Sacramento daily record-union., 1881-02-14
DEFERRED DEBATES.
speech of senator E. A. Davis.

remarks upon the pending bill. lt seemed 10 III )
that ALI had been said in opposition to 1t that COZ ID
yveIi he said and that it would be talking aga nst
time If should attempt TO say anything IN OF posi-
tion to it. as convinced 1t IS TO pass TINS o0dy
But after considering the matter 1t seems 10 DE that
IT is nv duty TO answer some remarks an asser-
tions which have been made upon this fio Jr-not a
duty that owe so much to myself as TO the people
whom / represent directly. That, MI. President,
is my only apology for taking up any OF the
time of this Senate this morning.
will say here that propose TO oc :upy the atten-
tion OF the Senate only for few me ments.
II is needless for to say that the people that
Immediately represent are inter -ted in the defeat
of this bill That people are now suffering people.
For wears they have been 81 Iffering people. For
wears they have been bearing burdens which did not
belong to them alone, but nch should have rested
upon the shoulders of the state. For years all the
profits OF the business OF chat people nave Deen de-
voted to protection; not only in protecting them
selves but as we claim, in protecting the property
of the people of this State. Now, then, make the
assertion that this question is not local questoo,
but that it is broader than mere locality that II Is
as broad as the commonwealth itself; that upon the
solution OF this question depends. as We oeneVe NOT
only the prosperity of our own section, out tue
prosperity OF the whole State. Now, SIR, II mas
been at empted upon the part of some to make TINS
question political question nave been surprlseu,
Mr.. President, at the attitude oT certain senators
upon this foor-Of those members OF the Legislature
of this State-n their attempt to make TINS IN any
sense political question; in their attempt to nrlng
il within the domain oil partisan polltlCS.
Now | want to ask this Senate in all candor,
can the element OF partisan polltlcS enter
into question Of this kind IL 1t can,
then there Is no such thing as craftsmanship Who
were in favor OF this bill? Who were IN favor one
year ago of the Act known a the ieorls law was
il then put forth as partisan measure! lhIee
years ago when this question engaged the attention
Of the Legislature OF this State, was 1t partisan
question then? Certainly not. But near weak
kneed Republicans, men who are more interested,
it seems to me- IN their own lttle sectlon Gnall III
80 tl,a unnla
bill be not repealed if the present measure under
discussion do not pass it will be the death knell OF
the Republican party in the next election 1here Is
no foundation for it,
Mr. President for one am ashamed of any such
opposition as that. | am ashamed because there IS
nothing in it. There is no foundation for 1t There
is no truth in it. because it IS matter whlch inter
ests the people Of all parties The people OF all par
ties are in favor of the present debris law. The
people representing both political parties are IN Ia
vor of the repeal OF that law. NOW, then, what Is
the history of this bill so far as 1t relates TO potics
Why we find that the plan was conceived Dy a DEM
ocratic administration and the initiatory steps to
carry it out were taken by Democratic admlnlstra-
ton The movement set on foot for the lnvestlga-
tion OF this gr at quest on was lnaugurated oy a
Democratic administration, and for that we say tnat
they deserve credit. They appropriated the sum OF
SlO9 600 for this purpose They created new oflce
in this State-the office of State Engineer. That
office was filed by the appointment OF gentleman
worthy to fill il in every respect, and he was DEM
ocrat and he still holds that most important trust.
Now then if it be urged that there is partisan
politics in this measure certainly its parentage be-
longs with the Democratic party But, SIR we scorn
the charge that there is any politcsint Wesay that
there is none in il, aud that the responsibility or
credit whatever it may be, rests not upon either
the Democratic or the Republican party. Now,
then who we're the promoters OF this sch me a
wear ago? 1t was not a Republican measure-it was
not a Democratic measure because 1t was partlcl-
pated in on both sides by of all shades OF poti-
cal opinion upon this floor Republicans and DEM
ccrats alike supported it. Republicans and bem-
ocrats alike opposed it, and | repeat that am
ashamed of those who have attempted, either in
seriousness or excuse for their votes, to bring
this question within the dominion OF partisan poll
tics.
