporations. It Is
estimated that fire alone destroys $50,000.-
000 worth of timber a year. The
management of forests not on public
land is beyond the Jurisdiction of the fed
eral government. If anything can be done
by law It must be done by the state leg-
Vdatures. I believe that It Is within their
constitutional power to require the en
forcement of regulations in the general
public Interest, as to fire and other
causes of waste in the management of
forests owned by private individuals and
corporations.
I have shown sufficiently the conditions
as to federal forestry to indicate that no
further legislation Is needed at the mo
ment except an increase in the fire pro
tection to national forests and an act
vesting the executive with full power to
make forest reservations in every state
where government land Is timber-covered,
or where the land Is needed for forestry
purposes.
Coal Land*.
The next subject, and one most impor
tant for our consideration, is the disposi
tion of the coal lands in the United
States and in Alaska. First, as to those
In the United States. At the beginning
of this administration they were classi
fied coal lands amounting to 5,476,000
acres,, and there were withdrawn from
entry for purposes of classification 17,-
867.Q00 acres. Since that time there have
been withdrawn by my order from entry
for classification 77,648.000 acres, making
a total withdrawal of 90.515.iXM) acres.
Meantime, of the acres thus withdrawn.
11,371.000 have been classified and found
not to contain coal, and have been re
stored to agricultural entry, and 4.356.000
acres have been classified as coal lands;
while 79.755.000 acres remain withdrawn
from entry and await classification. In
addition 336,000 acres have been classi
fied as coal lands without prior withdraw
al, thus increasing the classified coal
lands to 10.165.000 acres.
Under the laws providing for the dispo
sition of coal lands, the minimum price
at which lands are permitted to be sold
is $lO an acre; but the secretary of the
interior has the power to fix a maximum
price and sell at that price. By the first
regulations governing appraisal. ap
proved April 8. 1907. the minimum was $lO.
as provided by, law. and the maximum
was SIOO, and the highest price actually
placed upon any land sold was $75. Un
der the new regulations, adopted April 10,
1909, the maximum price was increased to
S3OO. except in regions where there are
large mines, where no maximum limit is
fixed and the price is determined by the
estimated tons of coal to the acre. The
highest price fixed for any land under
this regulation has been S6OB. The ap
praisal value of the lands classified as
coal lands and valued under the new and
old regulations is shown to be as follows:
4.803,921 acres, valued under the old regu
lations at $77,644,329, an average of SIS an
acre; and 5,864.702 across classified and
valued under the new’ regulation at $394,-
203,242, or a total of 10,168,623 acres, val
ued at $471,847,571.
For the year ending March 31, 1909, 227
coal entriesWwere made, embracing an
area of 35,331 acres, which sold for $663.-
020.40. For the year ending March 31,
1910. there were 176 entries, embracing an
are* of 23,413 acre*, which sold for SBOB.-
813; and down to August, 1910, there were
but 17 entries, with an area of 1,720 acres,
which sold for $33,910.60, making a dispo
sition of the coal lands in the last two
years of about 60,000 acres for $1,305,000.
The present congress, as already said,
has separated the surface of coal lands,
either classified or withdrawn for classi
fication, from the coal beneath, so as to
permit at all times homestead entries
upon the surface of lands useful for ag
riculture and to reserve the ownership
in the coal to the government. The ques
tion which remains to be considered is
whether the existing law for the sale of
the coal in the ground should continue
in force or be repealed and a new method
of disposition adopted. Under the present
law the absolute title in the coal be
neath the surface passes to the grantee
of the government. The price fixed is
upon an estimated amount of the tons
of coal per acre beneath the surface, and
the prices are fixed so that the earnings
will only be a reasonable profit upon the
amount paid and the Investment neces
sary. But, of course, this is more or less
guesswork, and the government parts
with the ownership of the coal in the
ground absolutely. Authorities of the ge
ological survey estimate that in the
United States today there Is a supply of
about three thousand billions of tons of
coal, and that of this one thousand billions
are in the public domain. Of course, the oth
er two thousand billions are within private
ownership and under no more control as
to the use or the prices at which the
coal may be sold than any other private
property. If the government leases the
coal lands and acts as any landlord
would, and imposes conditions in its
leases like those which are now Imposed
by the owners In fee of coal mines in the
various coal regions of the east, then It
would retain over the disposition of the
r’oal deposits a choice as to the assignee
of the lease, or of resuming possession at
the end of the term of the lease, which
might easily be framed to enable it to
exercise a limited but effective control
in the disposition and sale of the coal to
the public. It has been urged that the
leasing system has never been adopted in
this country, and that its adoption would
largely interfere with the investment of
capital and the proper development and
opening up of the coal resources. I ven
ture to differ entirely from this view.
