Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Sunday Oregonian. (Portland, Ore.) 1881-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 26, 1915)
THE SUNDAY OREGONIAN, POItTLATTD, SEPTEMBER 26, 1915. STATE CONTROL OF WATER POWER IS NATION'S HERITAGE Senator Reed Smoot's Speech at Recent Conference Shows Dangers of Federal Control and Points Out Great Need of Development of Latent Resources of West by Privately Owned Plants. BY REED SMOOT. United States Senator. (Address delivered before Western State Water Power Conference In Portland, Sep tember li2.) BEFORE the adoption of the Consti tution of the United States and the inauguration of President Wash ington, this country did not have in a true sense a national government. The actual governments were the gov ernments of the 13 original states. For purposes of defense against British oppression there was indeed, among these states a union and interde pendence of action which were finally and formally announced to the world in the Declaration of Independence, and gloriously achieved by the war of the Kevolutlon. Subsequently, under the articles of confederation, an effort was made to provide a form of government for this union; but it signally failed, for the simple reason that the chief powers of government of sovereignty of a juris diction of eminent domain in a broad sense, were withheld from it. Chief among these powers, the lack of which well-nigh reduced the confederation to impotency and dissolution, were the powers to raise money by taxation and by loans on the credit of the United States, and the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states First Articles of Little I He. In fact, the articles of confederation created a league of sovereign states and not a nation. Its Congress, as the name originally implied, was an as sembly of delegates from the states. It was a deliberate and advisory, rather than a legislative body. It could make requisitions upon the states, but it had no power of collecting them. It could not act directly upon individuals at all. It remained, therefore, for the consti tution to create the Nation as an entity, end to provide for it a national govern ment with sovereign powers. It is very interesting and important to note that the first effective step which led to the calling of the Phila delphia convention which framed the constitution was a meeting of com missioners of the states of Virginia and Maryland at Mount Vernon in 1785, for the purpose of settling "the juris diction over waters dividing the two states." This was followed in 1786 by a resolution of the Virginia Legis lature proposing a meeting of depu ties from all the states to discuss the best means of securing a uniform treat ment of commercial questions. Pursuant thereto a convention at tetided by deputies from only five etates, met in the Fall of 1786 at An napolis: and, in the words of Mr. Mad ison, this convention, "thin as it was, did not scruple to decline the limited task assigned to it, and to recommend to the states a convention with powers adequate to the occasion." Constitution Grants Powers.. As you all know, it was in confor mity with the call of the Annapolis convention, drafted by Colonel Hamil ton and unanimously agreed to, that the great convention met at Philadel phia in 1787 and evolved the constitu tion under which we live and have grown to be" the foremost nation in the world. The purpose of that convention in framing the constitution and of the people of the states in adopting it, as declared in its preamble, was to form a more perfect union, establish jus tice, insure domestic tranquility, pro vide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. In order to carry out these purposes the states and their people delegated to the general govern ment certain powers of a national character, and expressly declared that the constitution and the laws of the United States made in pursuance there of should be the supreme law of the land. Of necessity, and by the express terms of the Tenth Amendment, the powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution nor prohibi ted by it to the states, are reserved to the states, respectively, or to the people. Dual Form Is Heritage. There was thus created a dual form of government. Federal and state, each sovereignty operating directly upon the same individuals a thing unknown be fore in the world's history. To pre serve that form of government in its integrity, both as respects the states and the nation, should be the prayerful purpose not only of our statesmen, but of all patriotic citizens. It is a sacred heritage, transmitted to us in all its vigor and glory to our posterity. The constitution of my own states of Utah contains a declaration that "fre quent recurrence to fundamental prin ciples is essential to the security of individual rights and the perpetuity of free government," and that of the commonwealth of Massachusetts like wise declars that "a frequent recur rence to the principles of the constitu tion is one of the things absolutely necessary to preserve the advantages of liberty and to maintain a free gov ernment," , It is in the light of history, and from the viewpoint of the fundamental prin ciples of the constitution so illumi nated, which every intelligent citizen should understand, that I desire to dis cuss, in the brief time allotted to me, the subject of "Federal Tax on Water Powers." Water Property of States. The first of the enumerated powers of Congress under the constitution are the power to raise money by taxation and loans, and the power to regulate commerce powers, the lack of which rendered the old confederation lame and impotent. Ever since the decision of Chief Jus tice Marshall in the case of Gibbons against Ogden, to the effect that the power delegated to Congress to regu late interstate commerce comprehend ed the power to regulate and control navigation, notwithstanding the laws of any states to the contrary, there has been no doubt whatever concerning the power of Congress over the navigable waters of the nation for that specific purpose. But the power to regulate and control the appropriation and use of water for all other purposes, inherent in the states, and not delegated to the United States by any provision of the federal Constitution, still resides in the several states, and, in my humble opinion, they can only be deprived of this power by an amendment of the constitution. It