634 



CONSERVATION 



Save possibly for his indiscretions of 

 utterance, McHarg is exactly the type 

 of man which the Denver organization 

 might rejoice to see in high administra- 

 tion circles. 



Now the question is, how many more 

 McHargs, equally committed but better 

 able to bridle their tongues, are there in 

 the administration ? 



It may be said that Mr. McHarg's 

 philippic was a "swan song;" that he 

 was not given opportunity to speak 

 again, but that he was required to pay 

 for his disloyalty with his head. 



Unhappily, no such conclusion can be 

 drawn. 



Instead, we are assured that a definite 

 understanding existed that Mr. 

 McHarg, by his own choice, was to 

 retire at the end of six months. He 

 says, "It was only because of the great 

 friendship that I entertained for the 

 President and for Secretary Nagle that 

 I undertook the onerous duties required 

 of me -in the first place ;" and the press 

 tells us, "there was no one in Beverly 

 willing to say that Mr. McHarg's 

 resignation was in any wise the result 

 of the interview" above quoted. 



McHarg is a type. 



He represents the laissez faire, in- 

 dividualist, help-yourself viewpoint as 

 applied to our natural resources. 



And he is by no means alone in this 

 position. There are others ; and with 

 them the genuine believers in con- 

 servation must prepare to deal. 



Putting Two and Two Together 



THE Spokane meeting brought out a 

 degree of hostility to Govern- 

 ment irrigation which not all may un- 

 derstand. 



Note the statement by Mr. John L. 

 Matthews in the Seattle Intelligencer 

 that "the water-power trust is opposed 

 to Government irrigation projects of 

 every sort. It wants to develop irriga- 

 tion itself in order that it may have the 

 power incidentally developed at the big 

 storage dams, besides making profit off 

 of the water supplied to the land." 



Here we have an additional light on 

 the motives of the water-power trust of 

 which the country is hearing some- 

 thing these days. 



The point brought out by Mr. 

 Pinchot at Spokane is that this com- 

 bination is seeking to monopolize the 

 Nation's power. Hence its fight for the 

 power sites, and its natural desire to 

 have "friends at court." 



According to Mr. Matthews, how- 

 ever, there is nothing small about this 

 trust. It wants not simply the power, 

 but it wants in addition to control the 

 irrigation system. 



Thus the trust would make two uses 

 of the water stored in the great dams : 

 "For a consideration," of course, it 

 would supply the settlers with the 

 water, as essential to their lives as at- 

 mospheric air ; in addition from the 

 water stored in these dams it would 

 generate power and sell the same to the 

 settlers and, with the help of long dis- 

 tance transmission facilities, "run 

 things" generally. 



If we ask why the fight is coming on 

 now instead of having developed earlier, 

 a hint is found in Mr. Newell's address 

 at the Spokane meeting. 



Speaking of private capital invested 

 in irrigation work, he said : 



"Much of this investment, however, 

 has been made possible, or at least has 

 been stimulated by the Government 

 work. The fact that the National Gov- 

 ernment has deemed it wise to take up 

 the matter has been one of the strongest 

 arguments appealing to capitalists to do 

 likewise." 



That is, the Government first takes 

 the risk, constructs the great engineer- 

 ing work, and proves irrigation on a 

 large scale to be feasible and profitable. 

 Then the trust says to the Government. 

 "Stand aside, we will now take charge 

 of this business." 



Putting with this Secretary Ballin- 

 ger's declaration : "I am not a believer 

 in the Government entering into com- 

 petition with legitimate private enter- 

 prise," and his actual cutting down of 

 the work of the Reclamation Service 

 by abolishing the cooperative plan 

 whereby water-users paid in part i< >r 