The question as to how great an area
ought to be Included in a lease to one
individual or corporation. Is not free from
difficulty; but in view of the fact that
the government retains control as owmer,
I think there might be some liberality in
the amount leased, and that 2.500 acreiw
would not be too great a maximum.
By the opportunity to readjust the
terms upon which the coal shall be held
by the tenant, either at the end of each
lease or at periods during the term, the
government may secure the benefit of
sharing in the increased price of coal and
the additional profit made by the tenant.
By imposing conditions in respect to the
character of work to be done in the
mines, the government may control the
character of the development of the
mines and the treatment of employes with
reference to safety. By denying the
right to transfer the lease except by the
written permission of the governmental
authorities, it may withhold the needed
consent when it is proposed to transfer
the leasehold to persons Interested In es
tablishing a monopoly of coal production
in any state or neighborhood. The change
from the absolute grant to the leasing
system will Involve a good deal of
trouble in the outset, and the training of
experts in the matter of making proper
leases; but the change will be a good
one and can be made. The change is in
the Interest of conservation, and I am
glad to approve it.
Alaska Coal Lands.
The Investigation of the geological sur
vey show that the coal properties in
Alaska cover about 1,200 square miles,
and that there are known to be available
about 15.000,000,000 tons. This Is, however,
an underestimate of the coal in Alaska,
because further developments will prob
ably increase this amount many times;
but we can say with considerable cer
tainty that there are two fields on the
Pacific slope which can be reached by
railways at a reasonable t-ost from deep
water—ln one case about fifty miles and
in the other case of about 150 miles—
which will afford certainly 6,000,000,000
tons of coal, more than half of which is
of a very high grade of bituminous and
of anthracite. It is estimated to be worth.
In the ground, one-half a cent a ton,
which makes its value per acre from SSO
to SSOO. The coking-coal lands of Penn
sylvania are worth from SBOO to $2,000 an
acre, while other Appalachian fields are
worth from $lO to S3S6 an acre, and the
fields In the central states from $lO to
$2,000 an acre, and in the Rocky moun
tains $lO to SSOO an acre. The demand for
coal on the Pacific coast Is for about
4,500,000 tons a year. It would encounter
the competition of cheap fuel oil, of
which the equivalent of 12.000,000 tons of
coal a year is used there. It is estimated
that the coal could be laid down at Se
attle or San Francisco, a high-grade bi
tuminous, at $4 a ton and anthracite at
$5 or $6 a ton. The price of coal on the
Pacific slope varies greatly from time to
time in the year and from year to year—
from $4 to sl2 a ton. With a regular coal
supply established, the expert of the
geological survey, Mr. Brooks, who has
made a report on the subject, does not
think there would be an excessive profit
In the Alaska coal mining because the
price at which the coal could be sold
would be considerably lowered by compe
tition from these fields and by the pres
ence of cryde fuel oil. The history of the
laws affecting the disposition of Alaska
coal lands shows them to need amend
ment badly.
