The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-10-26
OlDnership of Coal Mines.
Hills Speech IN Defense Of the Plank in The NelD York
State Democratic Platform.

on the contrary, Il is In accordance With
tho traditional policy OF the government.
The Revised Statutes Of the United states
N nroyides ss follows: "section 23iS In
all cases lends valuable for minerals shall
be reserved from sale, except as otherwise
expressly directed by law" while the same
statutes further provide as follows: Sec
tion 2S46. No act passed at the first SEES
sion OF the Thirty-eighth congress. granting
lands 10 States or corporations 20 aid IN
the construction OF roads or for other pur-
poses, or 70 extend the time Of grants made
prior to the Goth day Of January, 1860,
Shall be construed as 80 embrace mineral
lands, which In all cases are reserved eA-
cluslTely TO the United States, unless otncr-
wise specially provided IA the act or acts
making the grant
Those who Historically criticize this plank
OF our platform do not seem TO know that
Il has always been the practice OF our State
to provide that Ia the sale Of state lands
certain mines should be reserved, TO Wit,
gold and silver mines discovered or here
after 10 be discovered
Section So Article 8, Of the public land
law is rs follows:
Soc so. state Mines The following mines
ere the property of the people u this State
IN their own right Of sovereignty.
|. Al mines Of gold and silver discovered
q hereafter TO be discovered within this
state.
Tho title ef the subsection reads "Stnte
Mines What Ia u -ne democratic plat
form propcses7 National mines
II any gold OF silver mines should be ia
covered IL this state tomorrow who would
raise any objection 10 the state Operating
rs well as owning them3 Private interests
might seek TO control them, as private in
terests now own and control tine anthracite
mines Of Pennsylvania, but the pubic IN
terests would be certainly promoted by
keeping the operation aud control OF such
mines In the State itself.
But It is said that the coal question IL not
. National one. and hence there shoulI
be no Intervention on the part OF the gen
clsm has any merit n may he asked why
aid the president himself recently intervene
aud summon private citizens 10 the White
House for conference and exercise hls OIL
cial Influence N regard n matter over
/ which le had no jurisdictions He was moi
acting under any statute. He had no nv
I ihority for any legal Interference on hl'
part He himself has made II a National
question. aud he aud his party are nov GO
topped from otherwise regarding v.
A NATIONAL QUESTION.
II Is a National question because the i'm
pending famine Involves The welfore ~ th'
whole people 81 the United states and sucl
famine should no prevented from eve
occurring sgain. which eau not be assuret
under private ownership and control u u
the province of wise etntesmanship n rrc
vide against the present emergency an,
nlsc u provide against tust such emerrap
! cies IN the future There is no permanen
remedy proposed By anybody except tina
| suggested IN the democratic platform
II Is an elementary principle that mi
importation TO the ownere Of proper
must accompany the exercise of the rieh
/ Of eminent domain The Federal constitu
! tiOn recognizes tie right " the government
I 10 take any private property for public us
I therefor
! The question as to what constitutes 2 pub
/ lie use IS nowhere accurately DEEMED an'
| nnst be largely determined by the NJ,
| tional authorities and IN accordance viii
established preeedents There can he ~
/ serious doubt that Il the government de-
! teimues that anthracite coal mines an
needed for public use their acquisition ca
! be GucCeegtully accomplished In SOM
! quarters there is the cl3tlcism that Ia
proposition Is 'patcrpal' IN Ito character
/ yiCld 60 no one In my consistent opposition
| to paternlllsm in Its offensive sense whlci
| seeks 10 substitute Stat NJ governmental
| control for individual action nud respon
! 6lbiity But we should not permit our
selves to,be frightened by the buga-boo o
| mere word, ! am opposed 70 any system
| which regulates what man shall cat "a
| drink, ON wear | believe In the llrgcB
| personal liberty consistent with public or
/ dcr and decency, | resent the suggestion
/ that " Va the province Of the goyernmeu
/ TO give every man work so that he ma
| earn bis living but | do believe that II !
4 the luty OF the government TO afford ever
man an equal opportunity with every othe
( man to earn his living Equal rights for al
I and special privileges for none ia the tru
doctrine ! am opposed 10 that specle
OF real paternallsm which seeks to use
protective tarin No-ealled) TO unduly enric
the producer NJ the expense OF the grea
body OF the consumers OF the nation Bu
| I can discover no paternaliHm In the prope
| sense Of that term In a proposition TO a,
quire the ownership OF O public neceasit
now owned by private parties In a fe'
tounueo Of single State Of the Union.
such az anthracite coal mines 70 be oil
Grated I'm the interest OF the whole peopl
without DETERMINATION for or against ain
class and without regard TO race, nstiona
ityt sex, religious or political opinions. A
we'll might tbs governmental business
carrying tho mails be srigmatized as Up,
ternalism' as the business of supplying Ia
neonle With the necessary fuel with whic
70 preserve their lives " 30 per cent Z
the supply Of pure and wholesome water.
the only water suitable for drinking pu
poses-was situated In the counties OF a slt
Gle state and under the control or privat
monopoly which could arbitrarily hx price
and regulate sales how long would Nh
people az the United States rest conter
with such an intolerahle conditicn2 No sill
ohleHtlon 70 'paternalsm' would Diet,
them from demanding governmental owue
ship and control of the pure water suppl
Of the country.