Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-02-11
THE DEBRIS BILLS.
Concerning the Congressional Bills for
Stsrage of Hining Debris.

duced into Congress, proposing appropriations
for dams upon the Sacramento and its tribu-
taries, to ilnpound the hydraulic mining de-
bris, are exceedingly objsctionabl, to the
people of the valley most intimately con-
eerned. The grounds of oil ject1on are easily
presented. Primarily. the bills if passed
would operate to defer the adequate settle
ment of the debris problem. ard SO defer
protection to the districts now daily suffering
irreparable injury. While seemingly pro
viding for the present restoration Of the Sac
ramento and Feather rivers, and their preser-
walton from farther injury, they would in
reality prclong the process of injury TO those
rivers, and would render their condition
worse. Secondly, tie bills tend to prevent
national appropriations in the future for the
restoration Of the rivers Of this State The
dams provided for by the bills are plainly
TO DAM THE DEBRIS
For the hydraulic companies. Should either
bill pass, it would be hailed as indicating the
Intention Of the National Government to
assume TO itself the burden of building stone
dams in the river canyons. and of thus pre-
serving hydraulic mining. It would be
loudly and speciously urged as grouad for
| the cessation OF legal proceedings, since it
rendered unnecessary those legal proceedings
SO perilous to hydraulic mining. Public
opinion, as in the case OF the late Drainage
Act, would bs rendered in sumo degree unfa-
vorable to those proceedings, and powerful
influence would be brought to induce the
Courts to avoid action. Meanwhile the
$500, 600 would be as futile to effect even
tolerable protection to the valley communi-
ties now suffering as were the brush dams,
which were absolutely 10 protection. Their
ex posure would thus have been extended
year, whils the hydraulic companies were
| benefited by the delay aud by their damage.
At the end of the year the National Govern
ment would refuse further appropriations,
for the bills would have been passed through
extraneous influence from this coast and
through internal agreements in Congress
! itself, and the National Government would
not have entertained for a moment the inten-
ton Of appropriatins from six to ten millions
| to dam the debris. The estimated cost of
such undertaking is placed by State Engineer
| Hall at S. 900, 600. but the public is aware of
the manner in which the cost of public works
double up. A delay only would have been
effected. At the same time
THE PROCESS OF THE DESTRUCTION
OF our rivers, which are now in such crit
ical condition, would have been advanced by
| the years delay in their etfectual protection
| A third result would be the prevention of
national appropriations for the restoration of
| the Sacramento and Feather when that
restoration had become possible through the
cessation of hydraulic mining. This State
would be left to bear that burden alone a.
| though it has valid claim 10 such particular
| for Congressional action. Congress would
think that California had received sufficient
from the National Treasury for the present,
and would refuse appropriations. Not many
such appropriations as proposed by the
bills can be expected in succession
In the light of these facts the action of
Congressman Berry and Page is peculiar
Dir. Berry especially, representing the dis
tric.s immediately concerned, has surprised
and disappoi ted his constituent, whether
political partisans or opponents. His express
sions heretofore have led them TO expect very
different conduct in Congress. No mora I'm.
mistakable assurances could have been given
| them than are Contained in his public letter
| TO the Appeal Of tie Ii h and to the Farmer
of the 165h. Yet his declarations there Of his
| convictions upon this subj ct, in exact accord
with theirs, he has departed from radically
and glariDgly. In this letter in which his
constituents confded, he declared that There
was no remedy except the complete CESSATION
of hydraulic sining = that mo remedial
measures will be eff .ctual to prevent this re-
suit Che conversion Of the Sacramento valley
into uninhabitable territory il that system is
continued" He also made it clear that in
his opinion the hydraulic process was an lille
gal process, saying that the law when laid
down by the Courts will prohibit hydraulic
mining" Yet in this bill be treats the method
of hydraulic mining as a legal process and
indirectly represents to Congress that it is
such 8 is worthy of Congressional favor and
succor. Believing that
THE DEBRIS PROBLEM
Cannot be adjusted without the stoppage of
hyd aulic mining, and that protection to the
valley cannot be secured without such stop
page, ne makes one object of that bill the
nerpetuation of that method of mining.
Knowing, as he has confessed, that dams,
while hydraulic mining continues, are de.
lusive remedy. he yet holds out to Congress
that they would be an adequate remedy.
Finally in the letter mentioned, speaking of
an intention contemplated by the miners,
by which eminent engineers and interested
parties were to be summoned to Washington,
to enl.ghten the committee of Congress upon
the subject" he declared that the only
result would be to transfer this contest to
Washington, the defeat of sll appropriations
for river improvement, and perhaps the in
definite postponement of the settlement of
this important question" Still, while his ex-
perieuce had convinced him Of the prejudicial
effect of such bill upon the settlement of
the debris question, he has introduced the
bill !; and while he perceives that the move
meEt in Congress is an artihce by the by
draulic compal les. yet he has aided them in
making it successful.
Mr. Berry's letter of December 26th, pub
lished in the Suffer county Farmer of Janu.
airy 9th, by no means retrieves his position.
He redeclares his belief that the cessation
of hydraulic mining is absolutely necessary to
the efficiency Of remedial measures; and he
asserts that in introducing his bill, he intend
ed only that it should provide for the dam
ming of the debris at present in the canyons,
and to
THE IMPROVEMENT Or THE RIVERS.
He attempts to avoid the influence of the
lengthy preamble, which clearly confirms the
nature of the object as indicated in the enact.
/ ing clause. by saying that 1T is not part
Of the bill )" and by directing atten-
ton to the wording Of the enacting clause
and claiming that such wording provides for
the preservation of the navigable waters of
California from ir jury by damming the debris
now in the canyons only. But despite the
declaration of Mr.. Berry. the enacting clause,
as a matter of fact, would bear only one con-
struction did it stand alone without the pre-
amble. That clause provides, BE it enacted,
etc tina. sum Of 100000 be appro-
priated to De exp; nded in preserving the
nsvigable waters of the State of California
from il juryeby the deposits of debris from
hydraulic u!ining :" There is no restric-
tive word. The irjary to be provided
against is that proceeding from the deposits
of mining debris. regardless Ct the time
when they were or are made. The obvious
meaning is that the deposits referred to are
those row being continuously made. There
ia nothing in the enacting clause still less in
the prt amble, to show that the opera
ton of the bill is to be confined to
the deposits now existing There is
r provision 6eferring the operation until
the cessation of hydraulic minirg. but that
provision wonld appear had such been the
bona fide intention Of the author, because it
is known that mining by the hydraulic pro-
cess might extend an indefinite period, and
without that provision the purpose of the
bill the final restoration OF the rivers, would
be defeated. Had the bill been intended to
dam the debris now in the canyons only, it
would have been easy to insert the little word
present" before the word deposit. Despite
Mr.. Berry's assertion that the preamble
forms no part Ct the bill, it does form
A MATERIAL PART,
And in declaring the reasons, outlines the OBJ
Jet Of the bill Should it be claimed that
there was any ambiguity in the enscting
clause, and that the intention of the bill was
norronSr thar ha obvirr,u