On November 12, 1906, President Roose
velt issued an executive order with
drawing all coal lands from location and
entry In Alaska. On May 16, 1907. he
modified the order so as to permit valid
locations made prior to the withdrawal
on Noveniber 12. J 906, to proceed to entry
and patent. Prior to that date some 900
claims had been filed, most of them said
to be illegal because either made fraudu
lently by dummy entrymen In the inter
est of one individual or corporation, or
because of agreements made prior to lo
cation between the applicants to co-operate
in developing the lands. There are 33
claims for 160 acres each, known as the
"Cunningham claims," which are claimed
to be valid on the ground that they were
made by an attorney for 33 different
and bona fide claimants who, as
alleged, paid their money* and took the
proper steps to locate their entries and
protect them. The representatives of the
government in the hearings before the
land office have attacked the validity of
these Cunningham claims on the ground
that prior to their location there was an
understanding between the claimants to
pool their claims after they had been
perfected and unite them in one com
pany*. The trend of decision seems to
show that such an agreement would in
validate the claims, although under the
subsequent law of May 28, 190 S. the con
solidation of such claims was permitted,
after location and entry*, in tracts of
2,560 acres. It would be, of course, im
proper for me to intimate what the re
sult of the issue as to the Cunningham
and other Alaska claims is likely to be,
but it ought to be distinctly understood
that no private claims for Alaska coal
lands have as yet been allowed or per
fected, and also that whatever the result
as to pending claims the existing coal
land laws of Alaska £.re most unsatisfac
tory and should be radically amended.
To begin with, the purchase price of the
land is a flat rate of $lO per acre, al
though, as we have seen, the estimate of
the agent of the geological survey would
carry up the maximum of value to SSOO
an acre. In my judgment U la eaeential
in the proper development of Alaaka that
these coal land* should be opened, and
that the Pacific elope should be given the
benefit of the comparatively cheap coal
of fine quality which can be furnished at
a reasonable price from these fields; but
the public, through the government,
ought certainly to retain a wise control
and Interest in these coal deposits, and I
think it may do so safely if congress will
authorise the granting of leases, as al
ready suggested for government coal
lands in the United States, with provi
sions forbidding the transfer of the
leases except with the consent of the
government, thus preventing their acqui
sition by a combination or monopoly and
upon limitations as to the area to be in
cluded in any one lease to one Individual,
and at a certain moderate rental, with
royalties upon the coal mined propor
tioned to the market value of the coal
either at Seattle or at San Francisco. Of
course such leases should contain condi
tions requiring the erection of proper
plants, the proper development by mod
ern mining methods of the properties
leased, and the use of every known and
practical means and device for saving the
life of the miners.
Oil snd Gas Land*.
In the last administration thero were
withdrawn from agricultural entry 2,820,-
000 acres of supposed oil land in Califor
nia; about a million and a half acres in
Louisiana, of which only 6,500 acres
were known to be vacant unappropria
ted land; 75,000 acres in Oregon and 174,-
000 acres in Wyoming, making a total of
nearly 4,000,000 acres. In September, 1909,
I directed that all public oil lands,
whether then withdrawn or not, should
be withheld from disposition pending con
gressional action, for the reason that the
existing placer mining law, although
made applicable to deposits of this char
acter, Is not suitable to such lands, and
for the further reason that It seemed de
sirable to reserve certain fuel-oil deposits
for the use of the American navy. Ac
cordingly the form of all existing with
drawals was changed, and new with
drawals aggregating 2,750,000 acres were
made in Arizona, California, Colorado,
New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. Field
examinations during the year showed
that of the original withdrawals, 2,170,-
000 acres were not valuable for oil, and
they were restored for agricultural entry.
Meantime, other withdrawals of public
oil lands In these states were made, so
that July 1, 1910, the outstanding with
drawals then amounted to 4,550,000 acres.
The needed oil and gas law is essential
ly a leasing law. In their natural occur
rence, oil and gas cannot be measured In
terms of acres, like coal, and It follows
that exclusive title to these products can
normally be secured only after they reach
the surface. Oil should be disposed of as
a commodity In terms of barrels of
transportable product rather than In
acres of real estate.* This Is, of course,
the reason for the practically universal
adoption of the leasing system wherever
oil land Is In private ownership. The
government thus would not be entering
on an experiment, but simply putting
Into effect a plan successfully operated In
private contracts. Why should not the
government as a landowner deal directly
with the oil producer rather than through
the Intervention of a middleman to whom
the government gives title to the land?
The principal underlying feature of
such legislation should be the exercise of
beneficial control rather than the collec
tion of revenue. As not only the largest
owner of oil lands, but as a prospective
large consumer of oil by reason of the
Increasing use of fuel oil by the navy,
the federal government is directly con
cerned both In encouraging rational de
velopment and at the same time insuring
the longest possible life to the oil sup
ply.
