Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1910-09-05

-----zs---
whore these sites are the riparian own
or does not control or own the power
In the water which flows past his land.
That power Is under the control and
within the grant OF the state. and gen
orally the rule IL that tho first user ia
entitled to the enjoyment Now. the
possession of the bank or water-poNer
site over which the water is 10 be con-
veyed in order to make the power use
ful, gives 10 its owner an advantage
and a certain kind Of control over the
use Of tho water power. and II Is pro-
posed that the government In dealing
with it's own lands should use this ad-
vantage and lease lands for power sites
20 those who would develop the power
and impose conditions on the leasehold
with reference To the reasonableness OF
the rates at which the power, when
transmitted, is to be furnished TO the
public, and forbldding the union Of
the particular power with "a combina-
ton OF others made for the purpose Of
monopoly by forbidding asst gnment OF
the lease save by consent Of the gov
eminent.
STATE RIGHTS
Serious difficulties are anticipated by
some I'm such an attempt on tho part OF
the general government, because OF the
SpNtIclEH tpnlTbl 81 inc state over the
water power in It's natural condition.
and the mere proprietorship OF the
government I'm the riparian lands. II is
contendcd that through its mere pro-
prietary right I'm the site. the central
government has no power to attempt to
exercise police jurisdiction with refer
euce to how the water power I'm river
owned and controlled ny the state shall
be used, and that II Is a violation OF
t1a gfufgfg rights I ntaatfnr, tho yaI
lily of this objection. The government
may impose any conditions that IL
chooses I'm its lease Of its own proper
~ oven though II may have the same
purpose, and i'm effect accomplish just
what the state would accomplish by the
exercise of its sovereignty. There arc
those (and the director Of the geologi-
cal survey, Mr.. Smith WHO has given
"A great deal OF attention to this mat
ter 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.
* n matter that ought to- be retained
by the general government. and that IL
should avail itself of the ownership OF
OF co-ordinating in one general plan the
power generated from these govern
ueut owned sites.
one the other hand. IL Is contended
that It would relieve a complicated sit
uation II the control OF the water
power site and the control OF the water
we're vested i'm the same sovereignty
and ownership, viz. the states, and
hen we're disposed OF for development
10 private lessees under the Testric-
Ions needed to preserve the interests
If the public from the axtortions and
buses OF monopoly Therefore, bills
nave been introduced IN Congress pro-
4 =. NN..aaa
ties deem a water power useful they
nay apply TO the government OF the
United states for a grant 10 the state
II the ad jacent land for a water-power
lite, and that this grant from tho fed
raj government TO the state shall con-
ain a condition that the state shall new
r part with the title to the water-power
lite or the water power, but shall lease
I only FOR d term of years not eX-
oeding 90, with provisions i'm the lease
~ which the rental and the rates for
which the power is furnished 10 the
public shall be readjusted at periods
oss than the term OF the lease. say,
very 10 years. The argument is urged
gainst this disposition OF power sites
hat legislators and state authorities
re more subject to corporate influence
nd control than would he the central
overnmcnt; In reply IL Is claimed that
rcadjustment Of the terms OF lease
old every 10 years would secure to
he public and the state Just and equit-
bic terms. Then II Is said that the
tate authorities are better able 20 UNI
erstand the local need and what Is
air adjustment in the particular local
~ than would he the authorities at
II has been argued that
fter the federal government parts with
tile TO a power site II can not con-
-ol the action Of the state In fulfilling
ne conditions of the deed. 10 which Il
answered that in the grant from the
overnmcnt there may be easily insert
d a condition specifying the terms
pom which the state may part with
ne temporary control OF the water
over sites, and. indeed. the water
over, and providing for a forfeiture
( the title 10 the water-power sites
case the condition Is not performed;
nd giving to tho president, in case ot
ich violation Of conditions, the pow
to declare forfeiture and 10 direct
roceedngs to restore the central gov
-nment 90 the ownership OF the power
ties with all the improvements there
\, and that these conditions may be
-omptlv enforced and the land and
ants forfeited to the general govern
ent by suit OF the United states
yalnst the state, which is permissible
1der the Constitution
do not express an opinion upon the
,ntroversy thus made or preference
to the two methods OF treating wa
r-power sites. l shall submit the
after TO Congress and urge that one
the other OF the two plans he adopt
STATE RESPONSIBILITY
At the risk of wesrylns my audience