The Winslow mail., 1921-12-02

California Edison Company to dam
and develop power from the waters
of the Colorado river should be Just
as acceptable to the people of the
state as to have it done by the gov
ernment, provided the people are Sc
cured i'll the power and water
fights justly belonging to them
The power developed from the Col
orado river rightly belongs to the
people and if private capital devel-
ops it and furnishes it to the peo-
pie, then the people must expect
to pay a reasonable profit to the
capital invested and producing it.
They will have to do the same if
the government builds these dams
and power plants. 1t has been as
sumed in times gone by, and right
ly so, that the project was too big
for private capital, but that day is
gone. There are several corpora
tons that would undertake the pro
ject if they could secure the consent
cf the government through leased
rights.
The government has done some
big things and has done them we'll
Private capital has likewise produc-
ed compa sable accomplishments in
late years. Undoubtedly the govern
ment would be Just as efficient as
private capital in the construction
Of dams and power nlants on the
Colorado river. 1t would probably
give greater consideration TO the re-
sulting conditions of the lower
reaches of the river as concerns
flood control. But if the dams are
constructed and the storage reser-
yoirs in use, the control of the flood
waters naturally and automatically
follow. 1t would seem lust as easy
and safe for the people to have this
situation part on an agreement
with private capital as with the
government.
In the first instance, the govern
ment is now incontrol There is no
reason why she should not remain
in control. Should she build the
dams and install the power plants
it seems very probable that the
trasmision, and sale of lhe powe1
would be turned over to some COM
mercial organization which would
build the tranmission lines, deliver
the power and collect for it for a
profit. In reality, it would result
IN government control only, and
this is the one element in the pro-
ject that must be fought for and
retained. To permit a private cor
poration to absolutely own and
manage, fix it's rates and locate it's
points of delivery and place of sale,
would be wrong, but we can see no
real objection to the use of private
capital in the construction work. in
the operation of the power plants,
and in the transmitting of their pro-
duct, if all the people are accorded
their rights to procure and nay for
such amounts of power as they are
justly entitled to receive.
If time is taken into consideration
in the matter of developing the now
wasting powers of the waters of the
Colorado river, it must be said that
private capital will produce results
much quicker than will the slow
moving machinery of the govern
ment, judging by what the govern
ment has done in the past. This
does not mean that the government
will not accomplish as much and as
quickly as private capital, but will
1t?
There is also the question of tax
alton. Government investment un-
doubtedly would be exempt The
investment of private capital un-.
doubtedly would be subject to the.
taxation laws of the state and coun-.
ty in which the investment is sit
lated. The question is of greaf i'm
portance to the state, and particu-..
larly to the counties in which the
investment is made a,d where it
is assessable.
If the government builds the pro-
iect. the people furnish the money.
The bond issue, or any other meth
cd by which the government raises
the millions of dollars for the con-.