Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-07-28

the decision lately rendered by the supreme
Court was strictly enforced the new state oil al,
fats would languish and die. and the cuitlVaieu
fields again become the barren, uninhapil"oie
wastes OF yorc.
Senator Fred Cox was the neSt speaker. He
said the bone of contention was the recent de-
cision o! the supreme Court Miller d LuN
were compelled 10 bring the suits that brought
about that decision. He knew the eauntry well
that was involved in that suit, owning q large
tract OF land adjoining to that OF Miller " Lux,
and similarly affected by the robbing OF kern
river of its waters by Haggin * Carr. de ttst
saw the land i'll question in 1865. lie bought
some at that time, placing upon II 2,OJ0 hedu OF
cattle They have purchased large tracts since,
buying and paying forit. II was bought on ac-
count of the water thereon: without tAe water
the purchase would not have been mnde; WITH
out the wateri TO them was vhlueless Ihey nilu
plenty of water until 1917. when Haggln " Carr
built the Galloway canal, divertlng the water
from Kern river near the town OF Bakersfield.
That canal is one OF no lnesa dimensions. Its
width on the top being 10 feet. That year they
had 70 dig wells and pump water for the stoGk.
His firm lost 5000 cattle on account OF the
DIR )ught thus occasioned, and Miller Lux
about l3.091 Since that time they have had no
water except IN the May, June AID July iresllets
Miller said to them, q Give one-quarter of the
water" but they replied " No. SIR Two hun
bred thousand acres OF land lying along
the river was thus robbed OF the
water that they had enjoyed for years
and run OIL on the plains, where II takes as
much water to irrigate 100 acres as it does go
acres upon the land owned by Miller * Lux and
Cox & CLARK. He described Kern river as 1t was
prior u 1871 claiming that they had all that
was required at all times of the year, and he
had seen the day when one could travel from
Kern river, through TulaIe lake, down the San
Joaquin river in boat to tide water: lie gave
a lengthy and detailed statement Of the manner
in which Hsggin Il Carr had taken the waters
from its natural channel, and through an in
tricate network of lengthy canals carried 1t out
upon abe plains. He said all we desire Is our
share of the water. From legal standpoint
we have right to it all, but this
we do not now nor ever have asked.
As an individual he wanted 10 see none of it go
to waste. lie was willing at any time to meet
the irrigstionists halfway. He appealed to the
Committee to see that justice was done. that
the rights of all be preserved. He Said that
Hlggin & Carr had diverted the water aud run
il TO waste to keep Miller & Lux and his firm
from having any. He asserted this, he said,
lat-footed, for he had positive knowledge of its
being a fact This season he noticed water
flooding wheat fields where the grain was
standing as high as his head. They ran it out
into Posey creek and upon alkal lands. We
Were compelled in justice 10 our manhood to
commence that suit Justice was upon our
side; our claim was well-grounded and we
were sustained by the Supreme Court.
AsSemblyman Gregory said he had heard all
he wanted about Miller Il Lux and Haggin d
Carr. Let us take up the bills. and let these
people point out the defects and tell us what
they want. COnfine themselves to the bills,
take them up section by section word by word,
and let us get down to the business for which
this meeting was called.
Mr.. II erdnon and Mr. Marks, two irrigation
lists, followed, replying to Senator Cox and Mr..
Lillis, going all over the Miller Il Lux and Hag-
gin X Carr matter again.
At 1880 P. u, the Irrigation Committee went
into executive session, but afterwards adjourned
without coming to any decision upon either of
the bills before them.