Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1878-08-07
State Board of Health and Mill
Dams.

The following article from the Mad
ison Journal, relative to matter which
has been the subject of considerable
controversy in this section, will un-
doubtedly be perused with interest by
many of our readers: 1872.
The State Board of Health is no doubt
good thing. There cannot be too much
care taken that the health of the COM
munity is protected with all the safe
guards possible. When a cause for dis
ease is discovered, the fact should be
made public, and the proper authorities
should see that the cause is removed. 1t
had not occurred to US, however, that au-
thority was given to this board to assume
the prerogatives of high court, and to
remove mill dams at will. From recent
action in regard to very old dam in
Jefferson county, it would seem that some
of the members OF the State Board of
Health hold to different view of their
duties. A dam at Milford, constructed
nearly forty years ago, is among the
subjects of investigation by this Board of
Health. 1t was created by legislative
authority, and has afforded mil-power
that has been of vast benefit to the peo-
pie for large circle around it. 1t should
be respected for its age if nothing else.
1t was constructed before the lands in the
marshes above it were entered. Latterly
it has occurred to some persons who have
become owners OF some of the marsh
lands, that it could be drained to better
advantage if this Milford dam were re-
Il fr
that the Messrs. Greene, who own the
dam, and who rank among the best cti-
zens of the county, had acquired rights
there, long before these persons making
complaints were residents of the State.
These old rights are of no consequence in
their estimation. They have now called
the State Board C Health to their aid,
and from some circumstances, we should
Judge that that Board thinks it is possess
ed of the full powers of high court at
at law. For instance, among the ques-
tons propounded by the Secretary of the
Board to Mr. Greene and son, owners of
the dam, for answer, are the following
81 am directed to ask you for inforlna-
ton in reference to the time and circum-
stances under which this dam was orig-
nally built, the authority for its original
construction, and by which it has been
subsequently raised, the total height of
the present dam, the amount of land
overtlowed, and the extent to which pri-
vate rights have been affected by such
overflow"
Are these questions in accordance with
the true prerogatives Of the Board of
Health? Is it essential to know how
high the dam iso Or even how old it is !?
This Board may we'll ask whether the
overflow causes sickness; and if So re-
port such fact to the proper authority,
that the evils may be removed: but we
are informed that physicians who have
practlced in that, country for thirty years
do not find that sickness prevails in
that region to greater extent
than in other parts Of the coun-
try, where no dam or overflow exists;
nor is it understood there is any consid-
cradle overflow in consequence of this
dam. The dam is about Al feet high,
and most of the time only confines the
water above, to its natural channel; and
in high water the land below the dam is
overlooked to nearly the same extent
that exists above it. We trust the Board
of Health will keep its investigation
within its legitimate sphere, and not per-
NIT itself to become the mere tool of
selfish persons, who desire to disturb
their. neighbors in their long acqu ire
just rights.