EDITORIAL 



53 



with the ability which he has mani- 

 fested on other occasions, press upon 

 those committees the far-reaching and 

 paramount importance of enacting into 

 living legislation the recommendations 

 which, otherwise, must lie dead in a 

 dust-covered report? 



In this connection the case of a west- 

 ern governor, now deceased, is recalled. 

 Certain legislation, odious from the 

 standpoint of the public well-being, was 

 before the legislature. The monopolists 

 had so completely accomplished their 

 perfect work as to have an overwhelm- 

 ing majority in each house. Next, by 

 one of the shrewdest moves on record, 

 they endeavored to buy the governor's 

 acquiescence by a plan which would 

 have left him forever proof against dis- 

 covery. He would be at liberty to protest 

 against the legislation, but the legisla- 

 ture would pass it despite his protest. 

 He might then veto the bill, but the 

 majority was so large in each house 

 that the bill would be passed over his 

 veto. He would have squared himself 

 with the voters, maintained his record 

 as an anti-monopoly governor, and at 

 the same time, be a million dollars to 

 the good; and the corporations would 

 have won. 



But did he? Instead, with an oath, he 

 spurned the bribe, doffed his coat and 

 rolled up his sleeves for the battle of his 

 life. To cut the story short, he blocked 

 the game, beat the bill and saved the 

 public interests. When he died, a few 

 years later, a subscription paper was 

 circulated for the benefit of his widow. 



Now, the question for Secretary Bal- 

 linger to answer is, has he the nerve 

 of this heroic governor? Will he ac- 

 tually enter the lists for the people's 

 rights? Will he not -simply talk, but 

 work? Will he organize a campaign for 

 the enactment of such legislation as he 

 lias recommended, and will he lead the 

 battle ancl so press it to the gates of 

 the entrenched hosts of monopoly and 

 special privilege that, when the Sixty- 

 first Congress adjourns, his admirable 

 recommendations regarding water- 

 power sites will stand as the law of the 

 land? 



The Milk ii\ the Cocoanut 



AT BOTTOM, the conservation strug- 

 gle is but another chapter in the 

 warfare over the public domain. 



This fight began with the establish- 

 ment of our National Government. 

 Seven of the thirteen original states 

 claimed public lands ; six held no claims. 

 Whether the public lands should belong 

 to the seven states or to the thirteen 

 was an early bone of contention. 



Since that day, the question of the 

 public domain has again and again 

 threatened the peace of the Nation. 



America has been singularly blessed 

 in the size and richness of her public 

 domain. Upon it, as was pointed out 

 by Thomas Carlyle, has rested, in large 

 measure, the success of her free insti- 

 tutions. 



This domain has been estimated to 

 equal, at its maximum, 1 ,000,000,000 

 acres. 



Various devices have been adopted 

 for its disposition. Sales, leases, the 

 offering of lands at auction at an upset 

 price, the preemption law, coal-land 

 laws, and the like. 



The most famous law for the dispo- 

 sition of the public domain was the 

 homestead law, signed by President 

 Lincoln, May 20, 1862. 



Of this law, the Public Lands Com- 

 mission of 1880 said : "It protects the 

 Government ; it fills the states with 

 homes, it builds up communities and 

 lessens the chance of social and civil 

 disorder by giving ownership of the 

 soil, in small tracts, to the occupants 

 thereof." 



For a period, this law bore admirable 

 fruit ; it has now, however, apparently 

 about reached the limit of its usefulness. 

 Is the reason for this to be found in 

 the fact that the public domain has all 

 been disposed of? Not at all, for it i^ 

 estimated that about half of the original 

 billion acres still remains the property 

 of the Nation. 



The trouble lies not in the shrinking 

 of the public domain, but in the in 

 applicability of the homestead law to 

 the character of that domain as it now 

 exists. 



