The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1910-09-09
NEWS OF
GENERAL
INTEREST
DAVIDSON POINTS OUT DISADVAN.
TAGES OF FEDERAL CONTROL.

There is reason to believe that un-
due "heat" is being developed in the
discussion of the control of water pow
ers in the west. The federal govern
ment has absolute control i'll matters
affecting navigation and commerce.
This proposition Is conceded but when
we come TO water powers on streams
that are not navigable, and can never
be made navigable. different questions
arise and over these questions there
is room for discussion.
If the federal government has alb
solute control over navigable streams
and those which can be made navig-
able. then the advocates of federal
control argue that all waters, however
remote from navigable rivers. ulti-
mately flow into streams which in the
end contribute to make navigation pos
sible. and hence federal authority,
they claim. extends to the remotest
and smallest possible contributing
branches.
~
ter that flow into the Great Lakes
help TO supply and keep at their min
imum level that vast body of water
which we speak OF as an INLAND sea-
That the small lakes, ponds and
streams wholly within a state ulti-
mately. to the extent of their over
flow or run off," flow into rivers that
are navigable. and thus become i'm
portant and necessary contributions to
navigation.
To illustrate. the numerous lakes of
Minnesota. at some seasons of each
year. if not continually. overflow. and
whatever surplus water they contribute
goes ultimately to swell the volume of
some river. and thus aids navigation.
We have in Minnesota certain drain
age basins, such aS the Red river. the
st. Louis. the Cedar. the Des Aloines,
the st. CroiX. Minnesota and the Mis-
sissippi. the Red river which flows
north into Canada and ultimately into
Hudson's bay. and the st. Louis, which
flows into Superior. All the other
drainage basins flow ultimately into
the Mississippi.
A Distinction
Now. 80 far as navigation is affected.
and commerce. either interstate or in
ternational. think it may be conceded
that federal control is paramount.
When it comes to the utilization of
these waters on their way to the sea,
for commercial purposes Treating
power or for domestic purposes or IT.
ri"ation) then the state or territory
within which such water is located, eX-
cept so far as it may affect naviga-
ton. should be wholly and exclusively
under state control.
If the general government under
takes the control of all water powers
and issues licenses for improvements.
and assumes supervision of the develop
ment of water powers. then whatever
government.
Minnesota having vast natural
wealth in her lakes. reservoirs and
rivers, greater than any other state.
ought to be benefited there from. Under
exclusive national control. the state
would have no advantage over an ''arid
state" where there is comparatively no
water wealth.
All plans for development and all
applications for privileges connected
with proposed development, would go
to Washington to be passed upon by
/. Il,
war department, and ultimately to
congress for final action.
State Control
State control under proper legislation
for all natural resources. is best for
various reasons which are briefly stat
ed:
First-The people in eacn locality are
the ones most interested and are the
ones best prepared to pass on the mer-
its of each proposed development.
SecOnd-Questions of drainage" and
overflow" more or less connected with
every dam and every water power i'm
provement affects many property rights.
Owners should not be compelled to go
to the national capitol for hearings of
petitions or protests. 1t is too remote
and too expensive for the interests of
citizens to be affected directly or indi-
rectly in their property rights.
Third-The legislature of states
would take a deeper interest and be.
come more familiar with the situation
and facts connected with each proposed