Milford chronicle., 1936-02-21

I annulled the contract and held IVA
unconstitutional found that there
is no intention to use the nitrate
plants or the hydro-electric units
installed at Wilson Dam for the pro-
duction Of war materials in time Of
I peace, the maintenance Of said pro-
/ perties in operating condition and
the assurance OF IN abundant sup
ply OF electric energy in the event
of war, constitute national defense
assets. This finding has ample sup
port.
"The act of 1916 also had in view
improvements in navigation Com
merce includes navigation.
The Tennessee River is a navigable
stream, although there are Obstruc-
tions at various points because Of
shoals, reefs 2nd rapids. The inn
provement Of navigation on this riv-
er has been a matter of national
concern for over a century.
while in its present condition,
the Tennessee River is not adequate
ly improved for commercial naviga-
tion, and traffic Is small. we are not
at liberty to conclude either that the
river is not susceptible of develop |
ment as an important waterway, or
that Congress has not undertaken |
that development, or that the con-
struction Of the Wilson Dam was
not an appropriate means to accom-
plish a legitimate end.
'"The Wilson Dam and its power
plant must be taken to have been
constructed in the exercise of the
constitutional functions of the
Federal government"
Disposal OF Surplus Power
Discussing the ccnstitutionality OF
disposing Of eurplus power, the
court said:
"The government acquired full
title to the dam site, with all its
riparian rights.
1.-The power of falling water was
an inevitable incident to the con-
struction Of the dam. That water
power came into the exclusive con-
troll of the Federal government. The
mechanical energy was conVeruDle
into electric energy. and the cleo
trio energy thus produced, consti-
LuLG property DtAbASAAl W NA~ N%@-N
ed States.
Authority to dispose of property
constitutiOnally acquired by the
United States is expressly granted
to the Congress by Section OF
Article of the Constitution.
The question is as to the scope OF
the grant and whether there are in
herent limitations which render in
valid the disposition of property
with which we are not concerned.
9
Power Embraces Leases
This power of disposal was early
TO embrace leases, thus
enabling the government to derive
profit through royalties.
The policy, early adopted and
steadily pursued. of segregating
mineral lands from other public
lands and providing for leases, ,
nointed to the recognition both OF
the full power of disposal and OF
the necessity of suitably adapting
The methods Of disposal TO different )
sorts of property.
But when Congress thus reserv-
ID mineral lands for special dispos-
Il, can it he doubted that Congress
,ouId have provided for mining d.
'ectly by its own agents, instead OF ;
living that right TO lessees on the I
payment of royalties?
Upon what ground could it be
aid that the government could not {
nine its own gold, silver. coal, lead a
# phosphates in the public domain, {
nd dispose of them as property be-
ongiug to the United States?
[ would seem to be clear that un- \
Ter the same power of disposition \
which enabled the government TO t
ease and obtain profit from sales d
" its lessees, it could mine and OBJ S
ain profit from its own sales. p
Water Power Property OF u ,.
"The question is whether a more o
United power of disposal should De c
pplied to the water power, con- g
ertible into electric energy, and to e
he electric energy thus produced \
{ the Wilson Dam, constructed by n
he government in the exercise OF a
Is constitutional functions. If SO, n
. must be by reason either of ID n
he nature of the particular prop I
rty, or (2) the character OF the r
surplus disposed of, or (3) the fl
lanner of disposition. e
THAT the water power and the
lectric energy generated at the =
am are susceptible of disposition o
S property belonging to the United g
tates is well established. r
"The argument is stressed that, G.
ssuming that electric energy gen a
rated at the dam belongs to the
nited States, the Congress has au-
lority to dispose of this energy Il
My to the extent that it is a sur h
lus necessarily created in the court Il
t making munitions of war or OPP v
rating the works for navigation
nrposes; that is. that the Temaind- 81
r of the available energy must be oi
,st or go to waste. s.
1--WE find nothing in the Constitu- m
on which imposes such a limita- di
on. It would hardly be con- OF
ended that, when the government az
eserves coal on its lands, it can di
line the coal and dispose of it only Sc
IT the purpose of heating public tn
or Cor other government fo
s.
Same Principle Applicable bt
1--WE think tine same principle is re
Dplicable to electric energy. The
rer,,r,,anf 1,racond i1nou tIa leads tn -,