394 



FORESTRY AND IRRIGATION 



Government " Taxes " 



A NOTHER Denver criticism is that 

 the National Forests are handled 

 "at the expense of our Western people, 

 through the imposition of taxes for 

 lumber, grazing, rights of way, fire- 

 wood, and multitudinous special uses." 

 To this policy it objects. 



Let us examine this criticism. The 

 American people, some eighty millions, 

 own certain National Forest areas in 

 the far \\'est. Certain other American 

 citizens, a few hundred, or a few thou- 

 sand at best, live near the National For- 

 ests. These , near dwellers desire to 

 avail themselves of the utilities named. 

 The eighty millions are willing that, 

 within reason, they shall do so. The 

 users now may use on one of two condi- 

 tions : Either with, or without pay. 

 The owners say the users shall pay ; to 

 this, some of these users evidently ob- 

 ject and stigmatize the pay as a "tax." 

 They evidently want the utilities as a 

 gift. 



Suppose the eighty millions adopted 

 this policy with respect to the National 

 Forests. Consistency would then re- 

 quire that they should apply the same 

 policy to their other properties. Of 

 these, they own several. In your town, 

 for example, the American people own 

 a public building. Why should they not 

 turn this over to the use of a handful 

 of your leading citizens ? 



The eighty millions own sundry bat- 

 tle-ships. Why not permit certain dis- 

 tinguished individuals living near the 

 waters where these vessels ride at an- 

 chor to use them gratuitously as pri- 

 vate yachts? 



The eightv millions own an ocean 

 cable in Alaskan waters. Why not do- 

 nate the free use of this cable to the 

 few Indians and Americans who live 

 near its termini? 



The American people own some 

 railroads : For example, in Panama and 

 on certain reclamation projects. These 

 could doubtless be availed of by people 

 living near by, who might ride on them 

 to and from their work, or their pleas- 

 ure. Why should the Government 

 "hog" them? 



At Fort Leavenworth the eighty 

 millions own a big building. It was 

 built for a Federal penitentiary and is 

 so used. It would make an elegant 

 gymnasium or riding school for the 

 "leisure class" living near. Why not 

 convert it to this use instead of ex- 

 cluding these eminent citizens unless 

 they choose to enter in stripes ? 



The eighty millions own a few 

 buildings — far fewer than they need — 

 in Washington. D. C. Business men 

 residing here could utilize these to ex- 

 cellent advantage for office purposes. 

 Why should they not be permitted 

 freelv to do so? 



The White House grounds would 

 make an elegant cow-pasture for cer- 

 tain descendants of Ham living hard 

 by. How selfish and cruel of the own- 

 ers sternly to exclude each and every 

 one of these hungry bovines from 

 this property ! 



Evidently, the whole policy of the 

 eighty millions regarding the fag end 

 of the United States which still belongs 

 to them is wrong. Whatever it has 

 left it should throw wide open, like the 

 Cherokee Strip or Sisseton reservation, 

 for the man who can get there first. It 

 belongs to the people ; is he not the 

 people? Surely, the time has come for 

 a new and "squarer" deal in the man- 

 agement of our public property. The 

 handful of Denver critics who are lead- 

 ing in this fight will live in history with 

 the Adamses, Paines, Henrys, Frank- 

 lins, and the rest who stood for free- 

 dom a century and a quarter ago. 



