Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-02-12

how they are affected, and we ask you TO DO SOME
thing because Of that.
Now. on the other side is the question, what
shall be done with the mines and these miners
You have heard from Senator Watson the amount
of capital that is invested in these mines You nave
heard from Senator George ard Senator Watson the
number of people that directly or indirectly de-
pending on these mines for their support, and am
informed by gentleman member OF the AS
semby-that the figures stated by Senators George
and Watson under the estimate instead OF over
it that the number of men directly or indirectly IN
the county of Nevada alone who are depending upon
the mines for their living does exceed one-haiI OF
the entire voting population of that county. The
voting population is 1920. He states that he
has made that careful study, and he Is satished
that he is correct And the county of Suffer Is in
terested in this question. Ask Chandler
as to the condition Of affairs in his county In the
cour ty of Yuba every single individual is interested
in this question. The city of Sacramento, with her
% 600 inhabitants is interested in this question
and are all depending upon the action OF TINS
Legislature ia reference to whether or not we can
maintain city aid protect ourselves. The capt.
tai invested by the miners assumes gigantic proper
tons. The capital invested by other people is SIM
ply incalcuable while the market which these
miners hold out to the people Of this State is also
of 81 antic proportions. Hence in dealing with this
debris Act you have the untold millions OF the
miners, with their immense capital to consider as
factor, as well as the unbounded possibilities of
wealth and Improvements Of the farmers and the
fertility of the great Sacramento valley to consider
Let call the attention of the Senators
to the remark made by Senator George,
which expresses the whole subject from miners
standpoint, viz: "The miners need no protection at
your hands," The miners can take care of them
selves They do not ask you to legi5ate for or pro-
tect them. They do not ask you to help them.
They satisfied with things as they are or as they
will be if the Debris Act is repealed. They do not
want any legislation They are satisfied with the
decisions that rendered in Courts of last re-
sort. They ask no am ndment to the law, cor pas
sage OF new laws They satisfied with the law as
it stood prior to the debris bill, or with the debris
bill itself. They ask legislation at your hands.
They are content like JEFF Davis, to be let alone.
They do not ask anything. They do not
need anything at your hands The Supreme
Court OF this State has decided in their favor
upon every case presented to it, and
undoubtDgly will keep Oh so deciding. They hold
their land by a parchment issued under the broad
seal of the United states, and our efforts would be
futile in taking it away from them. They need
nothing trey ask nothing, and in considering this
question, let me suggest to Senators that II they
repeal this debris Act, they are simply doing just
exactly what the hydraulic miners want, If they
wart anything and were a hydraulic miner, were
interested in a hydraulic mine-and presume
am like the balance of the Senators here, if could
own two or three hundred thousand dollars worth
of stock in them would like to do it-were inter
ested in a hydraulic mine, / should favor the
repeal of the debris bill and it would not
surprise me, Mr.. President, if | found
that some Of the gentlemen-not in this body OF
.course-that some OF the gentlemen VINO are favor
T
somehow other in hydraulic mining, and that the
repeal of this debris Act is just exactly what they
want for it reduces the ia es upon their business
and permits them to continue as before They SIM
ply ask to be let alone. Leave the law as it was
prior to the passage of the debris bill, and they are
satisfied repeal the debris Act and they are salts
fed keep the debris Act on the statute books and
they are satisfied and suppose they are disaatis-
fed only because they obliged under the debris
Act to be taxed three times So, If you repeal the
debris Act, you gentlemen who say you are opposed
to hydraulic mining do not, in my Judgment, prove
the truth OF your words by your acts. for you VIII
then be doing exactly what the hydraulic miners de-
sire. You gentlemen should Introduce bishere and
then vote for them. You gentlemen who say you
are opposed TO hydraulic mining and want TO stop
it, you are acting just exactly as the hydraulic
miners wish you to act, If you vote for the repeal
OF the debris Act. You should unite with us and
keep the debris Act on the statute books, or else
give us something BETTER forever hold your peace
and cease your claim of being friendly to farmers
and opposed to hydraulic mining. Now believe,
Mr.. President, that can safely say that all OF the
State, that every member OF this Senate, agrees
with me upon the two propositions that have just
offered. One is to the necessity If some action
as to the absolute necessity OF some action-belng
taken, and, second, as to the greatness and
va tuess of the interests involved in the
action that shall be taken. We should take such
action representatives OF California VIII relieve
necessities on the one hand while doing no injury
