The Washington times., 1913-01-04

, trust Mr.. Ferris. in closing the debate
| for this vicious measure, said:
What Ferris Said.
"I never was as positive in my life
! that a bill was So absolutely free from
, as this one
Evidently the House didn't agree
with Mr.. Ferris. for the bill ~was de-
| feated by a vote of 81 to eS.
Again. Mr.. Ferris voted for the
Goose river dam bill. which was jammed
through Congress in the last days of
the last session. and afterward vetoed
| 6y President Taft. He opposed the
| faumpnrey f amendment which provided
minimum charge for water-power sites
and for Federal regulation of rates tn
consumers of power IL the States shouid
not provide such regulation.
Question Important.
Ihere VIII be no question before the
next Congress of more Importance to
tne american people for this genera
tion and those to come, than the solu-
tion OF the water power problem. When
one considers that in the National
Forests alone there remains about thir-
teen million horse power-the larger
part of the water power in the West
rot now In private hands being in the
National Forests-together with other
water power on the poblic domain, it
II clear that the House Public Lands
upon how the problem of a water power
policy for our publicly owned water
bowers Is solved. Certainly Mr. Ferris
VIII not be in favor Of the solution of
ms question as stated by Colonel
Bryan In mis- Kansas City speech be-
fore the Conservation Congress-he has
gone on record in the other direction.
Again, one of the big questions be-
Iore Coming sessions will be the dis
posai OF the great public grazing lands
the United States. The solution of this
question as proposed by the conserva-
lonists Is set forth in some respects in
the Lever bill, which provides Federal
control OF these lands under a leasing
system. The other side of the question
Is to turn them over to the States, which
VIII undoubtedly mean n1onopolization.
Federal Control Disliked.
"on hearings before the House Public
Lands Committee, held last session, re-
lating to this legislation. Mr.. Ferris
clearly showed that he is not in favor
OF Federal control.
1t should further be noted that only
iast year when the question of an addf-
service with which 10 meet improve
ments to fight the forest fires which
devastate so much of the timber of
The national forests, to say nothing of
the human lives that have been lost,
and will be lost II adequate appropria-
tons are not made for this purpose
Mr.. Ferris went on record against this
increased Appropriation. He is not in
sympathy with the present administra-
ton of the forests in the West under
Mr.. Ferris was one of the gentle-
men who opposed Secretary Fishers 8
amendments TO the homestead bill
which would have thrown minor safe
guards around the taking UP Of home-
steads-so as to prevent homesteads
benig taken up under that name with
the real purpose of securing valuable
mineral lands and water power sites.
Favors Distribution.
1T is clear not only from his record
but from his attitude that Mr.. Ferris e
not in sympathy with. the conservation
policies, and that he favors the easy
road of giving everything away with
out any Federal regulation or safe
guard
Mr.. Ferris statement issued today fol-
lows:
II have Just read the article in. The
Times which. in effect, says that there
Congress to have the Federal Govern
ment cede to the several States the
public lands situated in the respective
States, and that the scheme is being
pushed particularly by men who favor
my selection as chairman of the Pub
lie Lands Committee.
Talk With Smoot.
THE facts are: 1 have just called by
phone Senator smoot. chairman Of the
Public Lands Committee of the Sen
ate. and he tells me that there is no
such bill pending. and no such bill
has ever received consideration at their
hands. and no word has ever been ut
tered by any Senator or any person be-