, 1907-05-07
MR., MONDELL'S POSITION De
FINED.

ferred editorially to Mr.. Mondelrs pc
sition upon the leasing question, Civ
ing quotations from letters in relation
thereto. In a letter to the edi
tor making reference to the editorial
in question, MI. Mondell discusses the
matter further and shows what kind
of a leasing proposition he would favor,
II any. The letter is an interesting one
and is given in full:
Newcastle, Wye, May 4, 1907.
Hon. w. L. Chaplin, Editor. Laramie
Republican, Laramie, Wyo.
My Dear Mr.. Chaplin: have read
with interest your editorial of Tuesday,
April 80, under the caption, "Mr. Mon.
dell's Position" in which you quote
from a personal letter from me under
date Of February 9, 1907, in relation
to grazing on public lands.
1t seems to me that the quotations
you make from my letter, separated
as they are from the body Of the let,
ter. do not convey an entirely correct
idea of my views on the question of
the use OF the public lands for grazing
purposes, and inasmuch as the edi.
torial in question vas intended to give
to the readers of The Republican my
position on that question, l avail my
self Of the opportunity to state my
views on the subject that is 10 being
so generally agitated.
You will recall that my letter Of
February 8 was in answer to your let
ter Of February 4, which in turn was in
answer to my letter of January 81, in
which 1 expressed myself in opposition
to the idea of national control of the
range, and which you answered by say
ing:
you and | are not far at variance
upon a leasing proposition" and In
which you express your opposition to
the Burkett bill as being along the
same lines as forest paternal policy"
In my letter Of February 9, follow
ing up our correspondence. l used the
language you quoted in regard to lin
tied leasing. but also expressed doubts
as to the possibility of enGcting salts.
factory legislation of that character.
What l had reference to by "limited
leasing" Of course, referred to limits
placed by congressional enactment
not by departmental regulation-limit-
ing the total area hat might be leased
and the amount that might be leased
to any one person.
In that letter l referred to the fact
that all propositions for leasing legis-
lation had had the continual and per-
sistent opposition of the interior de-
Misunderstanding an attempt to secur
limited leasing legislation for western
Nebraska several years ago-and l
stated that this opposition was largely
predicated on the view whichnow seems
to have administrative sanction look
ing to "the turning over to the federal
authorities, under the jurisdiction OF
the department of agriculture, abso-
lutte and unlimited power and jurisdic-
ton over the use of the grass of the
entire public domain"
My present view of the situation was
stated in my letter of February 9,
from which you have quoted, as fol-
lows:
THE more | think the matter over
the more l am driven to the view,
taking into consideration the difficulty
of legislation, the conditions, the diff
ferences Of opinion that exist and the
difficulty of administering any sort or
plan Of government lease OF control,
that it is best not to attempt anything
of the kind but get along the best we
may with gradual notifications Of the
laws in the direction Of making the
honest requirement Of public lands, in
reasonable bodies easier, with the view
of ultimately passing it all into private
ownership rather than adopt any sys,
tenn which suggests or leads to per
manent federal ownership and control
l find myself unable to adopt the
view expressed in The Republican edi'
torial in question when, after stating
my opposition to 1.-The forest reserve
permit system being extended to the
public domain" the editorial goes on
to say cit is well to state in this con
nection that such a policy is not at
the present time being advocated by
the national administration, Mr.. Pin
chot, Or any one else"
My reasons for dissenting from this
view are as follows: The Burkett bill
which no one denies proposed the ex
tension of the forest reserve permit
system to the public lands, unquestion
ably had Mr.. Pinchot's sanction-if In
fact 1t was not written in his bureau
The president in his public land mes
sage Of February 10, 1907, a few day!
later than my letter from which 70,
have quoted, used the following Ian
guage:
LET me again urge that Legislation
be passed to provide for the govern
ment control of the public pasture
lands of the west on the same genera