The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1910-04-27

GARFIELD DEFENDS ROOSE-
vELT'S CONSERVATION PLAN.
Hits Narrow Intcrpretation--Mak
Significant Reference to The Kind
OF Executive Action Which the In
terests Prefer.

HI the elements which go 10 mako up
a water trust are in existence today
and that the tendency toward such
Capitalization Is growing stronger,
James r. Garfield. formerly Secre-
tary OF the Interior. made a strong
plea tonight before the Colorado Con-
servation Commission for co-opera-
tion of Federal and State government
In the conservation of water power
resouces.
Mr.. Garfield was preceded by Gov.
John Shaforth. who at the morning
session declared In unqualified terms
for exclusive control OF power sites
by State governments. Letters were
read from Philip p. Wells, counselor
OF the National Conservation Com
mission, upholding Garfields position
and from Secretary of the Interior
Ballinger upholding Governor Sha-
froth's stand.
Mr.. Wells letter was in answer to
a request for a statement from Gift
ford Pinchot. which reached Wash
ington too late to be forwarded to
Mr.. Pinchot In Europe. 1t Is under
stood that Wells answered for Mr..
Pinohot.
Mr.. Garfield pointed out the dang
ers Of monopolization of the water
power sites of the country. and de-
clared that IL water power trust"
was not already in actual existence
all OF the elements that go to make
up such trust are present. and the
tendency toward such Capitalization
Is growing stronger every day. He
defended the course of former Presi-
dent Roosevelt in making use of a
broad executive authority in making
Withdrawals of water power sites, and
sought TO show by quotations from
the Federal constitution and from
the decisions Of Chief Justice Mar
shall that the chief executive was
full empowered to conserve such
public interests under the broad rule
OF the general welfare.
The Federal government, he said
possessed the right to regulate the
development Of water power on pub
lie lands In the States.
I'm BRIEF" said Mr.. Garfield. "the
condition is this:
THE Federal government owns
property essential for the develop
ment of water power. The States
control the use of water within their
boundaries. To bring together these
two elements that are necessary for
water-power development the juris-
diction Of nation and States should
cooperate.
'"The priv tdte interests which are
developing and using water of neces-
sity ignore State lines. and nothing
will be more acceptable to these in
terests than to have the Federal gov
ernment withdraw from all attempts
to control their transactions.
Again. unless the Federal govern
ment retains and exercises such con-
troll the interests of the people of one
State may be seriously jeopardized
by the action of an adjoining State
The fight is on I'm nation and States.
The question is simply this Shall the
public control and regulate the use
OF water, in accordance with the
needs of the public and for the bene-
fit Of the public. or shall private in
terests own and control the use of
water for their own gain. without re
gard TO the rights and needs of the
public? II is certain that an intoler
able water monopoly will be fasten
ed upon our people unless the publ,
In both nation and States assert it's
authority and control the use Of wa
ter.
THE conservation of water applies
I'm all it's uses. There are those who
attack conservation, alleging that 1t
means non-use. acknowledgement, but
no such proposition has been put for
ward by the leaders of the conserva-
tion movement. AS has been defined
over and over again, IT means the
wise use and development of water
for domestic purposes. irrigation, wa
ter power and navigation, in accord
ance with the needs OF the present
generation. but with due regard for
the future and under control of pub
lie authority, TO the end that unregu-
lated monopoly may be prevented;
that use by private individuals may
be limited In time. and granted under
conditions which will yield TO the
public a fair compensation for the
benefit derived, and finally prevent