The Columbus journal. (Columbus, Neb.) 1874-1911, 1910-09-07

that time 3S.3.4se acres have been -
stored for settlement OF the original foul
million. because they do not contain DOW
er sizes: and meantime there have beeI
newly withdrawn 1..l5&c acres on vacant
public land and :11.o07 acres on entere<
public land. or q total Of 1.45s.SS9 acres
These Withdrawals made from time 4
time cover all the power sites included
in the first Withdrawals. and many more
on rs rivers and In II states. The di9pO
sttion Of these power sites involves Ont
Of the most dif,lcult questions presente(
In carrying out practical conservation
The statute Of 1891 with its amendment.
permits the secretary OF the interior Il
grant perpetual easements or rights Of
way from water sources over public
laEds for the primary purpose OF irriEa'
tion and such electrical current - may
be incidentally developed. but no grant
can be made under this statute to con.
Germs whose primary purpose ID gener'
ating and handing 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 II woefully In
adequate because II dues not authorize
the collection OF . charge or nx tern
Of years. Capital II slow to invest In 1n
ENTERPRISE founded on . permit revoeabls
1t will.
It is the plain duty Of the government
to sec to II that In the utilization and de-
velopment OF all this immense amount
OF water power. conditions shall be i'm
posed that will prevent monopoly and
will prevent extortionate charges. which
are the accompaniment Of monopoly. The
difficulty Of adjusting the matter 10 &C.
centuated by the relation Of the powez
sites to the water. the fall and low 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 In under the control and with.
In the grant Of the state. and generally
the rule Is that the first water user u en-
titled to the enjoyment. Now. the pos
session Of the bank or water-poWer site
over which the water II to be conveyed
In order to make the power useful. gives
to its owner an advantage and a certain
kind OF control over the use Of the water
power. and II is proposed that the 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
lcasehOld with reference to the veasOn-
ableness OF the rates at which the power.
when transmitted. II eo be furnished to
the public. ard forbiddinG the union Of
the particular power with a combination
o! others made for the purpose OF mOnop-
oily by forbidd!n& assignment; Of the
leas. save by consent OF the government.
Serious difficulties are anticipated by
some In such an attempt on the part Of
TN" general government. because cf the
sovereign control Of the state over the
water power IN It's natural condition. and
the mere pToprietorship Of the govern
:,lsh ut in the riparian lands. 1t is con-
tended that through its mere proprietary
ri::iit liz the site. "a" central government
has no power to attempt to exercise To-
lice Jurisdiction with reference I" how
the water power I'm q river owned and
by the state shall he used. and
that IL Is violation Of the states rights.
I question the validity Of this obtectio.,.
The government may impose any cOn'li-
tons that IL chooses In its leYs.s 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 sOvereiEnt--
There are those land the director of the
geological survey. Mr.. Smith. who has
given a great deal Of attention 10 this
matter. IL 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. IL a matter that ought to be ~
tanned by the general government. and
that IL should avail itself Of the owner
ship az these power sites for ~. very
purpose Of co-Ordinating In one general
plan the power generated from these
government owned sites.
Arguments Against Idea.
On the other hand. II Is cOntended that
Il would relieve a complicated situation
IL 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-
lions and abuses Of monopoly. Therefore.
bills have been introduced In congress
providing that whenever the state au-
,hori:ies deem q water power useful they
United States for q grant to the state
II the adjacent land for q er-power
site. and that this grant from the fed
sral government to the state shall con-
ain q condition that the state shall
never part With the title q the water
power site or the water power. but shall
ease Il only for 4 term Of years not ex-
,eedin9 fifty. with provisions in the
ease by which the rental and the Patea
or which the power Il furnished to the
public shall he readjustcd At periods less
han the term Of the lease. say. every ten |
'ears. The argument Is urged against |
his disposition o. power sites that leyis- |
at0rs and state authorities are more sub ]
ect to corporate influence and control |
han would be the central government: in |
eply IL is claimed that a REIMBURSEMENT |
4 the terms Of leasehold every ten years !
would secure to the public and the state |
ust ard equitable terms.
] do not express an opinion upon the |
controversy thus made or a preference
- to the two methods Of treating water
,ower sites. shall submit the matter to
congress- and urge that one or the other
4 the two plans be adopted.
I have referred to the course Of the last
and Of the present one in
making Withdrawals Of government lands
rom entry under homestead and other
AVS and Of congress in removing all
Oubt as to the validity Of these with
rawais as a great step IN the direction
{ practical conservation. But II Is only
ne Of two necessary steps to effect what
hould be our purpose. II has produced
status quo and prevented waste and ir-
disposition Of the lands Until
he method for their proper disposition
an be formulated. But II In Of the ut
,ost importance that such Withdrawals
hould not be regarded AZ the final step
, the course Of conservation. and that
he idea should not be allowed to spread
hat conservation Is the tying up Of the
atural resources Of the government for
,deiinite withholding from use and the
emission to remote generations to decide
hat ought to be done with these means
? nrornotina present general human com. |
,rt and progress. For. IL 50. II II certain
, arouse the greatest opposition to con-
srvation a a cause. and II II were .
prrect expression Of the purpose Of con. |