may be conceded that when the Federal Government, in order to Im prove navigation, builds dams and locks in any of our navigable streams and thereby creates with the expenditure of its own money a surplus water power, it acquires a property right in such power which it may use. lease or sell to the best advantage, just as it might lease or sell a building which it had rected for some authorized Federal tise, but no longer required, in whole or in part, tor that purpose. It would hardly be contended, however, that the Federal Government could go into the business of erecting office buildings and residences for rent, or that it could build dams and power plants solely ror the purpose of selling power in un fair competition with its own citizens Such things are not contemplated or authorized by the constitution, and would be unfair, largely for the reason that the states cannot tax Federal property. rositlon Based on Might. It Is contended, however, that, be cause the Federal Government happens to own the technical title to vacant land in some of our Western states, it may dictate the terms on which that land maybe used in connection with the beneficial use of water; that, as the Secretary of the Interior has recent ly said, he may, as the custodian of such lands, consent or dissent to such use. and thus override the laws of the state on the subject of the appro priation and use of water. Such a , government if it can be called a gov ernment at all is a government of might and not of right. And it should be here noted and remembered that if this novel assertion of arbitrary pow er by the Secretary, or even by Con gress, should be maintained as a part of the law of the land, then the con sent of the Secretary or of Congress would be necessary for any use of water involving easements over the public land, whether for domestic, mu nicipal, mining, agricultural or other uses. This would place the settle ment and development of our arid states entirely at the mercy of one man or set of men a thing utterly abhorrent to our ideas of a free re publican government. This brings us to the fundamental question, whether the existence of public land in a state gives to the Fed eral Government any other or greater government powers than it has in other states which are so fortunate as to have no public lands. Now. the subject of the public lands is intimately woven with the very for mation and labile of our Union. At the time of the adoption of the articles of confederation there were conflicting claims among the original states to the waste and unoccupied lands lying west of the Alleghanles. Following the rec ommendation of Congress and the no ble example of Virginia, then the fore most state of the Union, various states made cession of their claims covering this territory, both as regards soil and jurisdiction, to the United States; and it is well known that Maryland with held her assent to the articles until this question of the disposition of the public or crown lands was practically settled. Admission to til Ion Complete. One of the conditions of these ces sions, in the deed from Virginia, and of other states following her unselfish example, was that the territory so ceded should be faithfully disposed of for the purpose of creating new states and "that the states so formed shall be distinct republican states and ad mitted members of the Federal Union, having the same rights of sovereignty, freedom and independence as the other states." These deeds of cession were accepted by Congress and thus the faith of the United States was pledged to carry out their terms and conditions. I know of no legal method by which this obligation resting upon Congress can be enforced, because under the Consti tution it has the absolute power of disposal, and may sell or withhold from sale. But when Congress admits a state into the Union and there is likewise no higher power which can control its discretion in that matter the state becomes a state of the Union, endowed with all the rights and powers of the other states, and subject only to the limitations expressed in the Constitution. The act of Congress, in deed, admits it into the Union; but its status in the Union is established and protected by the Constitution. And in the very necessity of the case, all of the states of the Union are on an equal footing in all respects whatever. With the exceptions of Vermont and Ken tucky, which were admitted as new and entire memb.ers of the Union, and which had no public lands within their borders, the acts of admission of all the new states contain an express declaration to that effect. Our fathers were careful to make the distinction between Soil and juris diction, between the proprietary right and the governmental power. When a state is admitted into the Union, it becomes vested with all the govern mental powers which the Constitution has not conferred upon the general Government, nor prohibited to the states; and, while the primary disposal of the soil remains subject to the rules and regulations made or authorized by Congress, the jurisdiction over it passes to the state. It is true that the United States may reserve or purchase lands for Federal uses within the state. for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards and other need ful buildings; but in those cases its jurisdiction rests upon cessions by the particular states. This is even true of the District of Columbia. Uniform Taxation Required. Taxation is the highest exercise of governmental power. It is the taking by the sovereign of a portion of the property of private individuals for the support of the government and its in stitutions; but under the Federal Con stitution the exercise of this power is subject to the just limitation that it shall be uniform throughout the Unit ed States. The taking of private property for public or quasi-public uses, and the regulation of rates and service of public-service corporations, are also the highest exercise of a governmental power, or eminent domain; but the ex ercise of this power is subject to the limitation that it shall be upon the payment of Just compensation. Now all of these things, and more. are attempted to be done, so. far as power development on or in connection with the public lands is concerned, by existing regulations of the depart ments of the interior and of agricul ture. Vigorous attempts are now being made by these departments, particu larly by