The Letters of Franklin K. Lane, Personal and Political
is high and his determination is strong. We will do better, and
increasingly better, as time goes on, I believe. With warm
regards, as always sincerely yours,
FRANKLIN K. LANE
Lane was a member of the Executive Council of the Red Cross, with
whom his wife was working during the war. He characterized its
symbol as,--"The one flag which binds all nations is that which
speaks of suffering and healing, losses and hopes, a past of
courage and a future of peace--the flag of the Red Cross."
To John McNaught
Washington, March 16, 1918
MY DEAR JOHN,--It is only now after a month's delay, that I have
an opportunity even to acknowledge your letter of the 17th of
February.
... The whole war situation seems to be so big that it overwhelms
the minds of men. ... But we are grinding on and going surely in
the right way. Not everything has been done that could be done,
but we are getting our step. This thing will be longer than we
thought. But as the President says, it is our job--our job is cut
out for us, and we are going to see it through. Russia has taught
us what happens to a nation that is not self-respecting. We are
hard at work, every one of us, big and little. The nation never
was as united, and while we do not realize just what war is, yet
we will realize it more from day to day and harder will our fibre
grow.
My boy is in France. He hopes to fly an aeroplane over a German
submarine base, and drop a ton of dynamite on it and put it out of
business.
How the world has changed since we dreamed together in the Cosmos
Club! How Paris has changed since we wandered through its
boulevards together! The day of the common man is at hand. Our
danger will be in going too fast, and by going too fast do
injustice to him. But your kind of socialism and mine is to have
its fling.
I was much pleased to meet your wife, very much indeed, and I hope
we may see you here one of these days. With my affectionate
regards, sincerely yours,
FRANKLIN K. LANE
On May 31, 1918, Lane sent a long letter to President Wilson in
relation to his plan for providing farms, from the public domain,
for the returning soldiers. The letter is given at some length,
because this plan was so dear to Lane's heart, and was one upon
which he had put much earnest study. In addition to the phases of
the subject printed here, he gave, in his signed letter to
President Wilson, detailed consideration to several other aspects
of the matter; such as, a comparison of his plan with land-tenure
in Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia; the need for an
extension of the method whereby land can be "developed in large
areas, sub-divided into individual farms, then sold to actual bona
fide farmers on long-time payment basis"; and also the part Alaska
should be made to play in affording agricultural opportunity to
our returned soldiers.
To Hon. Woodrow Wilson The White House
Washington, May 31, 1918
MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT,--I believe the time has come when we should
give thought to the preparations of plans for providing
opportunity for our soldiers returning from the war. Because this
Department has handled similar problems I consider it my duty to
bring this matter to the attention of yourself and Congress. ...
To the great number of returning soldiers, land will offer the
great and fundamental opportunity. The experience of wars points
out the lesson that our service men, because of army life with its
openness and activity, will largely seek out-of-doors vocations
and occupations. This fact is accepted by the allied European
nations. That is why their programs and policies of re-locating
and readjustment emphasize the opportunities on the land for the
returning soldier. The question then is, "What land can be made
available for farm homes for our soldiers?"
We do not have the bountiful public domain of the sixties and
seventies. In a literal sense, for the use of it on a generous
scale for soldier farm homes as in the sixties, "the public domain
is gone." The official figures at the end of the fiscal year, June
30, 1917, show this: We have unappropriated land in the
continental United States to the amount of 230,657,755 acres. It
is safe to say that not one-half of this land will ever prove to
be cultivable in any sense. So we have no lands in any way
comparable to that in the public domain when Appomattox came--and
men turned westward with army rifle and "roll blanket," to begin
life anew.
While we do not have that matchless public domain of '65, we do
have millions of acres of undeveloped lands that can be made
available for our home-coming soldiers. We have arid lands in the
West, cut-over lands in the Northwest, Lake States, and South, and
also swamp lands in the Middle West and South, which can be made
available through the proper development. Much of this land can be
made suitable for farm homes if properly handled. But it will
require that each type of land be dealt with in its own particular
fashion. The arid land will require water; the cut-over land will
require clearing; and the swamp land must be drained. Without any
of these aids, they remain largely "No Man's Land." The solution
of these problems is no new thing. In the admirable achievement of
the Reclamation Service in reclamation and drainage we have
abundant proof of what can be done.
Looking toward the construction of additional projects, I am glad
to say that plans and investigations have been under way for some
time. A survey and study has been in the course of consummation by
the Reclamation Service on the Great Colorado Basin. That great
project, I believe, will appeal to the new spirit of America. It
would mean the conquest of an empire in the Southwest. It is
believed that more than three millions of acres of arid land could
be reclaimed by the completion of the Upper and Lower Colorado
Basin projects. ...