One of the difficulties presented, espe
cially In the California fields, Is that the
Southern Pacific railroad owns every
other section of land in the oil field,
and in those fields the oil seems to be In
a common reservoir, or series of reser
voirs, communicating through the oil
sands, so that the excessive draining of
oil at one well, or on the railroad terri
tory generally, would exhaust the oil In
the government land. Hence It is Im
portant that If the government is to have
its share of the oil it should begin the
opening of wells on its own property.
It has been suggested, and I believe the
suggestion to be a sound one, that per
mits be issued to a prospector for oil
giving him the right to prospect for two
years over a certain tract of government
land for the discovery of oil, the right to
be evidenced by a license for which he
pays a small sum. When the oil Is dis
covered. then he acquires title to a cer
tain tract, much in the same way as he
would acquire title under a mining law.
Of course if the system of leasing is
adopted, then he would be given the
benefit of a lease upon terms like that
above suggested. What has been said in
respect to oil applies also to government
gas lands.
Phosphate Lands.
Phosphorus is one of the three essen
tials to plant growth, the other elements
being nitrogen and potash. Of these
three, phosphorus is by all odds the
scarcest element in nature. It is easily
extracted in useful form from the phos
phate rock, and the United States con
tains the greatest known deposits of this
rock In the world. They are found in
Wyoming. Utah and Florida, as well as
in South Carolina. Georgia and Tennes
see. The government phosphate lands are
confined to Wyoming, Utah and Florida.
Prior to March 4, 1909, there were 4,000,000
acres withdrawn from agricultural entry
in the ground that the land covered phos
phate rock. Since that time, 2.322,000 acres
of the land thus withdrawn was found
not to contain phosphate in profitable
quantities, while 1,678,000 acres was classi
fied properly as phosphate lands. During
this administration there has been with
drawn and classified 437,000 acres, so that
today there is classified as phosphate rock
land 2,115.000 acres. This rock is most
important in the composition of fertilizers
to improve the soil, and as the future Is
certain to create an enormous demand
throughout this country for fertilization,
the value to the public of such deposits
as these can hardly be exaggerated. Cer
tainly with respect to these deposits a
careful policy of conservation should be
followed. A law that would provide a
leasing system for the phosphate depos
its, together with a provision for the sep
aration of the surface and mineral rights
as is already provided for in the case of
coal, would seem to meet the need of
promoting the development of these de
posits and their utilization in the agri
cultural lands of the west. If it
thought desirable to discourage the expor
tation of phosphate rock and the saving
of it for our own lands, this purpose
could be accomplished by conditions in
the lease granted by the government* to
Its lessees. Of course, under the consti
tution the government could not tax
and could not prohibit the exportation of
phosphate, but as proprietor and owner
of the lands In which the phosphate is
deposited it could impose conditions upon
the kind of sales, whether foreign or do
mestic. which the lessees might make of
the phosphate mined.
Water-Power Sites.
Prior to March 4, 1909, there had been,
on the recommendation of the reclama
tion service, withdrawn from agricultural
entry, because they were regarded as
useful for water-power sites which ought
not to be disposed of as agricultral lands,
tracts amounting to about four million
acres. The withdrawals were hastily
made and included a great deal of land
that was not useful for power sites.
They were intended to Include the power
sites on 29 rivers in nine states. Since
I that tlma $.475,442 acres have been re
stored for settlement of the original four
million, because they do not contain pow
er sites; and meantime there have been
newly withdrawn 1,445,893 acres on vacant
public land and 211.007 acres on entered
public land, or a total of 1,466.899 acres.
These withdrawals made from time to
time cover all the power sites included
in the first withdrawals, and many more,
on 135 rivers and in 11 states. The dispo
sition of these power sites Involves one
of the most difficult questions presented
in carrying out practical conservation.
The statute of 1891 with its amendments
permits the secretary of the Interior to
grant perpetual easements or rights of
way from water sources over public
lands for the primary purpose of irriga
tion and such electrical current as may
be incidentally developed, but no grant
can be made under this statute to con
cerns whose primary purpose is gener
ating and handling electricity. The stat
ute of 1901 authorizes the secretary of
the interior to issue revocable permits
over the public lands to electrical power
companies, but this statute is woefully in
adequate because it does not authorize
the collection of a charge or fix a term
of years. Capital is slow to Invest In an
enterprise founded on a permit revocable
at will.