the Department of the Inte rior, to Induce or coerce Congress into the enactment of legislation predicated along the lines of those regulations, The avowed purpose of these regula tions and of the proposed legislation is to produce revenue for the General Government. It is an attempt to do indirectly what cannot be done di rectly. The time allotted me today will not allow me to discuss in detail the mer its and demerits of the Ferris bill. I do not hesitate, however, to state that the principles involved In it go to the very constitutional rights and life of the states. It has been declared by the Supreme Court that our Union is "an indestructible Union of indestructible states." The indestructibility of the Union was" finally settled by a cruel and bloody civil war. May I ask what will it require to forever establish the indestructibility of the states, which i just as important to the future life of our country as the Indestructibility of the Union? The destruction of the balance of power between the states and the Union by the usurpation of the constitutional rights of the state by the Union must never happen or be allowed. Slap Taken at Western States. The officers of the Interior Depart ment when told that legislation af fecting the waters of a state should be enacted by the Legislature of the state, that an act of Congress interfering with the control of the waters wholly witnin a state is governmental usur pation, reply that the state govern ments .ire weak, that they cannot pro tect themselves against the politicians, that the Western states are incanable of self-government and it requires the power and wisdom of the department heads and bureau clerks to protect the people's interest, and to conserve the natural resources of the state. If this were all true, which it is not, it would not be a sufficient cause for the de struction of the fundamental plan of our Government. Are the Western peo ple goiny to surrender local self-government to a centralized departmental power at Washington? If so, the progressive and prosperous career of our Western states will come to an end. Any . usurpation, the result' of which will be the destruction of the i rignts or a sovereign state, even if it is under the pretense of taking care of the people of th-e state, will be resent ed by the American people whenever they become informed of such a pro gramme. In this connection I call attention to a speech delivered in New York in 1837 by Daniel Webster, so applicable to present-day conditions: I have nothing- to do with the motives of those acta which I believe to have tran scended the boundaries of the Constitution. Good motives may always be assumed, as bad motives may be imputed. Good inten tions will always be pleaded for every as sumption of power; but they cannot Justify it even if we were sure that they existed. It is hardly too strong; to say that the Con stitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good Intentions, real or pretended. When bad intentions are boldly avowed, the people will promptly take care of themselves. On the other hand, they will always be asked why they Bhould resist or question that exercise of power which is so fair in its object, eo plnusible and patriotic in appearance, and which has the public good alone confes sedly in view. Human beings, we may be assured, will generally exercise power when they can get it; and they will exercise it most undoubtedly In popular governments, under pretenses of public safety or high public Interest. It may be very possible that good intentions do really sometimes exist when constitutional restraints are dis regarded. There are men in all ages who mean to exercise power usefully, but who mean to exercise it. They mean to gov ern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters, but they mean to be masters. They think there need be but little restraint upon themselves. Their notion of the public interest is apt to be quite closely connected with their own ex ercise of authority. They may not. indeed, always -understand their own motives. The love of power may sink too deep in their hearts even for their own security, and may pass with themselves for mere patriotism and benevolence. Good Motives Possible. "There is nothing," said James G. Blaine, "of which a public officer can be so easily persuaded as of the en larged jurisdiction which pertains to his office." The "leasing laws" proposed in the last Congress and especially that with respect to water power are undoubt edly intended by those who proposed them to be of beneficent effect. They are intended to cure corporate evils by process of indirection. They substi tute individual initiative, upon which this country was built up, for benevo lent despotism, and in the last analy sis they are but the return, to, or the approach to the old feudal system out of which the English people escaped in the days of the Magna Charta. If the Ferris bill should become a la,w it will be but the second step in establishing as a Government policy the leasing of the remainder of the public domain. Do you want your children to be tenants of the Govern ment or home-owning citizens? If this programme should unhappily be carried out, and Congress should be guilty of the supreme folly of enacting Buch legislation, it would be a direct encroachment upon the nigh preroga tives or the states and their people to manage and control their own internal affairs. What is the excuse for such proposed legislation, and who are the people clamoring for it? On the one hand, we find the bureaus, eager to increase their power and their revenues; on the other hand, we find some of the power companies, eager for the profits of financing and operation, willing to pay any charges exacted by the bureaus so long as they can continue to pass them on to the people. If any such legislation is enacted bv Congress, and if it is what the bureaus and the power companies term work able, .it will be in fact, if not in intent. me result or a conspiracy between the bureaus and the power companies to rob the states and their people not only of their property, but of their Just rights and privileges, and to divide the spoils. Some of the power com panies are frank to say that they are indifferent concerning the amount of the tax. provided it is definitely fixed beforehand, and is not more than the traffic will bear: for it becomes a Dart of their operating expenses, which they