Arizona republican., 1899-08-20
PHOENIX. AUGUST 20. 1899.
MORE ABOUT FEDERAL AID.

The Los Angeles Times Is not add
ing to its reputation for fairness Dy its
attitude toward this newspaper IN
connection' with the question of the
future of the arid lands. The Times
som time ago printed an editorial IA
voring the reclamation of these lands
by the general government. The Re
publican replied to it, in a straight
forward way, taking the ground that
the plan of The Times was imDr1ctI-
cable and visionary. A short time
afterWaId the Times printed Il com
municltion from a prominent cIti-
zen" of Arizona declaring that there
is a deep-laid schema to gobbIe up
these lands through the plan of giving
shem to the states and territories"
The Republican in reply said it knew
of no such scheme; that Its owner
favored state cession when he was the
Washington correspondent Of a prom
inent eastern newspaper, and before
he entertained the idea of settling ii
Arizona" and that his experience
here has served to confirm his early
conviction that it is folly to expect the
national government to solve the
problem that confronts the arid
wes." As The Republican has been
classed as the only newspaper of
prominence in the southwest that IA
vors the pan Of state cesEion, and its
editor has practically been accused OF
being a party to Job" to 'gobbls'
the arid lands in Arizona, .-he above
statement CT his position was deemed
by him to be proper The Times ig
nored it at the time but now quotes
the Albuquerque Democrat as follows:
'sThe only journal of any pr0mI-
hence n the southwest that fav0Ts
the plan CT state cession is the PhOe-
nix Republican, and the position OF
that paper on the subject Is very. easily
accounted for by itself when it says
its ed10r favored state cessiCn when
he was the Washington core spondent
of prominent eastern newspaper, /
and before he entertained the idea OF
settling in Arlzo2a.' Correspondents
of prominent eastern newspapers
know a great many things about this !
section Of the country that are not SO, |
and it is not surprising that they |
should form opinions On a. subject OF !
this sort not shared by persons who |
understand the situation"
We submit that Washington corre- i
spondent or any CHER person who !
may study the irrigation problem does
not need TO visit the arid belt to dis |
cover the difference between a Ute |
plan dream and a plain business prop /
osition. The dreamy nature of the /
plan Of the federal aid advocates is |
really more apparent in Washington, /
where the true feelings IF the congress /
and of the eastern people are known. /
The Republican has presented facts in /
connection with the reclamation prop |
csiticn which the Times Tor the Albu- |
querque Democrat have controversial /
Those journals are reduced to misrep- |
reservations and theoretical statements |
which cut No figure whatever. If the /
arid lands are ever reclaimed, and The 1
Republican believes they VIII be. the
work will be accomplished By private /
capital, as it ought 30 be If the gov
can be induced TO appropriate
money to build reservoirs in Indian
reservations 50 much the better for
such works would supply needed OBJ
ject lessons. Private capital is becom-
ing more 1avorabIy disposed toward r.
projects in he arid region
The danger lies in tie agitation en-
gagged in By the Times and ether news
which has a tendency TO fright
en away ,1-ssfDIa investors