Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-04-07

would from necessity become metropolis
for every important property holder in that
great country, with his witnesses and
lawyers, would have to make it his resi-
dence for from ten to thirty years, whilst
his suit was on trial And the LAWYERS.
All, me! When but think of the wealth
that would flow in their Golfers from hav-
ing everybody sued Fancy falls PROSTATE
upon the double edge of its own sword at
the bare prospect
And what are all these people to be
dragged into all this litigation for? Be-
cause there has been law suit between
parties of wealth and influence about
water right, and both sides didn't win it.
At the present time there is as little
trouble and litigation about water rights, as
about any other species OF property OF equal
value. Most of the rights claimed are
established by possession for the period of
the statute of limitations; and to foist upon
our people all of this litigation would be
little better than malicious. There is more
in this adjudication bill which is interest
ing, but it might occur to plain man that
it is more of a litigation bill than an irriga-
ton bill, and would do great deal more
for the lawyers than it would for the
farmers. And yet have even heard it in
timated that the Bar generally favor these
irrigation bills
But let us pass on to the third bill, COM
monty called the District bill" 1t is a
very lengthy BILL and it will be sufficient
to discuss few of the more-important feat
ures.,
1t provides for the division of the State
into water districts. and the election of
three Water Commissioners in each, who
shall draw salaries and appoint Secretary
perintendents and assistants, all of whom
draw salaries, and who are to do a great
many things and require Il great many
things; for instance:
To inspect the channels and canals
within their district at least once year,
and report to the State Engineer the condi-
ton of such channels and canals and water
supply" etc.
"To require all divertors and users of
water within the district to make to them
an annual accounting of the amount of all
waters diverted and used by them and the
number of acres irrigated thereby
"To establish upon all the streams 8 . g
a water gauge, etc.
But the bill also provides for dividing
| these water districts up into irrigation dis
| tricts, each of which is to have Il board OF
| trustees a secretary, engineers, attorneys,
water overseers, all of whom, OF course,
must live" These trustees have power
| to " look after the water" to purchase and
| construct bitches, canals, etc, and after the
proper authority is granted by vote of the
! district. to issue and sell bonds TO pay for
| such works. The trustees and commission
ers have power to adopt rules and regula-
tons concerning the reception, use, waste,
distribution and general management OF
water, and the bill provides that any viola
ton Of such rules and regulations shall be
punished as misdemeanor.
Is anything proposed by this bill which
| viii not. as soon as required, be accom-
| plished by private enterprise and capital at
| far less expense? Already very large
share of the waters of the State are di-
verted and appropriated. Money is seek
ing investment at low rates of interest. If
there are waters subject to diversion, which
can be profitably diverted, is not private
enterprise sufficient for the emergency
| Cannot the same end be accomplished
| without the double array of armies of Off
GERS and attorneys Of water districts and
irrigation districts? Do not all such enter
prises, when carried on by the public,
/ prove far more expensive than when con-
structed by private enterprise? 1t is esti-
mated that the construction of the main
works for irrigation, under favor
| able circumstances, cost from $40
to SO per acre. These works, il
constructed by the public with ali the
officers, employees and attorneys provided
| for in this bill would, with the lesser works
requisite, average probably SO per acre
| This would create an enormous bonded in
debtedness and would in many districts
exceed the cost of good farms already under
irrigation by private enterprise. And these
ltaXes must be borne not merely by those
| vino use the waters for irrigation, and are
directly benefited, but by all property in
the district The residents of towns
whether they iriigate or not, whether they
own factories, labor by the day or live on
their interest, must bear their share of this
| burden of taxation and whether benefited
! by ii or not
Is there not a better system to be de
yised? Cannot measures be proposed al
least subject to less objection?
| There is nothing in this system which
oyercomes or does away with the difficult
! ties surrounding the doctrine of the ripa-
| rianist.
1t is system providing for horde OF
officers and attorneys, without increasing
| the quantity of waters. If there should be
| punishments provided for the waste or inn
proper use of waters, the Legislature for
| the State and the Boards of Supervisors for
! the respective counties have ample power
| to atliX the penalties.
| Would it not be far more serviceable to
| the irrigation interests of the State if it, by
| proper officer or commission, would con-
struct great canals above the general level
of the plains. cutting the great waterways
at about right angles, and conveying the
water along on line of high lands, and
| furnishing it at fixed prices to corporations
and individuals, who would distribute it to
the different municipalities and localities
| at prices subject to official supervision I'M
der the Filcher law passed at the last ses-
sion?
Would it not be well to literally discuss
possible methods through the press of the
State, which seems TO feel the Importance
of this subject? c. W. CRoss.