may legitimately get back from the people, either through increased rates for service or by deferring re ductions in rates, which reductions the people served have a right to expect as the business grows and other ODer- atlng expenses decrease. Some of the power companies, indeed. seem inclined to prefer the distant and indifferent, and perhaps more Dliant. control of an irresponsible bureau, rather than that of the immediate rep ENGINEER DECLARES LEASE ADEQUATE tain title to the land or certainty of tenure, can give neither. Hence the ease with which an established busi ness can be extended as compared with the promotion of a new 'enterprise. . Speculation on Sites Feared. This explains the promoter's desire to obtain title in order that he may have the potential value of the power site a3 property security for his finan cial transactions. He wishes the pub lic to supply his credit. All this might be well enough if every such enter prise was Initiated and conducted in a bona fide effort toward development and if the effect which passing of title would have on subsequent rate regu lation was not so serious. The history of public land grants forbids the belief that power sites would not be held more often for spec ulation than for development. This must not be repeated with our water power sites. Present development would be blocked except at the expense of buying out the speculator at any price which he might fix. But even this Is not the most serious result which would follow. The lands thus secured would increase enor mously in value, and on this increased value, even -under the most stringent of rate regulation, the public would be required to pay interest and profits forever. One need only to examine the books of power and railroad corporations to see how often by transfer after trans fer from the original promoter down to the latest owner value has been piled upon value to the" limit that the business will stand. Charges Are Considered. The regulating body can deal only with the present owner, and unless in vestment and property are to be con fiscated must permit earnings not only upon the purchase price but also upon any increase in value that may have taken place since the present owner came into possession.. This is the crux of the whole sit uation. It is because of their desire to base rates upon this speculative in crease in land values over and above a reasonable return upon, the necessary and legitimate investment that certain representatives of water power inter ests have so Insistently and persistent ly advocated private ownership of pub lic power sites. Nothing can prevent this except the retention of these sites in public ownership, and no other cause should be considered for a moment Protection Seen In Lease. All the protection that capital needs, all the . capital that development re quires can be obtained under a proper leasing system. All leases should be for a fixed term, probably not less than 50 years, inorder that full op portunity may be given to realize upon the investment. ' The leases should be renewable to the bolder upon expiration except only resentatives and governing bodies of the people whom they serve. Some, on the contrary, are broad-minded enough to see that their interests and the in terests of the people are mutual, and that the prosperity of both goes hand in hand. We do not find that the states or the people are clamoring for this in novation in legislative activity. All that they desire is to live and let live, to develop their resources and to manage their own internal affairs so as to furnish employment to both capi tal and labor, under a constitutional form of government a government of laws and not of men in which their own governmental and proprietary rights are respected. The constitutions and laws of many of our western states declare that the waters of the states are the property of the states or of the public, and some of them express an order of pref erence in uses, as for domestic, agri cultural and manufacturing purposes. The laws of this state provide that "The use of the water of the lakes and running streams of the State of Oregon for the purpose of developing the mineral resources of the state, and to furnish electrical power for all pur poses, is declared to be a public and beneficial use and a public necessity, and the right to divert any unappro priated waters of any such lakes or streams for such public and beneficial use is hereby granted." "All waters within the state from all sources of water supply -belong to the state." But the right of the states really rests on higher ground than any mere proprietary claim. To say that the state owns the water whether in the form of fog and rain which, I under stand, are frequent in these regions, or in lakes or running streams is to use a figure of speech. Ownership is defined as possession coupled with the unqualified right of possession. Until the water is reduced to possession and control, it can hardly be said to be the subject of ownership at all. The state, however, has the police power and authority to declare how that ownership may be acquired and used, and what limitations may be put upon Federal Power Supreme. When that governmental power of the state comes in conflict with the proprietary interest of the Federal Government. which should prevail? Clearly, the governmental power. What is the rule when the Federal Government appropriates and dedicates to the uses of commerce one of our navigable streams? The proprietary right of the state or the riparian owner in the beds of navigable waters is held subject to the exercise of that power of Congress, and the Supreme court has declared that in such case there is no taking, in the sense in which that word Is used in the consti tution, but merely the exercise of an inalienable power of Government: and that when there are no grounds for estoppel, the Government is under no obligation to make compensation to the state or to the riparian owner. If it were otherwise, the states might im pose such burdensome charges and r strictions upon the exercise of this Federal power as to render it nuga tory. That I understand to be the doctrine laid down by the Supreme Court in the Chandler-Dunbar case. In precisely like manner, the tech nical title to the public land is held subject to the exercise of this govern mental or police power of the states to control and regulate the appropriation and use of