/HETHER it be or be not possible to

reclaim by irrigation some certain portion of the arid and semi-arid regions of this country is undoubtedly a question of importance per se; regarded simply as a local issue there has as yet been no adequate comprehension of the problem by those whose very existence would appear to depend upon its satisfactory solution.

This being the case, it is not surprising that attention to detail and consequent narrowness of the field of observation have, to a great extent, prevented any general recognition of the great principles which, underlying the Irrigation Movement, have given to it most of its influence and all of its vitality. And since the irrigationist insists that not only are these principles true, but will in their application be found to present a means for meeting at least some of the social difficulties of the hour, it is at least reasonable that examination be made of them and the correctness of such a position be discussed.

There are in the world two great economic forces, Labor and Capital. Together they form a prime mover; separately they are impotent. Labor, however, has one advantage in that it is the capital of every man who is able to work, and should at all times be readily convertible into the necessaries of life for its pos

sessor.

But it is a lamentable fact that in all civilized nations there is at the present time an inability on the part of labor to effect this conversion, and the tendency

is undoubtedly towards a still greater stringency in the condition. It is manifestly impossible to compel capital to employ labor where the natural demand for such labor is non-existent; what then can be done to enable the laborer to exist, supposing him willing to dispose of his labor but unable to find a purchaser? The irrigationist contends that the necessities of the laborer do in themselves constitute a natural demand which will tax all of his energies to meet, and proposes that he be given the opportunity to satisfy this demand directly, without the competition attendant upon a congested labor market or the evils arising from the fluctuation in values induced by empirical and unstable national legislation.

But labor to be thus utilized must certainly have within its reach such raw material as will absorb it profitably. And it is clear that the ultimate worth of such lies in its capacity to increase in value according to the amount of labor employed upon it. If, in addition, such raw material is capable of not only a cumulative but a recurrent increment, its ultimate worth is incalculable, inasmuch as such cumulative and recurrent properties are practically infinite.

It is in this light that the irrigationist regards the land. As raw material he maintains that, under irrigation, it is capable of making a remunerative return in direct proportion to the amount of labor bestowed upon it. For since the extent of any man's actual necessities depends

not in the least upon the cost of satisfying them, any return which is sufficient to provide these is remunerative, and unless a rise or fall in prices could govern the amount produced from a given area of land by a given amount of labor (which proposition is absurd), it is clear that this return will be both stable and reliable, and thus exactly meet the demand which it is required to satisfy.

That such a result is possible is demonstrated by the facts. The product from an acre of irrigated land under any crop has not yet been even approximately determined, nor does it appear capable of such determination. It is, therefore, a legitimate assumption that while the irrigationist is perfectly safe in his estimate as to the population which may derive sup port from a given area under conditions favorable to intensive cultivation, it is altogether out of the question for objectors to urge either that the limit of production will soon be reached, or that the available land will be exhausted.

But supposing any such objection were well founded, which it evidently is not, it simply amounts to the proposition that unless our unoccupied lands will absorb the whole of our unemployed labor it is useless to utilize them in the absorption of any part thereof; a position so nearly approaching the ridiculous as to demand no consideration.

Presuming, however, it be conceded possible to fix on the one hand the limit of production, or on the other the extent of cultivable land, it will be at once seen that even this by no means determines the amount of labor provided with employment. The development of the mining districts of the West depends almost entirely upon the ease with which sustenance may be obtained for the labor employed therein. If 100 acres of irrigated land in the neighborhood of such of a district will produce a surplus equal to the support of five men, those five will assuredly set to work upon unoccupied land (other than agricultural) which can now afford no return whatever. And so widespread are these effects that wherever such surplus can be transported at any reasonable cost they are found to operate; without the irrigated fields of Colorado one half at least of her mines would be idle, and all her dependent industries suffer in proportion.

The State of Wyoming today, with her river sands full of gold, her hills rich with mineral, her subterranean shales saturated with oil, waits for what? The intensive cultivation of those fertile acres which will afford not only support to those who till them, but from their surplus maintain the army of workers who shall render these treasures available to the uses of mankind.

Hence it follows that while intensive cultivation means enormously increased returns from the land (and the aim of the irrigation movement is to secure not only larger yields per acre but also extended area under crop), it is by no means a consequence that such a result implies over-production or even any increased competition in the markets; for the bulk of the labor which would derive its direct sustenance from the soil is just that which now is unable to enter the market as a purchaser, while the surplus, as we have seen, would go to supply the demand created for it by the opening of fields for industry which are now non-existent.

If it be true that the real advances in civilization have have always been made through its industries, it would therefore appear that the irrigationist will be largely concerned in the transformation which our social life is now undergoing. The possibilities of production from a very small area of land surely point to the massing of population, not in overgrown. cities, but in colonies of small holdings, in which all the advantages of urban life may be enjoyed, and many of its evils eliminated. Unless there be any disadvantage to mankind in the exercise of the traits common to humanity which call for social intercourse and intellectual advancement, this tendency cannot be deprecated; the irrigation movement is the outcome of an irresistible demand for the means to meet higher ideas, and its success will be in proportion to its capacity for their satisfaction.

If it be borne in mind that legislation under a popular form of government can never be in advance of social requirements, but must depend upon them for its inception, the necessity for a just comprehension of the broader side of the irrigation movement will be readily conceded. That much of our existing legislation is entirely inadequate to our present social needs admits of no doubt, and it is here that the