National Conservation Congress 



Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Gathering at Washington, D. C. 



The Fifth Annual National Conservation 

 Congress of the United States was held 

 in Washington, D.C., Nov. 18, 19 and 20, 

 the main meetings being held in the ball- 

 room of the New Willard Hotel, and the 

 sectional meetings in smaller rooms of that 

 and other buildings. 



It was intended that the main interest 

 on this occasion should centre in forest 

 and water power conservation, and as it 

 turned out the time of the meeting was 

 nearly wholly taken up with the latter in 

 its relation to State versus federal rights, 

 and the danger of monopolistic control of 

 water powers. 



The chair at the opening session was oc- 

 cupied by Mr. Charles Lathrop Pack, the 

 president, and the first speaker was Hon. 

 David Houston, Secretary for Agricul- 

 ture in President Wilson's cabinet. Mr. 

 Houston while instancing the great need 

 of better farming, held that the most press- 

 ing need was an improvement in methods 

 of distribution that would give the farmer 

 for his products a larger share of what the 

 consumer paid for them. 



Hon. James Wilson, ex-United States 

 Secretary for Agriculture, spoke on soil 

 conservation, and Mr. James White, As- 

 sistant Chairman of the Canadian Com- 

 mission of Conservation, told of the work 

 of that body, particularly in regard to 

 forest fire prevention along railways 

 through co-operation with the Canadian 

 Board of Railway Commissioners. 



The Waterpower Battle. 



The committee on watcrpowers, which 

 had been at work all that morning and 

 all the preceding day, presented three re- 

 ports in the afternoon. The first report 

 presented the resolutions on which all the 

 committee were agreed, the second was of 

 the majority and the third of the minority, 

 which latter was signed by Hon. H. L. 

 Btimson, former Secretary for War, Joseph 

 N. Teal of Portland, Oregon, and Dr. Gif- 

 ford Pinchot ex-Chief Forester of the 

 United States. 



The unanimous report stated that com- 

 pensation for privilege of waterpower use 

 should be reserved to the government, 

 state or federal, from which the privilege 

 came. Both majority and minority re- 

 ports agreed that the three essentials of a 

 sound waterpower policy were: Prompt 

 development. Prevention of unregulated 

 monopoly, Good service and fair rates to 

 the constuner. 



The majority favored the indeterminate 

 franchise with no fixed term limit. The 

 minority would allow a period not exceed- 

 ing thirty years during which the franchise 

 would be irrevocable except for cause. The 

 minority specified ownership by an unlaw- 

 ful trust, or in restraint of trade as suf- 

 ficient for immediate termination of the 

 franchise. The minority report stated the 

 central fact in the waterpower situation 

 today was that of concentration of con- 

 trol. Ten groups of individuals controlled 

 65 per cent, of the waterpower of the Un- 

 ited States, and the amount of concentra- 

 tion had nearly doubled in the last two 

 years. The fight for the conservation of 

 waterpowers was first of all a fight against 

 monopoly. The second prime necessity was 

 to forbid and prevent the speculative hold- 

 ing of power. 



The majority report stated that it was 

 essential that capital should be attracted 

 to these enterprises, and while they must 

 fully protect the interests of the public 

 both present and future, they were not con- 

 servationists if they advocated the imposi- 

 tion of terms which restricted rather than 

 encouraged progress. 



Senator Shaforth, one of the early speak- 

 ers in the debate on the motion to adopt 

 the unanimous report, said, *I have never 

 been impressed with the idea that down 

 here in Washington you can control water- 

 powers or anything else as well as wo can 

 in our own States.' He declared there 

 could never be any danger of monopolistic 

 control of waterpower because under the 

 United States statutes the transmission of 

 l)0wer between states brought the com- 

 j)anies under the Interstate Commerce 

 Act, and the federal government Ijad as 

 much right to fix their rates as it had those 

 of the railways. 



Several other speakers took this atti- 

 tude, while Mr. Pinchot, Mr. Stimson and 

 others replied by urging the activity of 

 the waterpowers trust, and stating that 

 the United States could control compan- 

 ies and monopolies which were so strong 

 that they could control state legislatures. 



The vote was on the question of sending 

 the unanimous report to the resolutions 

 committee. This was finally, defeated by 

 a majority of 434 to 154, and the report 

 adoj^ted by the Congress without roll call. 



The States Bights Question. 



This first vote took place on Wednesday 

 afternoon, Nov. 19. On Thursday the Reso- 

 lutions Committee in rei)orting on the ma- 



185 