their waters ror all pur poses except navigation. If it were otherwise, the public-land states might not only be stripped of all govern mental powers, and their laws ren dered inoperative, but their sources of revenue would be dried up. and their industrial progress arrested. This power of local control over the subject of water in connection with rights of way over the public lands was recognized in the act of 1866, which declared that whenever rights to the use of water had vested and ac crued under the local laws, a right of way therefor over the public domain was recognized and confirmed, and the right to construct was made subject to the sole condition that compensation should be made for any damage there by caused to the possessory rights of settlers on the public domain. That law gave to the territories the same rights which it recognized as belong ing to the states. Assuming, however, for the sake of (CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4.) in the event that the Federal Govern ment, the state or a municipality should wish to take over the proper ties for the purpose of ownership and operation, and if so taken over the lessee should be paid back his invest ment, less depreciation paid out of earnings and sinking funds accruing from earnings. The leases should be unalterable for their term, should contain every condi tion binding upon the lessee, and after Investment has been made, should be subject to cancellation only upon fail ure to comply with the express terms of the lease and by action instituted in appropriate courts, and even then only when the breach is of such a na ture that it cannot be remedied by an action to compel specific performance. Capital Thought Available. No one can honestly say that with such a form of tenure coupled with rea sonable conditions of occupancy, there will be any difficulty In securing upon favorable terms all the capital that the necessities of the Western States require. Much has been said on the question of rental charges for power sites and many strange economic theories have been advanced concerning the relation between such rental charges and the rates which consumers must pay for their power. It goes without saying that a rental charge, as well as every other charge of whatever source or na ture made upon a public utility. Is paid by the public in rates, for the simple reason that a public utility, as such, has no other source of revenue. But it by no means follows that the payment of every rental, charge must mean an Increase In prices to the con sumer. The rates of a public utility corporation are not adjusted to such a hair-trigger nicety. Rates and Costa Reviewed. No one would have the temerity to argue that an increase of a few thous and dollars in the taxes paid by the Portland Railways Company would re sult in an increase in street-railway fares, or that a corresponding reduction would be followed by reduced rates. It is advisable to charge a minimum rental in all cases to cover administra tive costs. Such an amount would be far too small to appear in rates to consumers. With regard to higher ren tals than this it should be established as a general principle that no addi tional rate should be charged which would have the effect either of increas ing prices to consumers or of reducing the earnings of the public utility below a thoroughly adequate return. ,j Rate and service regulation has an important bearing on the question of securing cheap capital for power de velopment. Regulation is necessary for public protection, but unless intelli gently exercised may defeat its own ends. It is better to err on the Bide of too great than of too little return, and to readjust rates at definite peri argument, that Congress has the con stitutional power to tax and regulate an industry under the guise of leases or easements over the public land an assumption which I most evphatic-i ally deny what wise purpose of gov ernment is subserved by exerting that power? Uncertain tenure, arbitrary control, burdensome taxes and pros pective "confiscation are no invitation or inducement to capital to invest in any induetry so conditioned, but quite to the contrary." There i3 no industry in the world more deserving of encouragement than hydro-electric power. Not only are the manifold uses of electricity becom ing more and more a necessary part o'f our social and industrial life, but the use of cheap electric power in pumping for irrigation, in the manu facture of fertilizers by the fixation of atmospheric nitrogen, may become an important factor in solving the press ing problem of the high cost of living, and its use in the manufacture of nitro gen explosives may become a matter of tremendous import in providing for our National defense. It is well known to all of you that the attitude of our Government during the last two ministrations has prevented capital from investing in these enterprises and. to our irreparable loss, driven it into other countries. The proposed legislation includes many of the features of an old system discarded and discredited three gen erations ago. Among these is a pro vision to divide the proceeds of Federal leases equally among the public - land states and the reclamation fund. The people will hardly be deluded into the belief that they are going to be en riched by " having money taken from one of their pockets, and withheld from their use in developing the coun try, with a chance that all or a part of it will at some future time be put back into another of their pockets. Federal Profit Disapproved. In discussing a somewhat similar measure in the United States Senate in 1832, Senator Benton, of Missouri, said: But there was a new feature to be intro duced into the report. The new states were to be seduced into the measure by the offer of a shoe from their own territory. He had heard an instance n which after the hor rors of shipwreck, when the survivors were reduced to the extremity of feeding on each other, one man. who was to be the next victim, in a fit of desperate agony begged to be Indulged with a slice from himself. So it appeared the new states were to be regaled with a slice of themselves and then torn limb from limb. Our public-land policy, since Ben ton's tithe, as well stated in a resolu tion unanimously adopted by the Con servation Congress, held in the City of Washington in November, 1913, is as follows: Be It resolved, that the established, tra ditional