ILLUSTRATIONS. Page. Map of the United States, showing areas covered by geologic maps published prior to July 1, 1913. 310 Map of the United States, showing areas covered by topographic surveysMap showing location of coal fields, metalliferous ore deposits, and rescue cars and stations. 372 476 Plate I.-A, View of tuberculosis cottage; B, Floor plan of tuberculosis cottage 586 Map of Yellowstone National Park....... 712 Map of Yosemite National Park---- 750 Map of the Sequoia and General Grant National Parks (travel guide) –. 764 804 6. Navajo National Monument, Arizona (as amended by proclama- 874 7. Chaco Canyon National Monument, New Mexico‒‒‒‒‒ 875 876 877 10. Lewis and Clark Cavern National Monument, Montana. 879 880 881 882 883 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 891 23. Gila Cliff-Dwellings National Monument, New Mexico__ 892 893 894 895 896 28. Mount Olympus National Monument, Washington... 898 899 900 The Department of the Interior was established by the act of March 3, 1849 (9 Stat. L., 395). GENERAL LAND OFFICE. Organized as a bureau of the Treasury Department under act of April 25, 1812 (2 Stat. L., 716). First Commissioner, Edward Tiffin, of Ohio; appointed May 7, 1812. Became a bureau of the Interior Department when that Department was organized under the act of March 3, 1849 (9 Stat. L., 395). INDIAN OFFICE. Organized as a bureau of the War Department under act of July 9, 1832 (4 Stat. L., 564). First Commissioner, Elbert Herring, of New York; appointed July 10, 1832. Became a bureau of the Interior Department when that Department was organized. BUREAU OF PENSIONS. Organized as a bureau of the War Department under act of March 2, 1833 (4 Stat. L., 622). First Commissioner, James L. Edwards, of Virginia; appointed March 3, 1833. Became a bureau of the Interior Department when that Department was organized. PATENT OFFICE. Organized as a bureau of the State Department under act of March 4, 1836 (5 Stat. L., 117). First Commissioner, Henry S. Ellsworth, of Connecticut; appointed July 4, 1836. Became a bureau of the Interior Department when that Department was organized. BUREAU OF EDUCATION. Organized under act of March 2, 1867 (14 Stat. L., 434). Became a bureau of the Interior Department July 1, 1869, under act of July 20, 1868 (15 Stat. L., 106). First Commissioner, Henry Barnard, of Connecticut; appointed March 14, 1867. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. Organized as a bureau of the Interior Department under act of March 3, 1879 (20 Stat. L., 394). First Director, Clarence King, of New York; appointed April 14, 1879. RECLAMATION SERVICE. Organized under act of June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. L., 388), under the Director of Geological Survey, Charles D. Walcott. First Director, F. H. Newell, of Pennsylvania; appointed March 9, 1907. BUREAU OF MINES. Organized as a bureau of the Interior Department under the act of May 16, 1910 (36 Stat. L., 369). First director, Joseph A. Holmes, of North Carolina; appointed September 3, 1910. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. DECEMBER 10, 1913. SIR: There are many matters of home concern as to which it is my pleasure to report to you, but I would give prominence to that which appeals to me as of largest and most immediate moment-the fuller and freer use of our national resources. It is, of course, known to you that there exists a feeling in the West that its affairs and needs have not been given that consideration at the hands of the National Government which they merit. This feeling is not confined to speculators or exploiters. It is the sentiment of many who are without selfish motive and regard the matter wholly from the standpoint of national growth. They point to the conditions which obtain in Alaska as unparalleled among people of our aggressive and nation-building stock. So, too, they are unable to understand why ways have not been found by which the great bodies of coal and oil lands, of phosphate and potash lands, may be developed, and the waters of the mountains made available for the generation of power and the redemption of the desert. There is one very simple explanation for the existence of this feeling. We have adventured upon a new policy of administering our affairs and have not developed adequate machinery. We have called a halt on methods of spoliation which existed, to the great benefit of many, but we have failed to substitute methods, sane, healthful, and progressive, by which the normal enterprise of an ambitious people can make full use of their own resources. We abruptly closed opportunities to the monopolist, but did not open them to the developer. LAND POLICY. I have said that we had put into force a new land policy, which caused dismay and discontent. Let me explain what I mean by this. It was, in fact, but a new application of an old policy. Congress has always been most generous as to the disposition of the national lands. One can not read our land laws without being struck with the fixed determination which they show that it was wisest to be quit of our lands as quickly as possible. It might almost be said that the Government regarded its lands as a burden rather than an asset. We gave generously to our railroads and to the States. There was land for all, and it was the Government's glad function to distribute it and let those profit who could. There was no thought then of creating timber barons or cattle kings, or of coal monopoly. The sooner the land got into hands other than those of the Government the better. And this generous donor was not so petty as to discriminate between kinds of lands, the uses to which they could be put, or the purposes which those might have who got them. Land is land, save when it contains minerals; this was roughly the broad principle adopted. To classify was a task too difficult or not worth while. The lands would classify themselves when they arrived in individual ownership. And so the door was opened for monopoly and for fraud. If the Government did not appreciate the invaluable nature of its assets there were men who did. Great fortunes were laid in the vast holdings of what had but a short time since been the property of the people. There was danger that the many still to pour into the West would by necessity become the servitors of a fortunate and early few. On this discovery our indifference at once took flight. And so out of the abuse of the Nation's generosity there came a reaction against a policy that was so liberal as to be dangerous. The Nation wanted home makers, but found its lands drifting into the hands of corporations which were withdrawing them from the market, awaiting a time when lands would be more scarce; it gave opportunity for many competing coal operators and iron manufacturers, but found the sources of raw material centering into a few large holdings; it wished its lands to be cleared of forests to make way for farms, but it found hundreds of consecutive miles reserved from use by the fiat of those who appreciated their worth, and many more miles of watershed despoiled of its needed covering in places where homes were not possible. A reaction was inevitable. If lands were to be withdrawn from public service, why might not the Government do the withdrawing itself? The old philosophy that "land is land" was evidently unfitted to a country where land is sometimes timber and sometimes coal; indeed, where land may mean water-water for tens of thou |