The Coconino sun., 1915-10-22
STRONG ARGUMENT AGAINST
 FEDERAL LANDLORDISM

of the Interior Lane submitted pa, per on Water Power" which opens with this question:
 "Should the government allow its dam and reservoir sites and other lands valuable for power development to pass from it's hands forever?"
 Mir. S. A. Bailey of this city takes up that question and answers it in a way that does not leave Mir. Secretary Lane peg to hang his pajamas on. Mir. Bailey reminds the secretary that he is but sorry imitator of the theories of one Pinchot, who long ago expressed the belief that
 Under whatever law it-any part of the national forest-is taken up the land and all its resources pass out of the hands of the people forever"
 Mir Bailey reminds the secretary that should the mere temporary pro prietary interest of the government, as he construes it, be carried to its logical conclusion, the result would not only be the retention by the fed eral government for all time of all the lands and resources of the state and the ultimate obliteration of all person. al ownership.
 Mir. Bailey points out that it is only when the title to public lands passes into private hands that the people have any interest in it or control it.
 Further, that it is not true that the government, either state or national, conveys it's proprietary powers when | it conveys title to an individual him self subject to whatever duties and obligations are due to the sovereign power of the state or nation.
 The pamphlet of MT. Bailey dis cusses the question from every legal and historical standpoint, and his argument is unanswerable, save under the law of might, the same that, in another way, is pleaded by the hold up when he takes the unarmed citiz- ems watch and purse.
 This whole oppression has come from the brains of such men as have never earned an honest dollar, who not only know nothing about the hard ships of the poor, or how the worlds work is carried on, but who would, if they could, add to the burdens of the poor by making, at the peoples ex- pense, soft places for that class which has never earned an honest dollar in their lives.
 The late Senator J. P. Jones once said to a distinguished brother senator who is likewise distinguished schol ar and author:
 "I have heard your speeches, sen ator, and greatly admired them; l have read your books and greatly en- joyed them; but, senator, you don't know a d-d thing in the world of how a poor man goes to work to make g. living"
 The same words would apply to Mir. Pinchot and his class of poachers, ex- cept that their speeches are not enjoy able nor their books to be admired
 Of course the government is the general proprietor of the country and all the property and lives within it, but its ownership is but a trust to be administered in way not to interfere with the individual rights of free people.
 The government has the sovereign ownership of navigable rivers, but what would be thought were its agents to declare that no citizen nor private company should place steam boats on a navigable river, lest the government should lose control of it's power?" That would be just as wise and logical as is Mir. Lanes proposi- tion about water powers.
 The wealth and greatness of this republic have not been created by the government, but by the people work ing in private or corporate capacity and this claim that of the country's resources all the people should have each his pro-rata is as foolish as it IS illegal and unwise.
 It is simply whether it is best for the pioneer with his necessities to meet and his industry and initiative to urge him on, as was the rule from the first settlement on the shore of the Atlantic, or to take from him every valuable resource that he may dis cover, and place it in the hands of an army of government teaches to be developed by that army through the use of the money which the people pay into the national treasury. To believe the last would not only be wicked and dishonest, but shameful perversion of the principles on which | fl f1,,rIoI (.nnd-