Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-08-31
THE ANTI-DEBRIs ASSOCIATION ARD
tbs "REcoRD-UNIoN."

The course of the RECORD UNION in regard
to the debris question has been guided by
far broader and more enlightened view OF
the interests of the State than has ever
been displayed by the Association which
condemns it. We have labored from the
beginning to secure the most advantageous
and permanently satisfactory adjustment OF
the difficulty between the miners and the
farmers. We have maintained throughout
the discussion of the subject the absolute
necessity of stopping hydraulic mining if it
could not be carried on without inficting
injury upon the valley lands. But since
this journal is published and circulates
through the whole State, and not merely
in one locality, it is bound to seek the best
good OF all, and neither can nor will pin
itself down to the narrow and superficial
views evolved from local prejudices. 1t
has recognized the fact that the mining
interest was an important one that large
capital was invested in it; that if posi-
bic it was therefore eminently advisable
that it should be preserved and not de.
stroyed that the best interests of the
whole State demanded the adoption of
whatever measures of relief and protec-
ton promised safety to the farmers with
out running the miners. And because this
policy was the only one which could be
justified completely, we have advocated
it. We have believed it to be possible
to do justice to the miners without i'm
periling the agricultural interest We
still believe this to be possible, and we
assert that neither the Anti Debris Asso-
citation nor any of the advocates of It's
positions has hitherto succeeded in adj.
vancing single iota OF evidence against
the soundness of our views.
We supported the Drainage Act because
we were convinced that it would afford the
required protection and relief. Nothing
has thus far occurred to warrant US in
withdrawing our confidence from the en-
cheering plans therein set forth. If the
scheme has been virtually abandoned it
has been because men who had property at
stake were too impatient either to await
the results of the proposed relief measures,
or to take the trouble necessary to a
comprehension of the methods sought to
be employed for their protection. They
rushed into litigation instead, and now
they are making desperate efforts to per-
suade themselves that litigation is capable
of effecting all they desire, though it is i'm
possible for any intelligent man to examine
the situation without perceiving clearly
that no decision of the Courts can possibly
solve the problem. The RECORD. UNION
has pointed out this disagreeable fact. It
has made it apparent to the meanest COM
prehension that in rejecting the Drainage
Act the Anti-Debris agitators deprived
themselves of the only machinery by
which the debris already in the rivers
could be held back Those who are capa-
bic of declaring that the positions we have
taken in this regard are inimical to their
interests, are scarcely capable of under
standing what those interests really are.
They have announced their determine
ton to trust everything to the Courts.
We have showed them that the Courts do
not possess the power to protect them
against the debris which has already left
the mines No one has ventured to deny
the correctness of this statement, and
nobody will. The difference between the
RECoRD-UNIoN and the advocates of It'll
CATION alone is plain enough. This jour
nal seeks to protect the farmers completely.
The advocates of litigation propose to leave
them without any protection against the
debris now in the streams. Should the
coming winter bring heavy rainfall, no
amount of litigation will prevent the
washing down of an enormous quantity of
debris from the mountains. No fulmina-
tions OF the Anti-Debris Association can
avert the descent of this matter. No
legal processes can hold it suspended in
the upper courses OF the rivers. 1t is,
therefore, a very practical and vital ques-
ton what shall be done about this. If we
had really been inimical to the interests
of the farmers we should have simply held
our tongues about this consideration, and
left them to discover by bitter experience
that they had made a mistake in suppos.
ing that the Courts alone could save them.
But because the interests of the farmers
are our interests we have done our best to
convince them that they were mourning a
great danger by ignoring the debris already
in the rivers, and by pointing out that
even if they gained all their suits they
would still have to encounter this danger.
If it had been demonstrated by full
and thorough experiment that the engineer
ing measures proposed were futile, and
that there remained no other recourse than
20 demand the immediate stoppage Of
hydraulic mining, we should have given
our heartiest support to that policy, though
even then we should have been compelled
to insist upon the necessity of dealing with
the debris already in the rivers. But nc
such failure has been demonstrated. The
engineering plans have not received any
thing like a fair trial. They have been
condemned iguorantly and in the absence
of any proof of their insufiiciency. And
in rejecting them the advocates Of litiga-
ton have left hole in their system OF
defense which, as we have repeatedly
shown, threatens the whole scheme with
disaster. All these statements are true,
and susceptible of complete proof, and
therefore when the Anti Debris Association
accuses the RECORD UNION, because it has
held these positions, of pursuing course
inimical to the interests of the farmers, and
dangerous to the State, it utters false
hood for which there is no excuse, and it
libels journal which has served the public
faithfully in this matter from the beginning
until now. Such interpretations and
libelous assertions will not advance the
purposes of the Association, nor injure the
RECORD UNION. Time will vindcate every
position we have taken in the debris con-