330 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



anticipated by some in such an attempt on the part of the general gov- 

 ernment, because of the sovereign control of the state over the water 

 power in its natural condition, and the mere proprietorship of the gov- 

 ernment in the riparian lands. 



It is contended that through its mere proprietary right in the site, 

 the central government has no power to attempt to exercise police juris- 

 diction with reference to how the water power in a river owned and con- 

 trolled by the state shall be used, and that it is a violation of the state's 

 rights. I question the validity of this objection. The government may 

 impose any conditions that it chooses in its lease of its own property, 

 even though it may have the same purpose, and in effect accomplish 

 just what the state would accomplish by the exercise of its sovereignty. 

 There are those (and the director of the geological survey, Mr. Smith, 

 who has given a great deal of attention to this matter, is one of them) 

 who insist that that this matter of transmuting water power into elec- 

 tricity, which can be conveyed all over the country and across state 

 lines, is a matter that ought to be retained by the general government, 

 and that it should avail itself of the ownership of these power sites for 

 the very purpose of coordinating in one general plan the power gener- 

 ated from these government-owned sites. 



On the other hand, it is contended that it would relieve a compli- 

 cated situation if the control of the water-power site and the control of 

 the water were vested in the same sovereignty and ownership, viz., the 

 states, and then were disposed of for development to private lessees under 

 the restrictions needed to preserve the interests of the public from the 

 extortions and abuses of monopoly. Therefore, bills have been intro- 

 duced in congress providing that whenever the state authorities deem a 

 water power useful they may apply to the government of the United 

 States for a grant to the state of the adjacent land for a water-power 

 site, and that this grant from the federal government to the state, shall 

 contain a condition that the state shall never part with the title to the 

 water-power site, or the water power, but shall lease it only for a term 

 of years not exceeding fifty, with provisions in the lease by which the 

 rental and the rates for which the power is furnished to the public shall 

 be readjusted at periods less than the term of the lease, say, every ten 

 years. 



The argument is urged against this disposition of power sites that 

 legislators and state authorities are more subject to corporate influence 

 and control than would be the central government ; in reply it is claimed 

 that a readjustment of the terms of leasehold every ten years would 

 secure to the public and the state just and equitable terms. Then it is 

 said that the state authorities are better able to understand the local 

 need and what is a fair adjustment in the particular locality than would 

 be the authorities at Washington. It has been argued that after the 



