Question: "Resolved, That the United States ought to construct a large system of irrigation works."

Brief for the Affirmative.

F. S. ELLIOTT and S. W. PHILLIPS.Best general references: Statement of Maj. Powell, House Ex. Doc. 51st Cong. 2nd Sess. (1890-91) No. 15; H. M. Wilson, Irrigation in India, House Ex. Doc. 52nd Cong. 1st Sess. (1891-92) No. 18; J. W. Irwin, A great Domain by Irrigation in Forum XII, 740 (Sept. 1891); Reports of Secs. of the Interior, House Ex. Docs. 51st Cong. 1st Sess. (1889-90) No. 13, and 51st Cong. 2nd Sess. (1890-91) No. 13.

I. Irrigation is of greatest value to the country. - (a) Large areas now worthless without it: Powell, 48. - (b) 120,000,000 acres reclaimable: Sec. Noble's Report 1891. - (c) Government no longer has any good agricultural land left. - (d) Irrigated land better for agriculture than common land. - (e) Irrigation has developed the country immensely. - (x) in India: Wilson 418-20. - (y) in Southern California and in New Mexico: Sec. Noble's Report, 1890, 608-9.

II. Irrigation is perfectly possible. - (a) There is plenty of water if it can be properly managed: Forum, XII, 745. - (b) Nature of soil is favorable; Forum, XII, 745-6. - (c) Conditions of India, where it has succeeded are similar: Wilson, 391.

III. Control of irrigation by others than the United States unwise. - (a) By states. - (1) River systems extend over several states. - (2) The one nearest the head could steal all the water: Powell, 221. - (b) By individual farmers. - It would be on too small a scale to be effective except in a few places: Powell, 237. - (c) By corporations. - (1) It leaves a great class of farmers at the mercy of the water companies. - (2) It would lead to the creation of large estates and the crushing out of small holders. - (3) It would lead to popular hatred, as in the case of railroads in the west.

IV. Irrigation to be successful must be by the United States: Sec. Noble's Report, 1890, 641. - (a) It must be on a very large scale: Powell, 48. - (b) Return from the investment, although sure, is very slow at first: Wilson, 410-18. - (c) It has to wait for immigration to fill up the irrigated land: Wilson, 381.

Brief for the Negative.

J. W. COOKE and V. H. MAY.Best general references: Forum, XII, 740, 1890; Whitney's "United States," supplement I; House Exec. Doc. 52 Cong. 1 Sess. (1891-92) p. 48; Senate Exec. Doc. 52 Cong. 1 Sess. (1891-92) IV.

I. The proposed system is inexpedient. - (a) Very expensive. - (b) Unwisely increases the civil service. - (c) Would divert public attention from more pressing questions. - (1) Finance. - (2) Tariff. - (3) Labor. - (d) Irrigation might be introduced for political motives. - (e) Gov't construction is usually lavish: Forum, XII, 740. - (f) Gov't control not economical: ibid. - (g) Example of India not applicable: Whitney's "United States," 34.

II. The constitutionality of such a system is questionable. - (a) Power not specifically granted in constitution. - (b) Such power not easily inferred.

III. Whatever is necessary can be done without government intervention. - (a) Private enterprise most economical: Forum, XII, 740. - (b) Private capital is able to create and manage such a system. - (1) Private capitalists have undertaken such works in the west, as in New Mexico: House Exec. Doc. 51 Cong. 2 Sess. (1890-91) VIII, 608. - (2) Private capitalists have undertaken equally large operations. - (x) Niagara Falls Water Power Co. - (y) Great railway systems.

IV. Possible abuses can be prevented by state and government oversight: Forum, XII, 740.

V. There are many obstacles to irrigation on a large scale. - (a) Insufficiency of water supply. - (b) Danger from large reservoirs. - (c) Destructive alkaline deposits.