What amount of land, in its natural state unfit for farm homes,
can be made suitable for cultivation by drainage, only thorough
surveys and studies can develop. We know that authentic figures
show that more than fifteen million acres have been reclaimed for
profitable farming, most of which lies in the Mississippi River
Valley.
The amount of cut-over lands in the United States, of course, it
is impossible even in approximation to estimate. ... A rough
estimate of their number is about two hundred million acres--that
is of land suitable for agricultural development. Substantially
all this cut-over or logged-off land is in private ownership. The
failure of this land to be developed is largely due to inadequate
method of approach. Unless a new policy of development is worked
out in cooperation between the Federal Government, the States, and
the individual owners, a greater part of it will remain unsettled
and uncultivated. ...
Any plan for the development of land for the returned soldier,
will come face to face with the fact that a new policy will have
to meet the new conditions. The era of free or cheap land in the
United States has passed. We must meet the new conditions of
developing lands in advance--security must to a degree displace
speculation. ...
This is an immediate duty. It will be too late to plan for these
things when the war is over. Our thought now should be given to
the problem. And I therefore desire to bring to your mind the
wisdom of immediately supplying the Interior Department with a
sufficient fund with which to make the necessary surveys and
studies. We should know by the time the war ends, not merely how
much arid land can be irrigated, nor how much swamp land
reclaimed, nor where the grazing land is and how many cattle it
will support, nor how much cut-over land can be cleared, but we
should know with definiteness where it is practicable to begin new
irrigation projects, what the character of the land is, what the
nature of the improvements needed will be, and what the cost will
be. We should know also, not in a general way, but with
particularity, what definite areas of swamp land may be reclaimed,
how they can be drained, what the cost of the drainage will be,
what crops they will raise. We should have in mind specific areas
of grazing lands, with a knowledge of the cattle which are best
adapted to them, and the practicability of supporting a family
upon them. So, too, with our cut-over lands. We should know what
it would cost to pull or "blow-out" stumps and to put the lands
into condition for a farm home.
And all this should be done upon a definite planning basis. We
should think as carefully of each one of these projects as George
Washington thought of the planning of the City of Washington, We
should know what it will cost to buy these lands if they are in
private hands. In short, at the conclusion of the war the United
States should be able to say to its returned soldiers, "If you
wish to go upon a farm, here are a variety of farms of which you
may take your pick, which the Government has prepared against the
time of your returning." I do not mean by this to carry the
implication that we should do any other work now than the work of
planning. A very small sum of money put into the hands of men of
thought, experience, and vision, will give us a program which will
make us feel entirely confident that we are not to be submerged,
industrially or otherwise, by labor which we will not be able to
absorb, or that we would be in a condition where we would show a
lack of respect for those who return as heroes, but who will be
without means of immediate self-support.
A million or two dollars, if appropriated now, will put this work
well under way.
This plan does not contemplate anything like charity to the
soldier. He is not to be given a bounty. He is not to be made to
feel that he is a dependent. On the contrary, he is to continue,
in a sense, in the service of the Government. Instead of
destroying our enemies he is to develop our resources.
The work that is to be done, other than the planning, should be
done by the soldier himself. The dam or the irrigation project
should be built by him, the canals, the ditches, the breaking of
the land, and the building of the houses, should, under proper
direction, be his occupation. He should be allowed to make his own
home, cared for while he is doing it, and given an interest in the
land for which he can pay through a long period of years, perhaps
thirty or forty years. This same policy can be carried out as to
the other classes of lands. So that the soldier on his return
would have an opportunity to make a home for himself, to build a
home with money which we would advance and which he would repay,
and for the repayment we would have an abundant security. The
farms should not be turned over as the prairies were--unbroken,
unfenced, without accommodations for men and animals. There should
be prepared homes, all of which can be constructed by the men
themselves, and paid for by them, under a system of simple
devising by which modern methods of finance will be applied to
their needs.
As I have indicated, this is not a mere Utopian vision. It is,
with slight variations, a policy which other countries are
pursuing successfully. The plan is simple. I will undertake to
present to the Congress definite projects for the development of
this country through the use of the returned soldier, by which the
United States, lending its credit, may increase its resources and
its population and the happiness of its people, with a cost to
itself of no more than the few hundred thousand dollars that it
will take to study this problem through competent men. This work
should not be postponed. Cordially and faithfully yours,
FRANKLIN K. LANE
The bill, incorporating this plan, was rejected by a Congress