on the other; not because our objections lead us
that way; not because our preJudices lead us
that way not because we follow the law of false
economy, nor because are governed by sectional
feeling for none of these rise to the dignity of
son or sense. 1t is duty to take such action as
will best advance the interests OF this great and
growing State of vii best settle this ques
ton, not for to-day, but for all time to come; not
for this present generation but for the future that
is opening its doors wide and presenting such
beautiful picture for those that love this State of
California settle it in such will reflect
credit upon all of and rebound TO the prosperity
and the welfare of this golden State that we love
/ fnslA Of n ard n
whether we do or do not like the that in
power oTthis Board Of Directors. In case we think
Mr.. Parks does not do his duty (and think he Is
not such bad maa as the Senator from Monterey
would have us believe; and SO far as that is CON
cerned, have nothing to say in defense of William
II. Parks | am willing that William II. Parks
should be put into the scale with William j. Hill at
any time i'll reference to his actions and conduct
upon this any other propOsition(. And hope
that the Senator from Colusa will not be influenced
| in his vote because he thinks that the money has
not been expended in proper places, but Will decide
the question upon the broad proposition:
Shall or shall not the State assist
| in this matterP and not because they
have built a levee on the east west side OF the
Sacramento river, not because they may or may not
have helped John Boggs or Hugh enn or NJ. Davis
| or Joseph Mcconnell, but decide upon the broad
question, Shall the State of California assist the
people of the Sacramento valley IN defending them
selves and their property agains the floods OF win
| ter and the detritus from the mountains u That,
it to me- is the only way there is to look at It,
Now the question is whether not the State should
help in this matter. have already called attention
to what it to me is the patriotic view OF the
| case is the national view; is the view by which
the people believe, of the nation have settled the
| question, to wit that internal improvements are
the roper basis of State and national legislation
| and State and national appropriations. | believe
that question to be settled beyond the possibility OF
| a doubt that the people Of this nation have decided
that it is correct and proper for the National Gov
eminent, for the State Government, to appropriate
money tor internal improvements. The Senator
| from Nevada, Mr. George read you from standard
works upon this question, showing that he
| had read the law and looked up the author
| tiles upon this question. The votes OF the
/ people have been given year alter year, and they
will he given year after year in the imable future
IN favor Of the proposition that the State and the
nation shall appropriate money for internal improve
meuts But we here in California are particularly
called upon to appropriate money for internal I'M
provements because this state has violated an ACT
OF Congress in its spirit, II not its letter, by taxing
some six or seven or eight hundred thousand dollars
! away from this purposa-t3 wit internal improve
mcnts-and appropriated it to other purposes. The
United States of America gave California 100000
acres of land, the proceeds Of which was TO be APP
ptopriated Tor national improvements. The Sttte
has sold that GOO acres Of land aud diverted the
money to other purposes, so that this state IN
equity in law, in justice, IS bound to refund that
rnoney-to take the money which it has diverted
from the purpose for which it was designed, divert
ed from the purpose that mentioned in the Act
Of Congress giving California her 100000 acres of
land for internal Improvement. may be incorrect
in my statement Of the amount realized rom that
but believe thatit amounts to some $780, 600.
Mr. Davis-SS03 GOO.
Mr. Johnson-It amounts to 1903, 600, then, T. at
the State OF California has diverted from the pur-
pose or which Congress gave it, to wit, internal I'M
proyemeuts, and applied it to other purposes.
grant you that it has been applied to wise and
benefcent purpose to wit, to the school fund: but
that s not the purpose Tor which Congress designed
the gift It was given-those 100000 acres Of land
were given 90 California for internal improvements,
SOLELY so that we are bound in law, ltseems to me,
and know, and you all must agree with me- that
we are bound in equitY and we 7reb0und in decency,
to either return this sum o. 1900 the proper
fund or devote at least an equal amount to internal
improvements, such are contemplated by the
debris Act and which have beer rendered 50 ueces-
sary BIZ the action OF the State itself The state Of
California has permitted hydraulic mining. The
state at any time could have passed statute, IN
the language of the amendments that I Of
fered to-day, which would and could have pre-.
vented hydraulic mining in this state unless
the hydraulic miner took care of the
tailings of his own mine. The State
has not passed such a law. Tie State has permitted
hydraulic mining to go on and to continue. The
farmers for years have been crying for relief AS
was well said by Senator Watson, this question has
been before the Legislature for the last years at