The San Francisco call., 1909-09-29

as between the public and the = In
vestor.
This is a matter which congress must
take up. The water power sites are
now generally disposed of and the
same kind of a procedure as that by
which agricultural lands are taken up.
and there is no power on the part OIL
the secretary of the interior in the dis
position of such sites to impose the
conditions suggested.
WITHDRAWALS ARE TEMPORARY
The matter has become so important
that under the last administration
| large tracts of lands amounting to
upwards of four million acres were
Temporarily withdrawn from settlement
| in order to prevent the acquisition OF
water power sites under the general
| land laws This amount has been re-
duced under the preesnt administra-
tion to 100000 acres, which includes
| even more ascertained water sites than
the original Withdrawals.
| 1t should be understood that these
Withdrawals are temporary and can
! only be justified as made in order to
permit congress to legislate on the sub
| ject of water power sites. Should con-
gress conclude not to do so, 1T would be
| difficult for the executive to find the
| authority indefinitely to withhold these
| lands from settlement under the gen
| eral laws on the ground that they
contain water power sites
NEW LEGISLATION FAVORED
| / shall, therefore, urge upon congress
at it's next session the passage. of a
| law authorizing the disposition of such
water, power sites on terms TO be
| agreed upon by the secretary of the
| interior with the proposed purchaser.
| 1t may turn out that restrictions of
| this sort are so burdensome as to dis
courage the investment of capital, and
| it may be necessary to modify the re-
| quirements on this account. But my
own impression is that the demand for
that these restrictions will not prevent
| the investment of capital. but will ul-
| timately bring to the PUBLIC Golfers a
source and viii secure the development
| of power for-ma anufacturing purposes
that will probably in time exceed the
utility and value OF coal, and become
a substitute for 1t.
COAL, OIL AND PHOSPHATE
I now come to what should. be the
proper disposition of coal lands, oil
| lands and phosphate lands. The anthra-
! cite coal strike evoked a. great deal of
fownership by private persons of a
monopoly of the coal supply of the coun-
| try and led Roosevelt to declare the
lands still undisposed of.
The truth is that in Alaska the de-
posits of coal are SO great that when
| furnish coal to the entire Pacific coast.
| since 1906 There are some nine num-
dred claims, but 1t is probable that
| Under the evidence adduced most of
these claims will prove to have been
| defective.
OPPOSED TO MONOPOLY
| 1t seems wise in the disposition of
coal lands, and indeed of all mineral
| lands having agricultural value to
| separate the surface of the land from
| its mineral contents. and then either
! to lease the right to take coal from
| the land at specified compensation
| per ton-that is. to provide system
! of royalties-or to sell the deposits of
! the land outright to the coal miner.
| In every case, restriction by way of
| forfeiture ought to be included to pre-
vent a monopoly of ownership. This
lis the great object of a change in the
method of their disposition.
| Some provision should be made with
reference to the disposition of the phos-
| phate land. This land. which is found
| in Wyoming and Idaho, contains. the
wonderful fertilizer which 1t will soon
| be necessary to use on much of the
1 land in the United States, and as the
need for the use of this fertilizer on
much land is growing, we should see
to it. If possible. that the product be
not subject to monopoly or sold out
side of the United States.
| CALIFORNIA OIL LANDS
The oil lands of California, as well as
| the phosphate lands. and practically
all the coal lands, have been with
drawn from settlement in order to