Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-12-15

inquiry that bill is fled here for the pu, bee
Of enjoining one of the greatest interests OF
the State. The proposition is to stop mining,
as they say. The necessity for such an ex.
treme measure is the supposed destruction OF
everything else in the State, SIS they would
tell us, or the great agricultural interest. We
want to show that the witness here. in con-
junction with an officer of the State, In
pursuance of a law Of the State, has ex-
amined these rivers with view OF seeing
and determining what can be done Tor tne
purpose of curing this evil. L do not
wish to make any extended argument upon
this matter: but / submit TO your Honor
whether or not the Court would entertain a
bill for this purpose at the very time that the
State is proceeding to correct this very mat
ter. and. as we propose to show your Honor,
proceeding, or proposing to proceed, by
scheme that is entirely practicable. with very
little cost-not as much as 81 in $500 OF the
property which they would destroy by this
action, and which would be utterly valueless
if they should epjoin this business of minirg-
That is the general proposition. The witness
has examined the subject ard made expert
ments, and has right to testify as to what
would be an easy and practicable method OF
curing this whole mischief, illustrating our
position that this is proceeding entirely out
of place; that there are matters which belong
to the political department of the Government
and which the political department is pro-
ceeding to deal with, and part Of which
was an examination had by this witness, in
CONJUNCTION With Mr.. Hall, the State Enei-
Beer, locking to this very matter. That Is
the purpose and scope. = We
want to show the ICourt. by this testimony
what we say, with all due respect to the
other eide, is the utter absurdity, the un-
precedented absurdity, may say, of attempt
ing to arrest an industry of this character by
those means. say in that connection, with
the broad views that the Chancellor takes In
using its right arm, an injunction, by which
great interests are to be destroyed, COM
munities are to be stricken down, and
portions of the State that the gentle
man represents here so honorably are
to be disorganized by the power OF this
Court, that before such thing is TO be done
this Court will listen, and listen attentively,
to see what is the necessity of such an extra
ordinary exertion of judicial authority, if
there be any necessity at all. And If this be
matter simply within the police power of
the State, within its most ordinary police
power, as we shall show your Honor, both
by the report and by what this witness can
testify, that this is a matter OF Importance
that we should bring to the attention of the
Court in order that it may be weighed in the
scales of justice. as it should be weighed in
coming to conclusion whether the peremp
tory powers of injunction, by which this great
industry is to be psralyzed and stayed, shall
be issued in this Court. This is the PROPOSE
ton as L view it for myself. My associates
may have other views.
Attorney Ger eral Hart replied to the
proposition made by Mr.. Wallace. He held
that the counsel had NO greater desire than
himself to see both these great industries
flourish, but that counsel addressed the Court
as legislative body instead Ct as Judicial
body. He was not proceeding against
the business of hydraulic mining, but
simply asked the hydraulic miners, that in the
conduct of their hydraulic mining business
they shall take care of their tGilings and
debris
The Court decided to exclude the testimony,
to which ruling counsel for the defendant ex-
Q.-What is the carrying capacity of the
American river compared with that of 1861
and 1862?
Al think that the American river in its
present condition will carry more water now
from little distance below Alder creek down
to where the velocity of the water of the
American river is stopped or checked near
its mouth, than it did-say prior to 1862
The river is very much broader than IN old
times.
Q-What has been the effect of changing
the mouth of the American river and the
creation of a new mouth?
A-The effect has been the sending of the
water right across the river, when the Ameri-
can pours out food, and cutting away the
bank on the other side, and the filling up of
the old mouth of the American river.
O.-Would or would not such have been
the result if there had never been any mining
in California?
Al think urquestionably so.
Q.-State whether the grade and rate of
the current of the American river from its
mouth to the point where it escapes from the
mountains st Folsom are greater or less
A.-The grade is less. The current Is less
than it was in old times.
Afternoon Session.
Hamilton Smith resumed the stand.
Q. 10y Mr.. Dibble)-What is your opinion
as to whether the American and Sacramento
rivers always occupied their present channels :?
A.-They unquestionably have varied their
channels, changing about from place to place.
1 have seen the same thing myself on the
Mississippi and the Missouri rivers. The
Mississippi river has made number of
cut-offs. All the great rivers of the world
running through alluvial countries are con-
stantly changing their banks unless they are
protected. Work is necessary to prevent
their banks from erosion.
Q.-State if you can the amount of sedi-
ment the American and Sacramento rivers
transport?
A.-Based on the figures which are con-
tanned in Mr.. Halls iep3rt, find that the
American river at iow-water carries 935 parts
of water by weight to l of sediment. The
water is 93j and the sediment 1. That is a
mean of three observations. The American
at high. water carried 100 parts of water to
l of sediment-the result of one obserya-
ton. The maximum amount of sediment
contained in the American, as found by MIR.
Hall. was 65 of weight to l of sediment 1
think | have got it wrong-190 parts in high
water to was the mean of five observations !;
the maximum was 65 to l, which was the re-
suit of one observation. The Sacramento at
medium food at street contained 1,212 parts
of water to / of sediment. The Sacramento
at biph-water at Freeport contained $50 parts
of water to of sediment, which is mean
of eight observations. The proportions are
determined by weight, which is the general
method of engineers in comparing amounts
of sediment in streams.
O.-On that basis of calculation how do
these rivers compare with other rivers in the
amount of sediment transported?
A.-There are many other rivers that
carry much more sediment than the Sacra-
mento, ard some rivers that carry coDsidera-
BILE more than the American. | have PIE.
pared table here which illustrates that
statement. which l could read, If you like.
1t is rather long.
Q.-Is it taken from any published work :?
A.-From large number of authorities.
Q.-State it.
The Attorney General objected to the tes-
timony, on the ground that it was incom-
petent.
The Court sustained the objection.
W. G. Belcher-We offer these TO prove by
the witness, and expect that he would if al
lowed to testify, the amount of sedi-
ment carried by the Pc and the Durance in
food and at its average; the Garonne, the
Rhone, the Nile, the Vistula, the Rhine, the
Ganpes. both above and below its junction
with the Brahmaputra the Hoang Ho, the
Mississippi at different points, as at Carroll
ton, Memphis, and at its mouth; the Indus,
and the rivers already given, and the author.
tiles from which the statements are taken.
O-How should the amount of sediment In
q river be determined
Alt can only be determined by the
careful experiments of an engineer; and can
be determined with accuracy only by large
number of experiments.
O,-What is the proper way for an en-
gineer to estimate the amount of damage
caused by the filling of river?
Tn mr. opiniop the amount of dan, aoe ia