The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1910-09-05

with reference to how the water power
in river owned and controlled by the
state shall be used and that II is a
violation of the states rights. / ques-
ton the validity Of this objection.
On the other hand, it is contended
that 1t would relieve a complicated
situation If the control OF the water
power site and the control of the wa
ter were vested in the same sovereign
~ and ownership-viz, the states--and
then were disposed of for devlop-
ment to private lessees under the re-
strictions needed to preserve the inter.
ests of the public from the extortions
and abuses Of monopoly.
Bills IN Congress.
Therefore bills have been introduced
In congress providing that whenever
the state authorities deem a water
power useful they may apply to the
government OF the United States for a
grant to the state OF the adjacent
land for water power site and that
this grant from the federal govern.
ment to the state shall contain a con.
dition that the state shall never part
with the title to the water power site
or the water power, but shall lease II
only for term OF years not exceeding
fifty, with provisions in the lease by
which the rental and 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. .1s-...>
The argument is rgedagainst this dis.
position Of power sites that legislators
and state authorities are more subject
to corporate influence and control than
would be the central government. In
reply it is claimed that a readjustment
of the terms Of leasehold every ten
years would secure TO the public and
the state just and equitable terms.
Then it is said that the state au.
thorities are better able to understand
the local need and what is fair adj
Justment in the particular locality
than would be the authorities at
Washington.
1t has been argued that after the
federal government parts with title to
a power site 1t cannot control the ac-
ton of the state in fulfilling the con-
ditions Of the deed, to which IL Is
answered that in the grant from the
government there may be easily IN
serted condition specifying the terms
upon which the state may part with
the temporary control OF the water
power sites, and, indeed, the water
power, and providing for forfeiture
of the title to the water power sites
tn'case the condition is not performed,
and giving to the president, in case
OF such violation of conditions, the
power to declare forfeiture and to di-
rect proceedings to restore the central
government to the ownership of the
power sites, with all the improvements
thereon, and that these conditions may
be promptly enforced and the land and
plants forfeited to the general gov
eminent by suit Of the United States
against the state, which is permits
sible under the constitution.
do not express an opinion upon the
controversy thus made or a prefer
ence as to the two methods Of treating
water power sites. / shall submit the
matter to congress and urge that one
! or the other Of the two plans be
| adopted.
o. ks Last Administration.
have referred to the course Of the
last administration and of the present
one In making withdra walls of govern
ment, lands from entry under home
stead and other laws and of congress
in removing all doubt as to the validity
of these Withdrawals as q great step in
the direction Of practical conservation.
But It is only one Of two necessary
steps to effect what should be our pur-
| pose. It has produced a status quo
and prevented waste and irrevocable
disposition Of the lands until the meth
cd for their proper disposition can be
formulated
But it is of the utmost Importance
that such Withdrawals should not be
regarded as the final step in the course
Of conservation and that the idea
should not be allowed to spread that
natural resources Of the government
for indefinite Withholding from use and
the remission to remote generations to
decide what ought to be done with
these means Of promoting present gen
eral human comfort and progress.
For, IL so, it is certain to arouse the
greatest opposition TO conservation as
q cause, and If it were a correct ex-
preston of the purpose OF conserva-
tlonists It ought to arouse this oppOsi-
ton. Real conservation involves wise,
nonwasteful use in the present genera
ton, with every possible means OF
| preservation for succeeding genera
tons, and, though the problem to Sc
cure this end may be difficult, the bur-
den is on the present generation
| promptly to solve 1t and not to run
away from it as towards, lest in the
attempt to meet it we may make some
mistake.
AS have said elsewhere, the prob
lem is how to save and how to utilize,
how to conserve and still develop,
for no sane person can contend that 1t
is for the common good that natures
blessings should be stored only for
unborn generations.
beg Of you, therefore, in your de-
alterations and in your informal dis
cussions, when men come forward to
suggest evils that the promotion Of
conservation is to remedy, that you