Title:
Letter from R[obert] U[nderwood] Johnson to John Muir, 1909 Mar 17.
Creator:
R[obert] U[nderwood] Johnson
Publisher:
University of the Pacific Library Holt-Atherton Special Collections. Please contact this institution directly to obtain copies
of the images or permission to publish or use them beyond educational purposes.
Contributor:
John Muir
Date:
1909 Mar 17
2008
Type:
Text
Format:
Image/jpeg2000
Identifier:
muir18_0315-md-1
Source:
Original letter dimensions: 28 x 21.5 cm.
Language:
eng
Coverage:
New York
Rights:
Copyright status unknown
Some letters written to John Muir may be protected by the U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). Transmission or reproduction
of materials protected by copyright beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners.
Responsibility for any use rests exclusively with the user.
Transcription:
COPY- New York, March 17, 1909. Dear Muir:- I have had no response to my request to know what you and your friends think
should be our next move. I propose that we should (1) Apply to Secretary Ballinger for a revocation of the grant, and if
that falls (I see the enemy is claiming Ballinger already) (2) Institute proceedings to enjoin the Secretary and the Supervisors
on the grounds that while Garfield had the power he bad not the right to nullify the act- (a) by destroying the valley it
was (in part) passed to pre-serve, and (b) by withdrawing this great portion of the park from free public use. These proceedings
I am told, could be begun in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals - a court of first instance - and an appeal could be
taken directly to the Supreme Court of the U. S. Unfortunately I have no money this year, but perhaps a public-spirited lawyer
of ability could be found who would take it up in the interest of the people. If we could get an opinion from an authority
that we have a good chance of winning, this could be used with Ballinger, who would certainly not like to be turned down by
the courts early in his Administration. A Review of the Hearings ought to convince him- (1) That Garfield admitted that he
had not considered other water supplies. (2) That Phelan and Manson admitted before the Senate Committee It is a matter of
money . (3) That if the Spring Valley be a grinding monopoly , the remedy is condemnation. The City has the unanimous support
of the legislature and if it needs more authority to condemn, it can get it. Note also that Warren Olney in one of his published
letters admitted that the Spring Valley is not a corruptionist. I see you are down in the Grand Canon with Burroughs, so
I send this to Mr. Colby to be given to you on your return. Please let me know the result of your consultation. May I gently
remind you that I wish you briefly to put on record for me your activity urging forest conservation in the 80s. I am gathering
material concerning The Pioneers of Conservation for a future article: Noble, Muir, Powell, Fernow, Bowers etc. etc. and the
Century. Somebody must do justice to the men ignored by the Roosevelt Administration. I've been too busy even to felicitate
you on our victory in the Congressional Committees. Kahn gave up the fight as lost. Send me all the comments of the S. F.
press, libels and all. If they were in New York, I'd sue the CALL for speaking of me as mendacious - and I'd do it in the
public interest. Faithfully yours, (Signed)