The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1873-01-23
For the anderson Mtelligencer.

MH. EDITOR: Laying it down as another
axiom in political economy, that all govern
ments possess the right to take private property
for public uses, by making reasonable compen-
sation, shall now proceed TO elucidate solu-
ton of the mill dam question, which consider
just 70 all the parties concerned. There is d
law in force now called the Ditching Law of
1856, which provides for the drainage of inland
swamps. Upon petition to the Circuit Court
from two-thirds of the land owners living on
any inland stream, having swamp lands ada
cent thereto, commission shall be appointed
to lay out said canal or ditch, and by this act
they have the right to pass through any mans
land, and remove distractions, dan1s, &C., so
that the drainage of said swamp lands may be
certainly secured. 1t also provides that if any
man is damaged by the operation of this law,
he shall be compensated pari passu, if
benefited he must pay for the benefit. This
is a iast and wise law, but fails to meet the ex-
igencies of the cases enumerated, because, un-
der It's provisions, it requires two-thirds of the
land owners residing on said stream, from its
TnOulu 10 ltS uedu. IuiS WOuiu UC PioStlId-
ble But an amendment to said law might be
made, which would meet every case, by pro-
viding that if the obstruction consists of mill
dam, and two-thirds of the land owners living
above said dam, whose lands have been or are
likely to become jured by reason of said OBJ
strucsion, shall petition the Circuit Court, set
ting Sorth the facts and more especially where
said condition of things has generated sickness,
that thereupon a commission of dsinterested
men shall be appointed, who shall view the
premises, and order the removal of the dam, if
necessary to the drainage of the swamp lands
above, and assess the damages which the owner
of the property may sustain by reason of the
removal of said dam. The amount of damages
assessed shall be Immediately paid out of any
funds in the public treasury, upon the removal
of the dam. Further, it shall be the duty of
the commission to assess upon each land owner
his pro rata share Of said amount, according to
the number of acres and the amount of injury
sustained or likely to be sustained, by reason
of said obstruction Five years or more shall
be allowed the land owners to reimburse the
public treasury, by paying the interest on the
whole amount, annually or semi-annually-
said assessment to operate as O. tax lien upon
Mr.. Editor, that the State acts as guardian of
the rights and interests of her citizens in this
matter, and simply loans her credit for few
years to secure great public good, on the very
best of security. The owner of the property
cannot complain, because be is compensated
for any damage he may sustain. The public
convenience will not be jeopardized, because
steau power will very soon supercede water
powes, if the public necessities require it.
Furthermore, if the Legislature of the State
is not yet prepared to take such decided step
in be;ialf of the great agricultural interests of
the State, she will at least be asked to provide
that upon petition of the land owners rs afore-
said, The owners of dams shall be required to
put in food gates in said dams, and hoist them
every Saturday evening and keep them open
till Monday morning, 80 that the sand may
flow eff gradually from the bitches above. In
many cases, it is thought, this would be sui.
fcien; remedy for the evil complained OF. 1t
is at Least worthy of trial, and if such sim
ple and cheap remedy will meet the exigency
surely no man could be found who would raise
his Voice against it. Something ought to be
done, and whenever the public attention is
properly aroused to the enormity of the evil,
remedy will be quickly applied. In one single
case which comes under my own observation, at
an average of thirty bushels of corn to the acre,
which is a low estimate for well drained bot
tom land, there is annually lost to the produc-
tive resources of the country not less than from
twelve to fifteen thousand bushels of grain
This amount would be sufficient to bread for
one year from $50 to 200 families, averaging
six to family. Have the public no concern
in thi, startling fact2 A few years ago, when
the proposed stock or fence law was mooted,
YOU would find but few to favor it. So will it
be with the reform proposed above. The ad-
vance in public sentiment towards any needed
reform, in agriculture as in other departments,
is generally slow but sure. So mote it be:
REFORM