Now sir one year ago the bill known as the drain
age Act was after discussion, after due deberaton,
duly passed. 1t either a good bill then, or 1t
was bad bill whatever its character 1t received
majority OF the votes of this body and of the other
branch of the Legislature and became law. Now
it was considered one year ago good bill "A neces-
sary bill Why is it not to-day good as 1t was one
wear ago? For myself, | cannot see that the bill
has Deprecated in value in a year. For myself l
cannot see why those who supported that bill one
wear ago cannot support it to-day. have listened
tentively during the progress OF the debates that
might ascertain, if possible why those men who
voted for that bill year ago are now opposing
IL and in favor of this repeal But IN all the dls Gus
sion which we have had from those gentlemen, |
do not find that they give aty reasons which
appeal to my Judgment reasons for the change IN
the position they then occupied. Now the only
question 1t to me, that ought to be discussed
at this time is to the necessity OF the law which
was passed one year ago, and following that we
proDsrly drift into discussion as TO whether the
nlans which have been conceived and which have
been attempted to be carried into effect under tnat
law have been made successful. II that law was a
necessity, and if the remedies proposed by 1t, upon
a fair test promise good results, then l say that
there is II, reason why this law should be repealed.
Now it NAV be said that l am from a localit- which
is directly interested i'll this propoSlton-more dl-
rectly interested than any ether section OF the State
that am biased in this matter, and that cannot
take broad view of the question. 1t is to be eX-
pected Of course, that the people OF fuba and SUIT
ter counties are in favor of the retention Of this law
1t has been asserted upon this floor that we are the
parties to be benefited at the expense OF those por
tious OF this State that are not to he benefited.
Now then is that truef Ii 1t be true, then per
haps there is excuse Tor the action OF the friends
of this repeal BILL If it be not true then the posi-
tion that they take with reference to this bill seems
to me to be entirely ildeensble. Now, then, the
people of Yuba and Sutter counties contend that
this is a necessary law and that its scope is beyond
the limits of the counties which represent; and it
is not alone the people of that section of country
that make that claim. We say, and We believe, that
il is the voice of majority OF the intelligent peo-
ME of this State who know anything about this
question that its importance is not local. but that
II is as broad as the State itself. Now sir if some
thing be done to remedy the evils which are at
tempted TO be met by the debris law, what viii be
the effect upon the State itselff Ii Is not as has
heen said upon this floor, that certain lands
in Yuba and Sutter and Sacramento counties,
ordering upon the Feather, Yuba and
Sacramento rivers, VIII be submerged and
ruined it is not alone the destruction OF private
nroperty but the salvation of the navigable
OF this State depends upon the solution OF this ques
tion We say tnat the salvation OF tins great artery
of commerce. the Sacramento river itself, depends
I1Don the solution of this question. But gentle men
unon the other side do not seem to think such is
the case 1t is not my assertion. 1t is not the
sertion of the people that Immediately represent
Int it is the assertion of men whom we have called
to our assistance-men whose judgment is certain
and therefore ought 10 be final upon question of
this kind /; men whose Judgment, say, ought to
control that Of the Legislature in the consideration
of this question. Now who is 1t that gives us in
formation of this KIND? 1t is the very that the
people Of this State have employed to investigate
the question, and the only men who were really
competent TO investigate 1t AUD base an intelligent
Judgment upon it. Why did the State three years
ago create the office OF State Engineerf Why did
the State bring into its counsel such men as Captain
Eads and Mendell of the United States Engineering
Department and others? Simply because the Leg
isature of this State at that time had the lntelii-
ence to know and to assert that they were not COM
petent to deal with the question that they required
the experience and the skill OF science to determine
this matter and for these reasons these men were
endowed by the state. 1t was expected then that
the Judgment Of these men would have some weight
with the people of this State, and the Legislature
then would not take any final action until this mat
ter had been thoroughly and properly investigated
bv the only men who were competent to do it.
Now, that vas the course of wisdom That infor-
nation has been obtained. One year ago the results
of this investigation laid before this body, and,
acting upon the Recommendation OF these men, this
Legislature passed an Act known as the debris law.
Now then what other course could this body have
taken in the matter? Senators could not fall back
upon themselves and say, We know more about
this than anybody else, Notwithstanding we have
expended 100000 of the money OF this State for
information" Senators then could not sit back in
their easv chairs and say, we know more about
this question than the State Engineers, and the
other engineers who have been called into c0nsulta
ton But the Senate, the Legislature, took the
common sense standpoint and said: "We have
sought this information from those who are
able to give it. We have asked for their advice for
the purpose OF enabling to act intelligenty. We
have got their advice. We have received their rec
concentrations, and we will carry them into effect,
bscause it is the only thing that We can do" And
so they passed the bill known as the drainage Act.
Now. what has the Legislature attempted to do at
this session? The advice which We have received
from the source from which we sought it has not
been changed at ALL All of the work of reclsma-
tion which has been carried on has been carried
on under the authority created by the law,
headed and devised by the very men upon
whom we relied for advice and information.
Their report to this body is, that the plans which
n rh hav art