The Minneapolis journal., 1901-02-27
WAR ON IRRIGATION
Determined Opposition to the Bills
Now Before Congress.
THE MINORITY MAKES A REPORT
Argument Is That 1t should BE Pri
vate Enterprise-Compe
for the Farmer.
Special to The Journal.

| RPSSld1 " LIE JOuTndl
! washington, Feb. 27.-Already some
| idea may be had of the character of the
opposition which will be brought against
the Hansbrough bill and other. bills of
similar nature which propose irrigation
OF the arid and semi-arid regions OF the
west and northwest. The Hansbrough
! bill is similar, in the main, to a bin re-
Gently reported favorably in the house by
| majority Of the committee on irriga-
| tion of arid lands. 1t provides that the
money realized from the sale of public
| lands in the arid and semi-arid states
| shall be set aside for the building of res
eryolrs, etc, thus overcoming the oppo-
s1tlon which has long existed to irriga-
ton projects because they looked to di-
rect appropriations from the treasury.
Inc committee on irrigation of arid
lanuS was not unanimous in reporting
the house bill. A minority of the COM
mlttee-Mr. Ray. who is chairman of the
mouse committee on judiciary, and Yes
paslan Warner of Illinois-opposes tho
irrigation proposition in its latest form.
and makes lengthy written report TO the
mouse, telling why it thinks it is unwise
and should not be adopted After argll-
ing at great length in favor of the un-
constitutionality of the proposed law. the
minority OF the committee goes on to
say:
There is no greater reason for the gov
arid and desert lands situated within a state
than to fertilize is barren lands take the
stone from stony ground, plant forests where
needed, etc. Should we do these things the
value of the lands would be increased un-
oouotedly and settlement thereon stimulated
put II would be a substitution of public
expenditure for private enterprise and ex-
penditure where only private interests, main
ly local, are to be subserved In our judg-
manf fhR time has when he eyon-
eral government is justified in making large
outlays of public money belonging to the
whole people for the benefit of a few, especl-
ally when the existing conditions are such
that such expenditure would greatly iniure
a large class of our citizens engaged in
particular industry.
The claim is made that by applying the
money derived from our public lands to the
irrigation of arid and desert lands belonging
| to the United States we may add many mil
lions of acres of productive soil to that we
already possess. 1t must be conceded that if
we add millions of acres of productive land
to our possessions we shall thereby diminish
the value If the present farming lands
throughout the union. 1t is said that, prop
erly irrigated, millions of acres of arid lands
in the great west will he made as productive
as the richest soils of our most favored
states and made to blossom as the rose"
Are our present agricultural lands so over
crowded, so unproductive. that to accommo-
date or feed increasing population we
should expend millions Of dollars from the
treasury of the United States TO afford oppor-
tunty for greater agricultural production and
consequent competition in the farming in
dustry? We think not. We think the people
OF this country under present conditions are
opposed to and will condemn such a scheme
Farther on in the report, which is quite
lengthy, the minority of the committee
returns to the attack along the lines set
forth above, and says:
We do not need to invite foreign immgra-
ton. The time has come when it ought to be
restrained and limited. We do not now re-
quire greater area of tillable soil. We now
feed our own people and annually send mil
lions of dollars worth of agricultural prod
ucts abroad. The value of agricultural prod.
ucts is small that farming is hardly re-
munerative We are not justified in taxing
the farmers of the east, the middle west and
the south to create competition against them
selves.
This irrigation matter is of the widest
possible interest in both the Dakotas and
Montana, and in the states to the south
of them on the eastern slope of the Rock
les. The Hansbrough bill and the New
lands bill in the house, just referred to-
embody the latest attempt to place the
irrigation question in such form as to
command the support of the oldest east
ern states. Heretofore these states have
opposed all irrigation bills because di-
rect appropriations from the general
treasury were provided for in them. This
latest proposition gets around the ques-
tion of direct appropriations by provid-
ing that the funds with which to irri-
gate shall come from the sale of public
lands in the states interested to which
provision the argument advanced by the
minority of the committee of irrigation
of arid lands directs its attack in the re-
port here quoted from; and the report
may fairly be presumed to show the line
of attack that will be made in both houses
against the measure.
When the house river and harbor com
mittee was sitting up nights with it's ap-
preparation bill a hearing was given one
evening to Colonel Pete Hepburn and
others of adjoining states to plead in be-
half of the Missouri river. Colonel Hep
burn held the floor and, with his usual
eloquence and persuasive power, was dis
coursing on the great commerce of that
waterway and the wonderful fertility of
the adjoining lands.
why, gentlemen" he declared, "the
soil is deep and mellow; corn grows twen-
ty feet high there"
And has seven ears on a stalk broke
in Representative Charles Curtis of Kan
sas, mischievously.
And there is shelled corn where the
pith of the ear ought to be- asserted
Representative Dave Mercer, of Nebras-
ka.
Colonel Hepburn was abashed at this
interruption of his eloquence. THAT is