and sound policy of the United Ctntoa with n4lMt to the dlSDOSltiOn Of ItS unappropriated public lands Is opposed to the making of a direct revenue thereby, be yond the expense incident to the surveying, classification and disposing of such kinds, but. on the contrary, that, said policy is In tended to encourage aDil promote the set tlement and development thereof; and that any act of Congress, or any administrative construction thereof which Is not in har mony with this policy, does an Injustice to the new states by placing them on an equal footing with the original states and by discouraging and preventing the settle ment of such new stata aud tae develop ment of their resources. If the United States ought not to adopt a policy of making a revenue out of what it owns, the soil, how much less is it entitled to make a reve nue out of what it doea not own or possess, namely, the water and the governmental power to control its ap propriation and use for beneficial pur pose? When an appropriator of water digs his ditch or constructs his dam or other means of utilizing water on or across the public domain, he pays the expense of locating and surveying him self. If he files a map to give notice in advance of construction or after ward, he pays all the expenses incident thereto. The Government is put to no expense in that connection whatever. On the other hand, when it sells its land, the patent is expressly subject to vested and accrued rights of way for the use of water for any and all purposes, and no deduction is made by the Government either in acreage or price on account of such rights of way. Hitherto the Government has never assumed that it could grant a water right- It has recognized that the right arises by virtue of use under the local law. If it may now grant a right for power purposes, what would happen if ods of several years' interval rather than by a continuous process, other wise the only incentive to improved methods and to economy of operation is taken away. States Regulating Rates. Such matters, however, are without the province of Federal legislation or administration. The states have the power of regulation and most of them are exercising it. Duplication by the federal Government would be both un necessary and unwise. uniy tor clearly emergency cases where a state had not provided itself with the means of regulation would I reserve a right of action under a Fed eral lease. Failure to regulate rates and service today does not prevent the full exercise of the right tomorrow, or nave any bearing on future actions, but if the essential of ownership is once lost it is lost beyond recovery. To my mind there is a clear differ entiation between the functions of the Federal and the state governments In the matter of power development and use; to the former the maintenance of public ownership and the admlnistra tion of the use of the land; to the lat ter the regulation of rates and service and issuance of securities. Co-operation Is Cited. But you have been" told that there is an irreconcilable conflict between the Nation and the states because the former claims to own the land and the latter claims to own the water, and oower cannot be developed without the use of both. Many a ponderous legal argument has been woven around this question of water rights. The subject may be interesting as a matter for academic discussion, but when all is said and done, nobody knows -what the final decision will be, and no one who is chiefly concerned in securing prac tical results cares. As far as the National forests are concerned, the Department of Agricul ture has solved the matter with mutual satisfaction in the States of California and Oregon, where, under written agreement with the state officials, all matters affecting power development are handled by co-operative and con current action. The department would be glad. to take similar action in any other state. Solution Believed Possible. It is believed that the programme of legislation which has been outlined will clear away any real obstacles. If such exist, to power development in the Western states. It is believed that such a programme is all that capital can reasonably ask and all that the public interest requires. It is believed that if all those who are engaged In power development will cease contending for the impossible goal of private ownership and are real ly desirous of arriving at a practical working solution, such solution can be had. and to it the Department of Agri culture will give full support. the water were required for some higher use under the laws of the state, for domestic use, for example, or for irrigation or municipal uses? If the United States should, under the option contained in the lease, acquire the property leased, and all other property dependent for its usefulness on the leased premises, where would its right to acquire property within the state end. and how could the state tax prop erty so acquired and held? How could the state regulate the rates and serv ice of a plant owned and operated by the United States? What we want is more and cheaper hydro-electric power for all purposes. Can we get it by taxing it, as we have been doing practically taxing it out of existence? Every purpose for which our fathers ordained and established the Constitution cries out against such tax. and against the leasing system by which it is sought to be enforced. Such a system directly affects the autonomy of the public-land states, and thereby impairs our more perfect union; it operates as a rank injustice to those states by depriving them not only of their rights guaranteed by the Consti Ad-ji.ution. but of the use of those natural advantages which God has bestowed upon them; the domestic tranquillity is adversely affected not only by the sense of the injustice of this system, but by its preventing that employment of capital and labor which a more lib eral policy would insure; such a sys tem leaves unprovided; for an important element of the common defense, and overlooks the general welfare entirely, and. finally, the logical outcome of a system of leasing under the autocratic control of the central authority is ab solutely destructive of the blessings of liberty under a republican form of gov ernment. What would our fathers say if they could see the operation of this system by which the free citizens of the Re public and of its sovereign states are to be transformed into tenants and