Douglas daily dispatch., 1926-09-21
DOUGLAS DAILY DISPATCH TUESDAY MORNING. SEPTEMBER 1926

DOUGLAS DAILY DISP1
government for the cost of administer
ing them. This is erroneous.
Under present laws 37h per cent of
the royalties and 5 per cent of the net
proceeds from sales of public lands
are turned back to the state govern
ments in which the public lands are
located.
Fifty-two and a half per cent of the
royalties and approximately 60 per cent
of the receipts from the disposal of
public lands are diverted to the recla-
nation fund to be used in the west,
while only 10 per cent of the royalties
and Approximately 35 per cent of the
land receipts revert to the United
States treasury
Last year the United States govern
ment received only $S42,S45 of the total
collected from oil and gas royalties,
while $3,142,447 was returned to the
states and $4,399,426 was turned over
to the reclamation fund.
From coal royalties $23,671 was paid
intosthe federal treasury, while $751;
1865 went back to the state, and the
reclamation fund received $124,2733.
OF the $5, O37 from potash, the ma
tionaI government received none, the
entire amount being paid into the re-
clamation fund
Sales under the timber and stone act
brought $76,5O7 to the federal treasury,
while, f$3,1S7 was returned to the
states.
Of the receipts from the disposal of
public lands $57S,7S3 went into the
general treasury last year, $565,O00 be-
ing paid into the reclamation fund, and
$3.50 returned to the states.
A. new proposal is now being ad-
vanced with regard to the nations pub
lie estate. When legislation was pass
ed which enabled western territories
to enter statehood, the government re-
tanned ownership of the public lands.
The land laws as now administered
have been in effect over half a century
and have been sustained by the SUI
preme court of the United States when
attacked. Outspolken demands have
been made that publicly owned lands
should be returned" to the states
wherein located.
Our public lands never were owned
by states and, therefore, were not
taken from them. In 1887 the Con-
federate congress passed an ordinance
establishing this fundamental policy
for the government of the territory Of
the United States northwest of the
Ohio river am quoting the exact
language of the ordinance dealing with
this question:
ssThe legislatures of those districts,
or new states, shall never interfere
with the primary disposal of the soil
by the United States in congress as
sembled, nor with any regulations con-
gress may find necessary for securing
the title of such soil to the bona-fide
purchasers"
AS already shown, Virginia, when it
entered the Confederacy, released us
claim and donated to the nation the
entire central section of the United
States north of the Ohio river. To give
to states the public land within their
boundaries would be a complete re-
versal of the policy of this government
from it's beginning, a precedent not set
by any other nation, and a step which
should not be inadYisedly taken.
Five years in the midst of govern
ment operations have convinced me
that the federal government is admin
istering more, and the states less, OF
the activities of government than they
should. 1t would be agreeable to rec
ommend from an administrators point
of view that states might own and con-
troll the public lands That would, OF
course, relieve the government OF the
labor and expense of administering
them and would relieve the taxpayers
Of a manual deficit in it's net operat-
ing expenses.
The department of the interior ex-
pended last year the sum of $2,949,SS1 {
for the administration of the public
domain, $2,37O ITO of which was spent
by the general land office and $579,161
by the geological survey.
1t collected $9,844,S31, exclusive OF
Indian land sales, and other public
land areas administered under special
acts of congress. Of this amount, 3d.
221 .6O4 was paid back to the state gov
ernments and S4,979,547 was diverted
to the reclamation fund to be used In
the reclalmlnS OIL drlu anu Soill "a ~
lands of the west
This leaves an unencumbered balance
amounting to $1,643,6SO actually placed
in the United States treasury last year
to offset the federal governments eX-
penditures of s2,949,397.
The net deficit or loss to the federal
government in administering the public
lands was, therefore, $1,3O5,657 If the
state governments should take over
the public lands within their borders
and distribute the receipts as prescrib-
ed by present federal laws, they would
Ibe compelled to pay this deficit now
met bv the United States treasury AS
far as the national government is i'm
mediately concerned financially il
would be an advantage to turn the re-
naming public domain over to the
Estates.
But what would probably become OF
the public lands and their resources il
administered by states? This question
can best be answered by asking what
ha become of public lands already re-
, leased to them. Many of you men car
answer that question from your owl
personal knowledge.
| The actual title to the mineral con