It is the plain duty of the government
to see to it that in the utilization and de
velopment of all this immense amount
of water power, conditions shall be im
posed that will prevent monopoly and
will prevent extortionate charges, which
are the accompaniment of monopoly. The
difficulty of adjusting the matter is ac- ,
centuated by the relation of the power j
sites to the water, the fall and flow of ;
which create the power. In the states !
where these sites are, the riparian own- !
er does not control or own the power in
the water which flows past his land.
That power Is under the control and with- !
In the grant of the state, and generally |
the rule is that the first water user 1s en- |
titled to the enjoyment. Now, tbe pos
session of the bank or water-power site
over which the water, is to be conveyed j
In order to make the power useful, gives
to its owner an advantage and a certain
kind of control over the use of the water
power, and it la proposed that*the govern
ment In dealing with Its own lands should
use this advantage and lease lands for
power sites to those who woifld develop
the power, and impose conditions on the
leasehold with reference to the reason
ableness of the rates at which the power,
when transmuted, is to be furnished to
the public, and forbidding the union of
the particular power with a combination
of others made for the purpose of monop
oly by forbidding assignment of the
lease save by consent of the government.
Serious difficulties are anticipated by
some in such an attempt on the part of
the general government, because of the
sovereign control of the state over the
water power in its natural condition, and
the mere proprietorship of the govern
ment in the ripsrlan lands. It is con
tended that through Its mere proprietary
right In the site, the central government
has no power to attempt to exercise po
lice Jurisdiction with reference to how
the water power in a river owned and
controlled by therstate shall be used, and
that it Is a violation of the state's rights.
I question the validity of this objection.
The government may impose any condi
tions that it chooses In its lease of its
own property, even though it may have
the same purpose, and in effect accom
plish just what the state would accom
plish by the exercise of Its sovereignty.
There are those (and the director of the
geological survey, Mr. Smith, .who has
given a great deal of attention* to this
matter, is one of them) who insist that
this matter of transmuting water power
into electricity, which can be conveyed
all over the country and across state
lines. Is a matter that ought to be re
tained by the general government, and
that it should avail Itself-of the owner
ship of these power sites for the very
purpose of co-ordinating In one general
plan the power generated from these
government osvnets* Kites.
Argument*
On the other hand, it Is .contended that
it would relieve a conijjlcated situation
if the control of the water-power site
and the control of the water were vested
In the same sovereignty and ownership,
viz., the states, and then were disposed
of for development to private lessees un
der the restrictions needed to preserve
the Interests of the public from the extor
tions and abuses of monopoly. Therefore,
bills have been Introduced in congress
providing that whenever the state au
thorities deem a water power useful they
may apply to the government of the
United States for a grant to the state
of the adjacent land for a water-power
site, and that this grant from the fed
eral government to the state shall con
tain a condition that the state shall
never part with the title to the water
power site or the water power, but shall
lease It only for a term of years not ex
ceeding fifty, with provisions in the
lease by w*hich the rental and the rates
for w’hich the power Is furnished to the
public shall be readjusted at periods less
than the term of the lease, say, every ten
years. The argument Is urged against
this disposition of power sites that legis
lators and state authorities are mere sub
ject to corporate Influence and control
than would be the central government; In
reply It is claimed that a readjustment
of the terms of leasehold every ten years
would secure to the public and ths state
Just and equitable terms.
I do not express an opinion upon the
controversy thus made or a preference
as to the two methods of, treating water
power sites. I shall submit the matter to
congress and urge that one or the other
of the two plans be adopted.
I have referred to the course of the last
administration and of the present one in
making withdrawals of government lands
from entry under homestead and other
law’s and of congress in removing all
doubt as to the validity of these with
drawals as a great step in the direction
of practical conservation. But it is only !
one of two necessary steps to effect what !