permittees of the Federal Government, lorded over and taxed without their consent by prefects sent from Wash ington? Preservation of t'nlon Desired. Gentlemen, the state which I have the honor in part to represent in that great body where all the states are equal, and which cannot be deprived of that equality without Its own con sent, could never have become a state under such a system. And when I plead for the preservation of its rights as an equal member of the Federal Union, and the preservation of the rights of the people as citizens of this great Republic. I am pleading for the preservation of that Union itself, as our fathers founded it. and for the rights and liberties of all its citizens. What constitutes a state? Not nigh-raised battlements or la bored mound. Thick wall or moated gate: Not cities proud with spires and tur rets crowned: Not bays and broad-armed porta. Where, laughing at the storm, rich navies ride; Not starred and spangled courts. Where low-browed baseness wafts perfume to pride: No men. high-minded men. With powers as far above dull brutes endued In forest, brake or den. As beasts excel cold rocks and bram bles rude Men who their duties know. But kuow their rights, and, know v lng. dare maintain. Prevent the long-aimed blow, And crush the tyrant while they rend the chain; These constitute a state; And sovereign law, the state's col lected will Oe'r thrones and globes elate Sits empress, crowning good, repress ing 111. This question, gentlemen of all par ties, is emphatically not a political question. It is one which concerns primarily the definition of the boun dary between the governmental powers of the Nation and of the states. In the correct solution of that question is Involved the very preservation of our form of government, a matter of most vital present concern to every citizen of the Republic, as well as to the fu ture of our beloved country. Question Not Political. . To demonstrate the non-political character of this question, let me quote from some of our great statesmen, liv ing and dead. While the Constitution was being weighed in the balance by the people, and the fate of the new nation was still hidden from human eyes. Samuel Adams, the great tribune of the people, wrote as follows: I hope the Federal Congress Is vested with powers adequate to all the great pur poses of the Federal Union; and if they have such adequate powers, no true and un derstanding federalists would consent that they should be trusted with more; for more would discover the folly of the people in their wanton grant of power, because it m-ight, and considering the disposition of the human mind without doubt would be wantonly extended to their Injury and ruin. The powers vested in government by the people, the only just source of such powers, ought to be critically defined, and well un derstood, lest by a misconstruction of am biguous expressions. and by interested Judges, too, more power might be assumed by the Government than the people ever Intended they should possess. Few men are contented with less power than they have a right to exercise: the ambition of the human heart grasps at more; this Is evinced by the experience of all ages. And again he writes: I was particularly afraid that unless great care should be taken to prevent it, the Constitution in the administration of it would gradually, but swiftly and Imper ceptibly, run Into a consolidated govern ment, pervading and legislating through all the states, not for Federal purposes only, as It professes, but in all cases whatsoever such a, Government would soon, totally an nihilate the sovereignty of the several states, so necessary to the support of the confederated commonwealth, and sink both in despotism. And Thomas Jefferson, the Father of Democracy, in the serene old age of 77 years, after a long and useful life spent in the service of his country in the highest stations, wrote as fol lows: It Is not by the consolidation, or con centration of powers, but by their distribu tion, that good government is affected. Were not this great country already di vided into states, that division must be made, that each might do for itself what concerns itself directly, and what It can so much better do than a distant authority. Every state, again, is divided into counties, each to take care of what lies within its local bounds; each county again into tow n shlus or wards, to manage minute details: and every ward into farms, to be governed each by Its individual proprietor. Were we directed from Washington when to sow. and when to reap, we should soon want bread. Father of Constitution Quoted. And Madison, another of our great Presidents, not inaptly called the Father of the Constitution, writing in the Federalist, that splendid com mentary on our fundamental law, which the Supreme Court has itself declared should not and cannot be disregarded in construing the Constitution, says: The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects. as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The pow ers reserved to the several states will ex tend to all the objects which. In the ordi nary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people, and the Internal order, improvement and pros perity of the state. Expressions to the same effect have come from the lips and pens of all our eminent statesmen and Jurists, and might be quoted without number. I will add only two more from our two living ex-Presldents. In his life of Gouverneur Morris. Mr. Roosevelt characterizes the Jealousy of the Western States, displayed by some of the members of the constitutional convention, as excessively narrow- minded, discreditable, mean and un- worthy. And in another place he says: The man who fought for secession wnrred for a cause as evil and as capable of work ing lasting barm as the doctrine of the divine right of kings itself. But we mav feel an intense pride lu bis gallantry; and we may believe in his honestv as heartily f we believe In that of the only less fool ish being who wishes to see our Govern ment strongly centralized, heedless of the self-evident fact that over such a vast land as ours the Nation can exist only as a Fed eral Union; and that, exactlv as the liberty of the individual and the rights of the states can only be preserved by upholding the strength of the Nation, so this same local- ' Izing of power in all matters not esivntialiv National Is vital to the wcllbeing and dur