The Raymer enterprise., 1910-09-08

that ttms imtn acres have bssa ~
stored for settlement Of the original Seur
million, because they DO not contain pow
q sttss; and meantime there have bssn
newly withdrawn 1.1G, - acres on vaee1t
public land and n1.oN acres on sntsfsd
public land. or . total Of L&a,W acfss.
These Withdrawals made from tms 70
time cover all the power sites included
in the nrst Withdrawals. and many mofs.
| on lk rivsrs and in II states. The dispo-
| sition Of these power sites involves ons
Of the most dincult questions presented
in carrying out practical conservation.
The statute Of 1851 with it, amendments
permits the secretary Of the intsraor %
grant perpetual easements or rights ef
way from water sources over public
lands for the primary purpose Of irriga-
ton and such electrical current - may
be incidentally developed, but no grant
can be made under this statute TO con-
Germs whose primary purpose 10 gsnsr-
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 10 woefully in
adequate because It does not authoriss
the collection Of . charge or AZ term
Of years. Capital Is slow TO invest in an
enterprise founded on q permit revocabls
At will.
It II 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 bs i'm
posed that will prevent monopoly and
Will prevent extortionate charges. which
are the accompaniment OF monopoly. The
dinculty Of adjusting the matter 10 &C.
centuated by the relation Of the power
sites to the water, the fall and dow Of
which create the power. In the states
where these sites are the riparian own
er does not control or own the power in
the water which flows past his land.
That power 10 under the control and with
in the grant OF the state. and generally
| the rule Is that the first water user II en-
| titled to the enjoyment. Now, the pos
session Of the bank or water-power site
| over which the water IL to be conveyed
| In order to make the power useful, gives
| to its owner an advantage and q certain
| kind Of control over the use Of the water
| power. and 1t IS proposed that tho govern
ment in dealing with Its own lands should
use this advantage and lease lands for
power sites to those who would develop
the power. and impose conditions on the
leasehold 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 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 Renarat NJ fha
sovereign control Of the state over the
water power In its natural condition. and
the mere proprietorship of the govern
ment in the riparian lands. It is con-
tended that through Its mere proprietary
right In the site. the central government
has no power to atfcmpt to exercise po-
lice Jurisdiction with reference to how
the water power In river owned and
controlled by the state shall be used. and
that It Is a violation Of the states rights
I question the validity Of this objection
| The government may impose any condi-
tions that It chooses in Its lesss Of its
own property. even though II 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 land the director Of the
geological survey. Mr.. Smith. who has
| given u kTchI OChl VI uttcukOH W tAhs
| matter, Is one Of them who insist that
this matter Of transmitting water power
into electricity. which cnn be conveyed
all over the country and across state
lines. Is q matter that ought TO be rt-
tained by the general government. and
| that II 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. 1t 10 contended that
| II would relieve q complicated situation
| II 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 un-
der the restrictions needed to preserve
the interests Of the public from the extor-
tions 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 a grant to the state
OF the adjacent land for q water-poweE
site. and that this grant from the fed
eral government to the state shall con-
tain 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 ratel
for which the power Is furnished to the
public shall be readjusted at periods lesi
than the term Of the lease. say. every ter
years The argument 10 urged against
this dIsposition of power sites that leEis-
lators and state authorities are more sub
Ject to corporate influence and control
than would be the central government; in
reply It Is claimed that q readjustment
OF the terms Of leasehold every ten year.
would secure to the public and the state
Just and equitable terms.
do not express an opinion upon the
controversy thus made or q preference
AZ to the two methods Of treating water.
power sites. shall submit the matter &c
congress and urge that one or the other
Of the two plans be adopted.
1 have referred to the course Of the Last
administration and Of the present one In
making Withdrawals Of government landi
from entry under homestead and othei
laws and of congress in removing ~
doubt as to the validity Of these WITH
drawals as a great step In the direcuon
of practical conservation. But It 10 only
one Of two necessary steps to effect VIVA,
should be our purpose. II has proouceo
q status quo and prevented waste ana "
revocable disposition Of the lands unu
the method for their proper disposiuol
can be formulated. But II 10 oi tne ".
most Importance that such withdrawail
should not be regarded ~ the nnai steI
in tho course NJ conservation. and tina