'should be our purpose. It has produced
a status quo and prevented waste and ir- j
revocable disposition of the lands until !
the method for their proper disposition j
can be formulated. But it is of the ut- !
most importance that such withdrawals ■
should not be regarded as the final step 1
in the course of conservation, and that j
the idea should not be allowed to spread j
that conservation is the tying up of the ;
natural resources of the government for ,
indefinite withholding from use and the i
remission to remote generations to decide
what ought to be done w*ith these means
of promoting present general human com
fort and progress. For, if so, it is certain
to arouse the greatest opposition to con
servation as a cause, and if it were a
correct expression of the purpose of con
servationists it ought to arouse this op
position. As I have said elsewhere, the
problem is how to save and how* to util
ize, how to conserve and still develop;
for no sane person can contend that it is
for the common good that nature’s bless
ings should be stored only for unborn
generations.
I beg of you, therefore, in your delib
erations and in your informal discussions,
when men come forward to suggest evils
that the promotion of conservation is to
remedy, that you invite them to point
out the specific evils and the specific
remedies; that you invite ttiem to come
dow*n to details in order that their discus
sions may flow into chanels that shall be
useful rather than into periods that shall
be eloquent and entertaining, without
shedding real light on the subject. The
people should be shown exactly what is
needed in order that they make their
representatives in congress and the state
legislature do their intelligent bidding.
AVERT & CO.
! 81-83 South Forsyth Bt., Atlanta, a*.
MACHINERY
-
Reliable Frick Ena!ne*7~Boliere v *ll Size*.
Wheat Separators.
BEST lIPROVtD SAV MILL ON EARTH
Largo Engine. and Bellera ouppllod
promptly. Shlnglo Mills, Corn Mill*. Cir
cular taws. Sow Tooth, Patent Doge,
•tuom dovernora. Full lino Knglhea *
Mill Supplloo. Send for free Catologuo.
Dropsy!
Y tMb Removes all swellm* in Bto to
jfv T days; effect a permanent cure in
SV 30 to 6o day*. Trial treatment
liven free. Nothin* can be fairer.
~ Write Dr. H. H. Green’s Sens
Specialists, Sox B, Atlanta, ta.
T~RY MURINE EYE remed y
For Red, Weak, Weary, Wetary Eye ud W i
GRANULATED EYELIDS 181
Murine Doesn’t Smart—Soothes Eye Pain
Orenfate Sa Ihrtae Ere KmNdr. LhpU, XSt. SBe, ILB3
Marina Eye Salve, in A.eptic Tahoe. 25c. 91.00
EYE .BOOKS AND ADVICE FREE BT Matt.
Murine EyeßemodyCo^Chicjtgo
THE WAY HE FIGURED IT.
f
tfEoett SmSA
Mr. Wise—lt’s a line machine, but
I have to employ a man who does noth
ing else but keep It in the repair.
Auto Agent—Well, If It. famishes
atsady employment for one man, it’s
a great deal better auto than thos»
that don’t.
Opportunity of suffragist.
Baroness Aletta Korff tells In one
of the magazines how the women of
Finland came to vote. The fact Is
that women had to show that they
could meet an emergency before the
vote came to them. They have not,
had many opportunities to take the
Initiative In the world’s history and A
they have not always responded wheiß
the opportunity came, but when
crisis, such as that in 1904, when thel
strike and the revolutionary outbreak’
In Russia took place at the same time,
occurred, they proved they could
make peace by doing it. Not until
England and the United States find
the women helping them to bear some
great trouble will they give them the
right to vote.
Scandal.
Mrs. Slmmoncs glanced at the scare
headline: "Bank Robbed! Police at
Sea! ’’ and laid down the sheet.
“Naow, look at that, Ez!” she ejac
ulated, repeating the headline aloud.
“Here’s a big city hank broke Into by
burglars, and th’ city police force all
off flshin’ somewhere! What a scan
dan ” —Judge.
Youth is Invariably present in the
old age o fa great man. He never
completely loses life's first elixir. —
Prof. Harris-Bickford.
A fool man appreciates the nonsense
of a pretty woman more than he does
the sense of a homely one.
If a man speaks of auburn locks
when a girl has red hair she knows he
has poetry In his soul.
This Is a
Good Breakfast!
Instead of preparing a
hot meal, have some fruit;
Post
Toasties
j. i , with cream;
'-'f-X-
A soft boiled egg;
Slice of crisp toast;
A cup of Postum,
Such a breakfast is pretty
sure to win you.
“The Memory Lingers’*
Postum Cereal Co., Ltd.
Battle Creek, Mich.