Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-11-03
TIE PROPOSED COMPROMISE.

he thus unofhcially represented. He says
he thinks it safe to say as follows g The
miners will agree to construct at their
town expense stone dam in the Yuba at
"the mouth of Deer creek, such as is
recommended by Colonel Mendell. and
"to make the dam high enough and strong
'enough to satisfy the farmers. They are
willing to begin work on the dam imme-
"diateiy the compromise suggested is
tsmade. They will make such dam as
s'Mendell says is certain to stand, aud if
"need be would supplement it by brush
dams lower down the river. They would
"not ask as condition precedent that the
spending debris suits be Withdrawn, but
"would simply require that the suits re-
ernain in statu quo until the dam or dams
chad been built and approved by proper
! " Commission appointed for that purpose,
'twith the understanding that the suits
g would then be dismissed. do not think
"the miners would agree to stop work
"while the dams were building, but by
" beginning the construction of the stone
dam Immediately they would stop more
"debris, during say the first sixty days
thereafter, than they could put in in that
time and which without the dam would
"be continually flowing down stream"
1t may we suppose be safely assumed
that Judge Searls has in this interview
faithfully represented the measures which
the miners are willing TO undertake if the
farmers will meet them in friendly spirit.
Of course the underlying implication is
gard must be sufficient to hold the farmers
harmless henceforward The question
whether the measures proposed are capable
Of achieving that end is therefore the most
| important one to be considered. 1t is
necessarily a question for engineering
science to pass upon, and no other judg-
ment can be of final or conclusive value
concerning it. II competent engineers re-
port that the flow of debris upon the
farming lands can be successfully pre-
vented by the measures proposed, it will
be for the farmers to determine whether
such settlement is or is not as good a
one as they are likely to obtain in any
otker way. It will doubtless be realized
that the compromise suggested embraces
less of certainty than a perpetual injunc-
ton. This is undeniable. But there are
offsets to that consideration. For example,
who can venture to predict the end of the
litigation which has been entered upon
When wealthy corporations find their
existence at stake they will fight to the
bitter end, and the laws delays are in
such circumstances practically iiiimitable.
Several high legal authorities have already
expressed the opinion that decision could
not be reached in these cases in ten years.
Surprising that is so, where will the lands
of the threatened farmers be before they
obtain the relief they seek?
If they could go on swiftly, and be sure,
first, of e prompt decision, and, second, of
& IANOIdDl6 Q6ClsIOu, ~ HOulu EC UuTSa-
sonable to talk of compromise. But COM
promise presupposes always the existence
of an equilibrium of uncertainty. Neither
side can tell how the contest will termi-
nate, and therefore both sides are willing
| to discount the future at moderate rate.
Compromise, in short, is believed to be the
best way of securing the equities of the
situation with minimum of friction and
expense. In this case the equities are with
the farmers mainly, but they should be
| cautious about pushing their advances be-
You'd those equities. For example, if the
miners can carry on their business without
indicting injury upon their neighbors, their
right TO do SO is incontestable. It is not,
therefore, to stop hydraulic mining that
the farmers are joined, but to stop the flow
of debris from the hydraulic mines upon
their lands. Now if the miners offer to take
care Of this debris if, that is, they under
take SO to prosecute their business that no
injury shall result to the farmers the OBJ
iect sought by the latter will have been
obtained.
The advantage of the proposed COM
promise consists in this that it offers an
immediate cure for the evil complained of,
whereas legislation does not offer an i'm
mediate cure Again, the compromise
plan may be looked at in this way: Sup.
posing that the miners carried out these
measures without making any arrange
ment with the farmers. Could the latter
then expect to win their suits Clearly
not but why not? Because the miners
would then be able to show that the
abuse complained Of had ceased. And if
this would be the result OF the carrying out
of the compromise project without CON-
promise, does it not follow that the effect.
iveness of the proposition is demonstrated
A compromise viii also provide for the
holding back of all the debris put into the
streams from the time the work is com.
pleted. That is beyond question an earlier
date than the Courts can give any prospect
OF for the cessation of the evil. There are
always some people who seem to think it
very fine and courageous and manly to go
about shouting "No Compromise !" But
if in sober truth compromise is the best the
situation admits of, to refuse it is merely
stupid. Whether it is the best the present
situation admits of, and whether the par
ticular form of compromise proposed by
Judge Searls is the most advantageous to
be had, are questions to be discussed seri-
ously and in a practical spirit. There is,
however, as we trust we have made quite
plain in this article, enough in Judge
Searls' proposition to command the atten-
ton and the dispassionate examination of
the farmers.
THOSE CONFEDERATE BONDS.
The Bank of England is to great many
,,oo,,tc = ,-ar,, conscientious ~, fact aI,,oe4