Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1910-09-07


| that time 3,475,442 acres have been re-
| stored for settlement of the original four
| million, because they do not contain pow
| er sites; and meantime there have been
| newly withdrawn l 245, 1892 acres on vacant
public land and 211,007 acres on entered
| public land, a total of ], ass, 1893 acres.
| These Withdrawals made from time to
| time cover all the power sites included
| IN the hrst Withdrawals, and many more,
on 1875 rivers and in II states The diSpo-
| s1t1on of these power sites involves one
| of the most difficult questions presented
| In carrying out practical conservation.
The statute of 1891 with it's amendments
! permits the secretary OF the interior to
grant perpetual easements or rights OF
| way from water sources over public
| lands for the primary purpose OF irriga-
! ton and such electrical current as may
| be incidentally developed, but no grant
| can be made under this statute to con-
Germs whose primary purpose is gener-
ating and handling electricity The stat
ute of 1901 authorizes the secretary Of
the interior to issue revocable permits
over the public lands to electrical power
] companies but this statute is woefully in
adequate because it does not authorize
the collection Of a charge or fix . term
of years Capital is slow to invest in an
/! enterprise founded permit revocable
at will.
1t is the plain duty Of the government
to see to it that in the utilization and de-
velopment of all this immense amount
of water power, conditions shall be i'm
posed that will prevent monopoly and
will prevent extortionate charges, which
are the accompaniment of monopoly. The
difficulty of adjusting the matter is ac-
centuated by the relation of the power
sites to the water the fall and flow OF
which create the power. In the states
Vx1n elf ora t1A rin
er does not control or own the power in
the water which flows past his land.
That power is under the control and with
in the grant of the state, and generally
the rule is that the first water user Is en-
titled to the enjoyment. Now, the pos
session of the bank or water-power site
over which the water is to be conveyed
in order to make the power useful, gives
to It's owner an advantage and a certain
kind of control over the use Of the water
power, and 1t is proposed that the govern
ment in dealing with it's own lands should
use this advantage and lease lands for
power sites to those who would develop
the power, and impose conditions on the
1easehold with reference to the reason
ableness Of the rates at which the power,
when transmitted, is to be furnished to
the public, and forbidding the union of
the particular power with a combination
Of others made for the purpose of monop-
oily by forbidding assignment of the
lease save by consent of the government.
Serious difficulties are anticipated by
some in such an attempt on the part of
the general government, because of the
sovereign control Of the state over the
water power in its natural condition and
the mere proprietorship Of the govern
rnent in the riparian lands. It is con-
tended that through it's mere proprietary
right in the site, the central government
has no power to attempt to exercise po-
jurisdiction wifi rpfarAncA n
the water power in a river owned and
controlled by the state shall be used and
that it is violation of the states rights.
/ question the validity Of this objection.
The government may impose any condi-
tons that it chooses In its lease Of Its
own property, even though it may have
the same purpose, and in effect accom-
pliSh just what the state would accom-
plish by the exercise of its sovereignty.
There are those (and the director of the
geological survey, Mr.. Smith, who has
given a great deal of attention TO this
matter, is one of them) who insist that
this matter of transmitting water power
into electricity, which can be conveyed
all over the country and across state
lines is q matter that ought to be re-
tanned by the general government, and
that 1t should avail itself of the owner
ship of these power sites for The very
! purpose Of co-ordinating in one general
plan the power generated from these
government owned sites.
| Arguments Against Idea.
! On the other hand, it Is contended that
1t would relieve complicated situation
If the control of the water-power site
and the control of the water were vested
in the same sovereignty and ownership,
viz, the states, and then were disposed
of for development to private lessees I'M
der the restrictions needed to preserve
the interests Of the public from the extor
tons and abuses Of monopoly. Therefore,
bills have been introduced in congress
providing that whenever the state au-
thorities deem water power useful they
may apply to the government of the
United States for q grant to the state
of the adjacent land for a water-power
site, and that this grant from the fed
eral government to the state shall con-
tain a condition that the state shall
never part with the title to the water
power site or the water power, but shall
lease it only for term of years not ex
ceeding fifty, with provisions in the
lease by which the rental and the rates
| for which the power is furnished to the
! public shall be readjusted at periods less
than the term of the lease, say, every ten
years. The argument is urged against
this disposition of power sites that legis-
lators and state authorities more sub
tect to corporate influence and control
than would be the central government; in