Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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.