THE PROGRESS OF WESTERN AMERICA. 



49 



of the reports of the several Irrigation Commissions 

 and the assembling of the Third National Irrigation 

 Congress. 



The Public The Los Angeles address began by invit- 



Domain a . . '. 



Heritage, ing the attention of the country to the 



fact that the public domain fit for agriculture with- 

 out irrigation is exhausted. It then stated that a suf- 

 ficient portion of the arid public lands can be irri- 

 gated to furnish homes for millions of families. 

 " Notwithstanding the present condition of these arid 

 lands," said the Address, " we confidently predict 

 that they will become the seat of the highest civiliza- 

 tion and the greatest average prosperity yet devel- 

 oped on this continent. The intensive scientific cul- 

 tivation rendered possible by irrigation results in the 

 largest conceivable development of independence 

 and prosperity on the fewest possible number of 

 acres." It was then declared that " the problem of 

 conquering these deserts is national in its essence. 

 These lands are the heritage of the American peo- 

 ple. To have a home upon them is the birthright of 

 every American child. The conditions under which 

 they would be reclaimed and acquired by the settler 

 must be founded on the recognition of these facts.' 7 

 It is impossible to lay too much stress upon this feat- 

 ure of the declaration. No policy which proposes to 

 take these lands beyond the control of the American 

 people, or to permit private interest alone to name 

 the terms on which they shall be acquired after 

 reclamation, can permanently endure. We have no 

 land policy to-day worthy of the name. It is purely 

 a game of grab. The Desert Land Law, in a major- 

 ity of instances, is the cloak of dishonest purposes 

 and methods. It keeps the word of promise to the 

 ear and breaks it to the hope. That is its design. 

 The great principle enunciated at Los Angeles must 

 prevail, but it can be preserved by any one of a num- 

 ber of plans suggested. Remembering the funda- 

 mental idea, we must proceed to select a plan of leg- 

 islation upon which we can all agree and which will 

 appeal powerfully to the nation's sense of right. An- 

 other important declaration under this head favored 

 the limitation of the amount of land to be taken by 

 individual settlers to forty acres. This was a radical 

 step, but it won wide public approval. 



Division The Los An S eles Address made this ex- 

 ofttie plicit declaration concerning the thorny 



Streams. su bj ec t of interstate waters : " We de- 

 clare that all streams rising in one state and flowing 

 by natural courses through one or more other states 

 must be conserved and equitably divided under fed- 

 eral authority. 1 ' In another place it is declared: 

 "Nothing must be allowed to jeapordize interstate 

 streams, and it is highly important that the drainage 



J. F. ROCHO, 

 Of Greeley, Member of Executive Committee for Colorado. 



areas of these streams should be promptly known and 

 defined at once in a way sufficient for the purpose 

 here in view and not await the slow results of a thor- 

 ough technical inquiry, which should follow in its 

 train and for its needed purposes.'' It was further 

 suggested that a non-partisan national commission 

 should be appointed to investigate the whole subject 

 of national legislation. It has, of course, been impos- 

 sible to secure that during the past year. Doubtless 

 interstate waters will furnish an absorbing topic at 

 Denver. The question is surrounded by many diffi- 

 culties, but it must be solved sometime and some- 

 how. TJiere is nothing to be gained by dodging it. 

 The men who will assemble at Denver are a hun- 

 dred times better fitted to deal with the question than 

 any Congress we shall ever have in Washington. It 

 is the part of wisdom to look this subject squarely 

 in the face and recommend to the country the very 

 best plan that western brains and patriotism can de- 



The 



ship of 



er< 



- nly P int at which the Address was 

 vigorously attacked in the convention 

 was where it dealt with the abstract ques- 

 tion of water ownership. Representatives of certain 

 private interests thought the paragraph on this sub- 

 ject might well be left out, although they did not se- 

 riously dispute its soundness. The paragraph was 

 modified in some respects, but in its final shape read 

 as follows: " We declare it to be the correct princi- 



