Wausau pilot. [volume] (Wausau, Wis.) 1896-1940, 1914-02-24

against each other on the subject
OF control of the water power II
the nayigable streams. Is Uncle Sara
to have control over water power
leases. or is it to be vested hereafter
in the legislatures of the individual
states? The majority in congress be-
lieves in states rights. The conserva-
tionists say that If the matter be
turned over entirely to the states, mo-
nopoly will rejoice and the public will
be robbed.
In December there was a National
Conservation congress held in Wash
lngton. 1t was supposed to be conf
posed of delegates devoted entirely 10
the plan to keep the command of wa
ter power sites in the hands of Uncle
Sam. However, there were good
many delegates present who l. was
charged were representatives OF the
water power people, and who were
present for the sole purpose of trying
to thwart conservation under federal
authority.
There was a hot controversy in the
tOt4GGlN dl1Ou Dut hAd4Ay q
resolution introduced by Clifford Pin
chot pledging the congress to the prin-
ciple that the people would draw a
revenue from their heritages was put
through by an almost unanimous vote.
1t was evident that those who were OPP
posed to the plan did not care to put
themselves on record as voting against
something which if put into effect
seemingly will give the entire people
return for the power site rights which
the government may grant
Water Power Lease Bill.
There is today before congress a bill
which is intended to give to the indi-
vidual states the right to lease water
power sites on naVigable streams with
in their borders. Uncle Sam is sup
posed to have control of navigable
streams and therefore the conserva-
tionists say that giving the states pow
er to govern in the matter is taking
away from the federal government a
constitutional right and that the result
will be, state legislatures being more
easily reached than a national legisla-
ture, that monopoly will get hold Of
the water power sites and the people
will get no return for that which is
inheritently theirs.
Within six months the United States
Supreme court has handed down two
decisions which prove as conclusively
as Supreme court decisions can that
tho TTnftnd nj
troll of the power in navigable streams
and that it can exact payment for its
use. One case came out of Michigan
and the other out of Utah.
Recently intimations have been
printed that the president of the Unit
ed States is in entire sympathy with
the Democrats in congress who want
to give water power to corporations
without payment to the whole people
for its use. The president is a states
rights man, but it is not believed he
has expressed himself as in favor of
such a plan. The Pinchot men say
the report almost unquestionably is
being spread in order to make the pao-
pie of the country believe that man
in whom they have confidence thinks
the scheme as outlined by the majority
in congress is righteous.
ConserVationists on Guard.
The conservationists in Washington
are wakeful to the situation They
know everything that is going on and
1t is known that if congress attempts
to do what a subcommittee apparently
intends that it shall do, there will be
another fight in the center of a field
with as much interested onlookers as
there were when Mr.. Pinchot and his
followers attacked Mr.. Ballinger and
his followers.
The Democrats say that they are
progressive and are conservationists
The followers of the school of Clifford
Pinchot deny that the Democrats are
telling the truth. The conservationists
say that to put the water site matter
in the hands of the states is to throw
away money and to make monopoly
c ,rtain. If water power legislation in
the form in which the majority in con-
gress seem to want to enact it is put
through and signed by the president,
it is declared by the conseTvationists
that one pledge in the Democratic plat
form will have been shattered, that
monopoly will rejoice and that the peo-
pie Of the United States will have
their pockets picked.
On the other hand the Democrats
say that the states can be depended
upon to safeguard their own rights
and that there is no reason why the
federal government should enter into
the confines of any one state to regu-
late the affairs of it's people in the wa,
ter power matter.