Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-03-06

and depth, greater deposits of like material
to the present, cemented dispositions on their
beds, with heavier grades than the present
rivers, and yet the material in those
ANCIENT CHANNELS,
Under the action of even greater foods than
modern ones, did not come down, for We find
it there to-day, some cemented and some not.
Therefore defendant says the deposits ia the
new rivers will not come down that have CO.
mented therein, ard if at all, or even only in
the far future of geological ages. The testi-
mony shows positively that the material put
into the American has and does recement
therein. Counsel at length reviewed the tes-
timony Of the several engineers that were
witnesses as to the quantity of material in
the American river, and drew the conclusion
that the whole quantity of debris thrown cut
of given mines since 1875 is now in the river,
and will remain there until in geologic time
the mountains will come to the sea, as they
must. The dislodged material from defend
PENDANTS mine was proven to be 80 per cent.
rock. not of only 30 or 60 per cent. 1t is in
largest part heavy rock, and the remainder
sand and pebbles, and the remaining seams
to be worked consisting largely of cemented
gravel and sand. This is the material that
will remain in the bed Of the stream. Coun-
sci here compared Uren's and Allardt's pro-
files of the original bad and of the fills in the
American river. He drew attention to the
fact that the Polar Star and Southern
Cross dam of debris in the Bear river, 200
or 500 feet deep, of material like that from
the Gold Run mine, has stood for years, and
the foods of 1878, 1880 and 1881 in no wise
affected it. But it is said if the defendant
fills up the river any more the matter viii
come down, as the filling was now past the
point IF further resistance. This counsel EN-
49,, H., ,,al I'D lnlI Id
proof to the contrary. Ii defendant has
shown that all the material that has come out
of the Gold Run and Iowa Hill mines for the
past five or six years is lodged and cemented
in the river between
CANYON CREEK
And Rice's bridge, and has remained there
and resisted all the floods. is It not reasonable
to suppose that it is permanently fixed except
as to the great changes in geological time in
the far future, when the mountains come to
the sea? All the matter remaining to be
mined is OF the matter that does remain in
in the river; that does make an even, &C.
mented, smooth river bed; and the space
between the mouth of Canyon creek and
Rice's bridge is sufficient to hold all the ma
teriai that can be mined from all the mines
in the Gold Run district and keep it there
forever, with not pound of it sent below
those points. All that can be carried down
is the fine material that is held in suspension
by tie water. But if five per cent. or ten
per cent. of the material complained of comes
to Sacramento. it goes bslow it, to still water.
But if il comes even then, it is inappreciable
il quantity. We admit some of the finer
material comes down, and it-while Colby
says two per cent. comes, and we say ten
per cent.-harms no one. On the contrary,
take the result of the work of single
quartz mill of eighty stamps at 160 tons
a day for year grinding rock to powder.
From the mine the material is brought out
and poured into the river as found in the an
ciant river, the deep blue gravel. In the
quartz mill it is reduced as nearly as possible
to an impalpable powder. Which will the
water most easily carry off? If ten per cent.
CO mes down the American river, the powder
from single quartz mill will exceed it. Yet
plaintiff does not complain OF quartz mill
work. neither doss the plaintiff complain of
drift claims. Let US take one drift claim
alone-that near Forest City. It briggs out
the freed sand and gravel and leaves the rock
behind. Il washes the matter and puts it
irto the river at the rate of 500 GOO yards per
year, and it is put into the mountain rivers,
and nothing with it to hold it in them, while
defendant does put in material that cements
its deposits and holds them in the river. Is
the offerse, if it be one, complained of
against the defendant, greater than that of
the farmers on the banks of the streams, by
reason of their deposits in the streams?
Counsel dwelt on the effects from
NATURAL WASH,
OF denudation of the hillsides of timber, the
construction of roads, the keeping of sheep
and cattle in the mountains in great numbers,
the disintegrating powers of frost, air and