Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-02-07

repeal OF the bill. One of many reasons Mr. Presi-
dent, why am in favor of repeating the debris law
| is do noJ believe the evil be cured by the
| remedy proposed. Half a million dcars have been
expended upon the scheme, and there is no dam
that cffers The least obstruction either water or
| debris. BY additional expenditure Il several
millions, dams and levees might perhaps be built
that would stand for while, but siey wcud be GER
tain to break at some great 10 G-tiue. and do in
! fuitey more damage thsH If theT never had been
constructed at all a lew evenings ago | listened
TO an interesting lecture upon Alaska by the cele
| brated geolOgist John Muir He described an i'm
mensa glacier that comes down from the
| great snow-cad mountains III the land
/ OF the Polar bear and the aurora borealis
in one perpetual moving mass, which is continually
breaking cif and falling distance of several hun
dred is-t mo the sea with deafelGg roar, form
ing gr at icobergs, thousands Of them every day.
Now Mr. President, firmly believe hat you might
as wei uttempt to stay the progress OF that tre-
meuduUs glacier by building a brush fence athwart
its wuy, as euGeayor to dam against the perpetual
stream Ci debris which the hydraulic miners
putting in motion and which the mountain torrents
are irresisuby drifting t. lower levels In point Of
stupendOus FOLLY this attempt L. impOund the
debris and rectlfy the river channels mas only
parallel in the visionary scheme OF an enthusiast
who, in the days Of the Roman Emrirt proposed to
immorta!ize the then ruling Emperor by hewing
him statue, with extended arms, our Of mountain,
one hand holding q liver and the other great city.
! am unwilling, Mr.. President, to allow ten or
twenty millions of the peoples money u be X
pended in order TO experiment with an attempt TO
son why desire to the debris law repealed, is
because it is cumulative; it lies up and appTo-
PIRATES millions Of the peoples money without
restriction as to time or amount. Il il be retained
for twenty years, as the friends OF the scheme de-
mand, and the taxable property Of the State in
creases in the same ratio 1t has during the last ten
years the State drainage tax alone viii, i'll the year
1900, amount 10 Sl,ll9,00O per annum-a snug sum
for Drainage Board OF Directors ana few favorite
contractors to pay with. l am opposed to a fur
ther continuance Of the debris appropIia-
which has been III good working order
only about six months, has Already expended SI19,-
963 IS more than the total amount raised under
the provisions Of the Act for the entire year
The Drainage Commission has mauareG to spend
$40 rs y on contracts aud Si2 G7 - i9r the
penses of the State E ginetF Department, salaries
Of Directors, Secretary, etc, mahug total
penditure Of S5i2, $50 -, or about $3.50 600 more
than was authorized by the Act rs understand
Section % Of the Act entitled An f. g 10 promote
drainage which, by the way is q misnomer-
the Commissioners have acted contrary 70 law IN
running the construction funds IN debt. That
section provides that no Indebtedness shall be
created against either of said funds Tor any one
year in excess OF the amount provided to be raised
by the tax levy for said year for said funds" And
now, Mr.. President, hear the same Old story.
Here they unblushirsy come wi.h deficiency OF
$4,000 the trso years account, when
the law poinly says that they mus keep within
their income. This apparent financial crookedness
was brought 70 light at the investigation resulting
from senator Glascock's resolution But there is
telling what the deficiency viii amount TO before
they get through with it, as / understand a large
force Of men and teams have been at work trying
reTar the brush fences across tine 3 ar and luba
rivers whose accounts have not yet been presented
and audited Had 1t not been Ilr the Glascccs in
yestigaton the State DrainaE= Directors T. would
have insisted thst they ha1 Np=ndcd only 5G3, 600,
published iu their report An almost super
human effort is being put forth to prevent the repeal
Of the law; and if the worst TO the worst the
debris schemers will offer an anenducut providing
lat the repeal shall not take IF c- until another
year shall have elapsed. The fat is, Mr.. Presi-
dent, they have got Themselves III dGht fix,
and want time to cover up tAlr tracks.
AT least 1t loo that way to me.
The course they have, and are, pursuiGg may
serve 10 explain why the clief .gers had pro-
yiso, which | regarded with sJspic lH a. the time,
inserted in the debris law, viz tina " the pro-
visions Of the Law requiring claims % be approved
! by the State Board of Examiners before warrant
shall be drawn by the Controller therefor, shall not
be applicable to clalms presented under the pro
/ visions Of this set No wonder they
willing have the state Beard ci ESaguiners pass
/ upon their bills and accounts But NJ President,
! am in favor uf repeaiirs he deagls ian, II for
other reason than thati tar tne lcope of the whole
State b. keep up Uoslulss WHICH Is a.Ee-y local ia
] its character ana "hicu, ~ my huuioie ludg-
uent, is violation of the spsr il not the
/ letter, Of the Constitution OF this state. l con-
/ tend, Mr.. President, that unjust and bur
! densome tax has been imposed upon the State
/ at large the past year. >2l3,l2o - 10 protect
an interest, in fact 10 SubsiGize interest thaT
ought to stand or fall upon its own meTits. OF this
amount san FraDcsco's share is about $117, 600 ;;
Alameda pays So 0G0, Contra Costa $1,000, Fresno
$1,000, Eumboldl s. $50, Los Angeles $ 600, Marin
$4,000, Monterey SSs509, Napu si 600, San Joaquin
- coo, Santa Clara $4,000, Solsno 5 500, Sopoms
S75J0, and on to the cad Of the chapter amount
/ ing in all to 1898 100 Tis tax alone raised the
State levy last year from 5J cents to 62l cents on
/ the 500 In addition TO the state tax district
drainage tax Of S50,33l and water tax of $50 III,
were also levied and co ected, although ]
understand some ii the hydraulic companies paia
: ia Ia