ability of the Government. Mr. Taft in his lecture, at Yale, has recently spoken as follows: This great expansion of Federal activities nss been almost within the present genera tion and within the recollection, and by the agency, of living men: but It lwis not changed the form of our Oovernnu'it. nor has it lessened our obligations to respect the sovereign rights of the state. This brings mo to a consideration of tre importance of maintaining the constitutional autonomy of our our Federal svs- tem Is the only iorm of popular govern ment that would be possible In a countrv i,STUS w,tn ,an enormous territory and 100,000,000 population. Centralisation Tendency Feared. And speaking of the withdrawal of public lands from sale a question which has some apparent analocrv, but really no connection whatever with the question assigned to me. for one re lates to tho disposal of the land, a purely proprietary question, while the other concerns taxation, eminent do main and regulation, which are ques tions involving the exercise of gov ernmental powers Mr. Taft says: The case Is an exception because gonerallv matters having such an immediate loi-iil Importance are within the control of the people of the state. But the nsperitv ami vigor of the complaints illustrates vorv well the Inevitable result if evervthing were reg ulated from Washington and the state gov ernments, were reduced to nothing but agen cies of the National Government. In this connection and in conclusion allow me to quote from the writinc3 of John Flske, the greatest philosopher among our historians, and the greatest historian among our philosophers. He says: Too much centralization is our danger to day, as the weakness of the Federal tin was our danger a century ago. The rule of the Federalist party was needed in 17v as the rule of the Hepuhlican pai-tv was needed in 18til, to put a curb upon the cciitri'iisal tendencies. Hut after Federalism had f.urlv done Its great work, at the beginning of the llth century. It was well that the adminis tration of our National affairs should pa-s Into the hands of the partv to which Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams belonged and which Madison, in his calm, statesmanlike wisdom, had come to Join. Aud now that in our own day the disruptive forces have been even more effectually and thorouhlv overcome, it Is time for the principles of that party to bo reasserted with fresh em phasis. If the day should ever nrilve (which God forbid!! when the peoplo of the different parts of our countrv shall al low their local affairs to be administered by prefects sent from Washinston, unit when tho self-government of the slates shall have been so far lost as that of the de partments of France, or even so far as that of the counties of Knglnud on that da v the progressive political career of tha American people will have come to nn end and the hotves that have been buiit upon It for the future happiness and prosperity of mankind will bo wrecked forever. GOLDENDALE FAIR PLANNED Premiums, Cash Prizes and Purses .Aggregate $300O. GOLD END'AL E. Wash., Sept. 25. (Special.) Arrangements for tha swventh annual fair to be held at Gold endale October 6, 7, 8 and 9. have been completed by the directors of tho Klickitat County Fair Association. Three thousand dollars in premiums, cash prizes and purses are offered. Forty special features for which at tractive prizes are offered bv Goldendale merchants have been ar ranged by the committee to be. held in front of the grandstand daily between races. The management has decided to cut out wild west stunts. Relay strings will not De barred, however, from tho regular four-day relay race. The racing card iikcludes harness, running and Indian races each day. Indians from the Yakima Reservation will attend in their fancy tribal cos tumes, giving war dances and parades every day. A balloon ascension with a triple parachute drop will take place, on the grounds daily. 13. C. Allison is president of the Klickitat County Fair Association, and A. J. Ahola, secretary. NEW HIGH SCHOOL OPENS Many Pupils Enroll at Grosliaiu and 1 icq u ire Another Teaclicjr. GRESHAM, Or., Sept. 23. (Special.) Union High School No. 2, successor o the Gresham High School, opened for active study Tuesday morning, with at . registration of more than 140. All the) branches of a first-class high" school are taught. The faculty present ia composed of the following teachersl Elmer F. Goodwin, principal; Charles E. Bee. science and manual training; Eva Struggles. English and Latin; Mary E. Good, mathematics and book keeping; Hazel Cartan, domestic sci. eivce and physiology; Edith Caughn Mc Cormlck. history and German; andi Ellen Adams Pomeroy, voice culture. A meeting of the School Board will be held tonight, at which time another instructor will be added to the faculty. The registration far exceeds the expec tations of the School Board. KENNEWICK BUDGET FIXED Tax Lery Will Be 15 Stills', Com pared to 12 Last year. KENNEWICK, Wash., Sept. 23. (Spe cial.) The budget covering the receipt and expenditures necessary for the con ducting of the city government for next year has been adopted by the City Council. The amount is about $12,0n0. The tax levy is somewhat increased; because of the shortage of $3000 on account of the failure to receive reve nue from saloon licenses. The levy this year will be 15 mills, in increase of 3 mills over last year. The only retrenchments were the re duction of the salary of the Chief of Police from $S5 to $75 a month and that of the deputy from $75 to $65 a month. CTtelialis Woman Dies. CHEHALIS. Wash.. Sept. 25. (Spe cial.) The death of Mary Sliwa, of Adna, wife of Frank Sliwa, occurred this week. Mrs. Sliwa was born In Austria, March 17, 1890. Besides the husband, one son, 8 years old. and two daughters, 2 and 5 years, respectively, and a sister survive. The interment was in the Oddfellows' cemetery at Claquato. Rev. Father Moons offici ated. Dayton Club to Kcorg-anizc. DAYTON. Wash.. Sept. 23. (Special.) The Dayton Commercial Club has an nounced a "get-together-' meeting tor the near futuro to talk over a campaign for new members and the organization of different bureaus. There win be bu reaus for civic improvement, for good, rotdH, trafllc and business interests. The ssn.oon.ono Welland Ship Canal in Canada, at the eastern end of the Great LaKOi, will proba'oi be completed by 191i. The iwar has bean but a slight handicap.