The Birmingham age-herald., 1910-03-11

Hams in 1882. MT. Ballinger was in the class ahead of him. s | You recommended Mir Ballinger for l appointment as commissioner of the land office, did you not?" asked Senator Nell son. ''I did"
 And while he was commissioner, did not he often go to your office and talk matters over with you both as Secretary of the Interior and as his frend?' asked | MT. yertrees.
 Yes"
 The details of MT. Ballinger's testimony before the congressional committees re- garding the coal bills that were pending in 1908 again were gone into at great length. It appeared that MT. Ballinger's bill related to claims technically known as bad faith claims, made in technical violation of the law, which Mir Garfield said everybody agreed should be changed.
 Claims Transmitted
 The Ballinger bill, 1t was said. per- mitted the "bad faith claimants to trans- | init their claims and come in under the | new bill; in other words, come in com | pliance with the law
 MT. Garfield said that this bill failed, and that the new law of 1908 as finally passed provided only for the, consolida- ton of good faith entries.
 MT Vertrees questioned the witness somewhat fully as to his conception of the laws under which he made the whole | sale withdrawals of lands as water power sites. MT. Garfield said there was no specific law for the withdrawal of power sites as sueh He withdrew them, how ever, to prevent their being acquired as agricultural or timber lands, or under any other law. MT Garfield and the attorney had a number of clashes during the afternoon. The witness was rather sharp in some of his replies. Once in referring to the obligations of public officer, he said:
 "A locomotive on a railroad track can either go ahead or standstill. and yet be on the track. So a public officer can keep within the law and do much or little for the people,"
 Objects of Conservation
 MT. vertrees and the witness spent some time discussing between themselves the aims and objects of the conservation movement. One of the attorneys ellie ited this response from MT Garfield:
 'In all this conservation movement, MT yertrees, tkere has been no dog in the manager business. We believe in present are needed but we do not believe in un. regulated and unrestricted monopoly
 Mr Vertrees here read to the witness statement made by George Otis Smith director of the geological survey, to the effect that valuable data in the survey had not been used by the reclamation se rvice when Secretary Garfield ordered the wholesale withdrawal of water power sites MT. Garfield said he had told MT Smith that this was an unfair statement and that he felt 1t was Intended to dis credit the former adn ninistration. Mir Smith. he said. stood by the statement but denied ary intention of discreditine anybody.
 --r Vertrees:
 Y "Mr Garfield. in your letter to Presden Taft. dated November 6 last, which let ter you say was called for to correct hat you believed to be the President! transformation, didn't you say in con Lection with the rsstorations made b, ,1r Ballinger that the chief differences between the withdrawals made by yo, and the withdrawals made by Secre tsry Ballineer were that all private land were eliminated oy him by specific de scription, and by you by general excep vss no material difference between tb' , amount of lands withdrawn by you ant : those withdrawn by MT. Ballinger afte these proper deductions were ade?' l "Yes."N
 EIinaipation of Lands
 And doesn't Director Smith say that wi file these private lands did enter Int | the matter, that the greater part of th' differences between the withdrawals mad by you and those made by Mir. Ballinge : was the elimination by Mr. Ballinger o lands that in no way could be considered . available for power sites?' Tt was that statement which ] con sidered unfair"
 MT. Garfield said that at Mentor, 0. - lll.lu1 -. - oIly cns 'DRoaao oUINR9." that II .xS1l.so 0ros,,o \ l\uinir