The Ogden standard. [volume] (Ogden City, Utah) 1902-1910, 1910-04-19
GARFIELD MAKES
A STRONG PLEA

iii tho clements which go TO make
e n,otor trust arc in existence today
VA ,hc tendency toword such central
Ian,ton is growing stronger, former
Socrotary of the Interior James K.
SarGold tonight made strong plea
hoCo,o the Colorado conservation con
yention for cooperation between tho
fadorol md state governments In tho
oonsnrv.tlon OF water power re-
NJ Garfield was preceded by Gov
o-no- Iohn F. Shatroth. who, at tho
norninr session of the meeting. de-
nIercd in unqualified terms for eH-
omsIvc control by state governments
DENVER. colo, April lS-n
lengthy address dehSered oeiorc 'no
Colorado state Conservation coUniu''
sion lanes Il. Garfield. former sec
retary OF the interior. spoke upon ths
subject of conservation OF water
RIGHTS the state and federal control
| of water power sites and the genera
principles OF conservation,
Mr.. Garfield pointed out the dangers
of monopolIzaton OF the water power
sites of the country and declared tnat
| n a water trust was moi already III
sctusl existence. all of the elements
going to make mp such a trust are
present and the tendency toward such
Capitalization is growing stronger
every day.
He defended the course of former
| President Roosevelt in making use oil
a broad executive authority 10 make
Withdrawals OF water power sites and
sought TO show by quotations from the
constitution and from the decisions OF
| c. lief Justice Marshall that the chief
executive was fully empowered TO con-
serve such public interests under the
| broad rule Of the general welfare" Fl"
State Lines Ignored.
In brief" said Mt Garneld. the
condition is this Theo federal govern
ment owns property essential for the
development OF water power. The
states control the use Of water withia
| their respective boundaries. To bring
| together the two elements necessary
for water power development the ma
! tion and states should cooperate.
THE private interests that are de-
veloping and using water. of neces-
sIty. ignore state lines and nothing
! will be more acceptable to these In
| teTests than to have G federal gov
! ernment withdraw from all attempt 10
! control their transactions.
Unless the federal government re-
tains and exercises such control the
interests OF the people of one state
may be seriously ieopardized by the
| action of an adjoining state
Public Control.
During the last ten years the
great possibilities for the use OF water
have been appreciated. Every where
private interests are attempting TO
gain control Of vantage points for de-
velopment The fight Is on In na-
tion and state. The question Is sim
ply this:
Shall the public control and reg
ulate the use of water for the needs
Of the people and for the benefit of
the people or shall private interests
own and control the use OF water for
Us own gain without regard TO rights
and needs OF the public It is Ger.
tain an intolerable water monopoly
In all It's uses There are those who
VIII be fastened upon our people un.
less the public IN both nation and
state asserts its authority and con.
troll of the use of water.
The use OF water for the develop.
mont of power for storage and for
irrigation means. OF necessity, exclu-
slve use in particular places and such
exclusive use is readily turned into
oppressive monopoly unless regulated
by the public II Is not enough Ia
deny a water trust exists today All
elements which go TO make up such
trust are in existence and the ten.
dency toward such centrallzatlon
grows stronger day by day
Conservation Of Water,
The conservation of water applies
attack conservation, alleging conserva-
ton means non'use. non-deveIopment,
but no such proposition has been put
forward bu the leaders of the con.
scrvatlon movement AS mas been de-
fined over and over again. It means
Wise uses and development of water
ior domestic purposes. irrigation. wat.
or power and navigation in accord
ance With the Deeds of the present
generation but with due regard for
the future and under controI of public
authority
During the last few wears both
nation and states have been attempr.
Ing to deal with this problem In
many minds there seems TO be A ne.
cessary conflict between these iuris-
oictons, but such is not the case.
There are duties upon both nation and
state. There is work enough for all
and there is a common ground for
cooperative control and regulation
The great danger that threatens our
FEDERAL and state governments 10.
cay is that special interests. private
| interests, property interests NAV IN.
duly or unfairly dominate legislative
action. II is not Just to arraIgn indi.
yldual or Snccial interests for this con.
dition We must likewise condemn the
Indifference of our citizens. We ,s
people have been too busy max.
Ing money TO give proper heed and
attention 10 the notions of our lecis-
lativc representatives We have bcen
willing to calmly sit by and see great
property rights. grent special prlylI.
eyes granted to private interests and
individuals without regard to thc nub.
lie welfare -
There wns rrcat latitude for eYecu.