Mr. TONGUE. I have no objection to the amendment the gentleman proposes.
Mr. SHAFROTH. I have no objection to the bill if that is done.
I have no doubt this is a meritorious bill if these amendments are included. I think we ought to have
considerable to say as to what shall be done with these lands.
Mr. TONGUE. I have no objection to the amendments proposed by the gentleman.
Mr. BARTLETT. The gentleman from Colorado stated a while ago that the amendment in reference to mining was in the bill.
Mr. SHAFROTH. It was in the bill one year, I know, but I did not remember whether it was in the bill introduced in this Congress or not.
Mr. MCRAE. I suggest to the gentleman that he permit this bill to go over until Monday. It is unusual and unprecendented, in my opinion, to open national parks to free mining. That carries with it the right to utilize any and all of the public timber in the park in the operation of mines, and you may defeat the very purpose of the park if you allow that to be done. I do not want to object to consideration of the bill, but I hope the matter will go over until that feature of it can be considered. I am opposed to this amendment, and will also ask some other amendments.
Mr. TONGUE. I will say to the gentleman from Arkansas that I am so well satisfied that there is no mining there that I regard any provision on that subject as of no importance one way or the other, and in order to avoid objection to the bill, I am perfectly willing to submit to the amendment.
Mr. MCRAE. The creation of a national park is a very different thing from the making of a public reserve, and we should see to it that the parks are established for public and not private purposes. To set these public lands aside as a national park, and then to allow miners to go into and work it freely and at pleasure may result in dedicating it to mining, if there is mineral there. If there is mineral in the land, it ought not be a park. The two are inconsistent.
Mr. SHAFROTH. Suppose it were discovered that there were some valuable mines on this land, that it was infinitely more valuable for mining than for any other purpose?
Mr. MCRAE. If there is a probability of that, then I say there ought not to be any park created. The idea of a national park and a mining camp are inconsistent with each other.
Mr. SHAFROTH. You can not determine that at this time, nor possibly for ten or twenty years, whether there is to be any mining done there.
Mr. MCRAE. Then if you can not determine that, you ought not to undertake at this time to make a park of the lands in question. Declare it a reservation and wait.
Mr. SHAFROTH. Then you exclude them from the privilege of having a public park there. I think they ought to have a public park there.
Mr. MCRAE. I am not certain but we are overdoing the business of establishing national parks; but I do not arise for the purpose of objecting to this one if the facts stated in the report are true and some other amendments are made as to the administration of the park.
Mr. MONDELL. I hope the gentleman will not insist on his amendment. There is not a national park in the country that is open to exploration under the mining laws. There is no reason why this national park should be so open.
The debate then moved to other topics, such as its prohibition against settlement, cost and expense to the federal government, and provisions for military policing. The course of this portion of the debate went as follows:
