52 



AMERICAN FORESTRY 



proposal that the person who wishes to 

 develop a water-power on the public 

 land must not only pay a Federal tax 

 for the privilege, but must file on the 

 water rights, under the laws of the state 

 or territory, and then transfer the zvater 

 rights to the Federal Government. This 

 would be simply a legal or quasi-legal 

 method of doing what Mr. Pinchot 

 seeks to do in defiance of law. It would 

 make water-power development costly 

 in the public land states and territories ; 

 it would be a tremendous barrier to 

 development ; and, more than all, it 

 would constitute the Federal Govern- 

 ment not merely a landlord, but a water- 

 lord ; and a waterlord exempt from 

 local taxation. We do not believe any 

 part of this can be reconciled with the 

 claims of either justice or expediency." 

 Why the Secretary's apparent "con- 

 version?" That his report would be 

 liberal was well understood in advance 

 of its appearance. The explanation 

 given by some is "the hammering be- 

 stowed upon the Secretary which has 

 awakened him to the necessity of get- 

 ting into line." "White House influ- 

 ence" is also referred to. The Presi- 

 dent, it is claimed, "appreciates the ne- 

 cessity of putting his administration 

 squarely behind the conservation move- 

 ment. From a political standpoint," it is 

 said, "he cannot afford to do other- 

 wise. * * * Besides, Mr. Taft is 

 said to have returned from the West 

 with a much more definite idea of the 

 necessity of safeguarding the natural 

 resources than he had earlier in his ad- 

 ministration." And this feeling, it is 

 believed, has communicated itself to the 

 Secretary of the Interior. 



One fact should be clearly understood 

 by those who seek to protect the power 

 sites from monopolization. The with- 

 drawal of sites by the Secretary is, as 

 he has repeatedly indicated, and again 

 in the above report, only "temporary." 

 "Without such withdrawals," he has 

 declared, "these sites would be enter- 

 able under existing laws, and their 

 patenting would leave the General Gov- 

 ernment powerless to impose any limita- 

 tions as to their use. If the Federal 



Government desires to exercise control 

 or supervision over water-power de- 

 velopment on the public domain, it can 

 only do so by limitations imposed upon 

 the disposal of power and reservoir 

 sites upon the public lands." The Sec- 

 retary, therefore, advises Congress to 

 enact appropriate legislation. 



Now, suppose that, as has happened 

 in countless other instances. Congress 

 does not act. The Secretary of the 

 Interior will have washed his hands in 

 innocency. He will be able to point to 

 his report and say that he indicated the 

 danger and called upon Congress to 

 meet it, but that Congress failed to do 

 so, and that, therefore, great as is his 

 desire to protect the public interests. 

 Congress itself, by its inaction, has for- 

 bidden him. All, therefore, that will 

 remain for him to do will be to throw 

 down the bars and let the cattle into the 

 standing corn. 



Clearly the matter is now "up to" 

 Congress, and upon that body rests the 

 responsibility for meeting the situation. 

 Further, the Secretary, by his recom- 

 mendations, has placed himself in a 

 happy position. If Congress acts, he 

 can claim the credit^ if it fails to act, he 

 can plead "not guilty." 



But not so fast. To make recom- 

 mendations is easy, especially if there 

 is ground to suspect that they will be 

 pigeon-holed. The test of the Secre- 

 tary's earnestness in the public behalf 

 is yet to come. Will he stop with mak- 

 ing recommendations and peacefully sit 

 in his swivel chair while Congress de- 

 bates all manner of other questions and 

 prepares to "pass the appropriation bills 

 and go home?" 



If "the Secretary will acquit himself 

 of the suspicion of lukewarmness in 

 this matter, he must go much farther. 

 It is a matter of record that he knows 

 the way to Capitol Hill, and that he has 

 appeared before congressional commit- 

 tees and urged the enactment of legisla- 

 tion, notably in the matter of the Alas- 

 kan coal claims. Will he again go be- 

 fore appropriate committees, and agam. 

 with the prestige of his great office, and 



