Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-08-19

The bill was read the second time and passed
TO engrossment.
THE IRRIGATION QUESTION.
Days resumed his argument in defense of
vested rights in wafer the question before the
Senate being the reconsideration of the vote by
which Reddy's amendment of q week ago (pTo-
viding that the English cor mon law of riparian
rights shall not be considered the rule Of de-
cision in any of the Courts Of this State was de
feated. The Senator consumed the morning
session with his remarks.
ASSEMBLY MESSAGE
A message was received from the Assembly,
announcing the adoption by that body Of As
sembly Concurrent Resolution No. 3, relating 10
natural reservoirs on Government lands.
On motion of Steele, the resolution was
adopted.
EXTRA PER DIEM
Reddy offered resolution allowing the Post
mistress s. per day extra for extra services dur
ing the session. Adopted.
Recess till p. NJ.
Afternoon Session.
On reassembling of the Senate. DAYS resumed
his argument and held the floor until 2:30.
Parkinson spoke in favor of the motion to re
consider. He discussed the irrigation question
upon its equities, expressly emitting reference
to the legal points involved except in far as to
say that he favored the repeal of Section 1922 of
the Civil Code, which recognizes the English
common law Of riparian rights.
MEMORIALS.
Chandler presented Il memorial from Wheat.
land Grange, protesting against any legislation
in the interest Of either appropriations or ripa-
rlanlSts, ana expressing It's views III series
of resolutions, in which a general system of
State control of waters was Endorsed.
Hurlbut presented memorial from the
Decentralization party of san Francisco favor
ing the repeal of the English common law as
applied to uphold riparian rights.
THE MAIS QUESTION.
Reddy spoke in favor of reconsidering the
vote by which his amendment OF last week was
defeated. Referring TO the argument made by
Days in favor of State control Of the public
waters, he desired TO know how the friends of
that proposition expected to be able to secure
State control without first supporting bill to
repeal the English common law of riparian
rights. lie commended that no State or other
system could be indugurated without first re
pealing that provision. 1t was the one great
obstacle in the way of any equitable distribu-
ton of water. Personally, he would favor Sys-
TEN of State control, which both the riparian
and appropriation doctrines oppose. But the
first thing TO do is to repeal the CommOn-law
doctrine before any change in the present sys-
TEN can be inaugurated. RiparianiSm means
cowboy cabin standing here and there over a
sterile and desoate country, often two days
ride apart-in fact, the employment of few va
queros. On the other hand appropriation-while
perhaps not the best system that could be de
vised-means blooming meadows fields of way
ing grain happy homes and the employment of
thousands of men, women and children.
ground covered by him in his previous six
hours argument. He did not deem it necessary
to repeal The English common law provision in
order to reach an equitable conclusion in the
matter of the distribution and use of water
Spencer denounced as bad sense, bad logic
and bad economy the proposition to repeal
law that protects Il citizen in his rights before
passing another that could operate in its stead.
But for the Desert Land Act under which dunn
mics were sent out to secure hundreds of thou
lands Of acres OF sterile land, in the interest of
few m0nopolists, nothing was ever heard sbout
irrigation. But these dummies that are scat
tered abroad over the deserts have been and are
now Justify crying Water water" at five dol
lars day These bills, intended to upset the
vested rights of the people who had settled the
fertile valleys of the state in good faith were
conceived in iniquity and are being urged for
the benefit of two or three miiionaires Repeal
the provision protecting vested rights. and you
have nothing but the naked doctrine OF appro-
priation, to which there is no practical limit
The water laws of California today are the
most liberal in the world. The common
law of England has given to rs that
priceless jewel, the jury system, and that other
blessing, the writ of habeas corpus. 1t has
given to US some of the brightest legal minds in
the world and yet we are called here upon n
moments notice, in obedience to a whitman
impulse Of excitement that was sweeping over
the State-and asked to repeal this law so far as
ii protects vested rights and we are asked to
repeal that provision, too, before providing any
other law to either wholly or in part take its
place. He hoped that no Senator who signed
the petition for the calling of the extra session
would allow himself to be whipped and bullied
into the act OF voting for the bills offered here
| in the Interests OF the water mOuOpoliSts The
signing OF that petition bound no man to sup
port lnlquitous measures-laWs that would
despOil people of their vested rights. He had
not, in his mind, while considering this matter
alone the cattle pastures and lizard covered
pains OF some particular section, but, on the
contrary, he appealed to the Senate in defense
OF the people who settled the fertile, Watered
valleys of the State, and who have built ND
happy homes therein. These are the people
whose rights and future liberties are en-
dangcred.
Johnson of Sonoma argued that 10 legislative
act or omission can despoil any citizen of the
rights vested in him by the written Constitution
OF the United States. He referred elOquently to
what irrigation had accomplished in the south
ern counties, where towns and cities had been
built UP under the influence of the We alth thus
created, and commended that no power ever
would or could be invoked TO return these beau
thu ana fiourlshiDE places to the desOlation of
the desert. 1t would be like removing the color
ing of Titan from one of Titian's pictures. He
would vote against the proposed reconsideration
II he believed that Il reconsideration would en-
danger any mans vested rights, which fallacy
he did not believe Nomatter what wemay do
| long years after we vacate our places IN this
senate chamber, the great stream of constitu-
uonal law-protecting every mans rights-will
still flow on. lie would not 20 to Italy for in
| formation on the irrigation question; but he
would go to Kern or Fresno county, to River
SIDE or Anaheim, or Los Angeles; and if he
i2Hnd there that liberal use of water was
causing Tue olive ard orange groves to flourish,
and the fields to keep green and fertile, then he
would favor proper use and distribution of
water for such purposes. If citizens there
whether they be appropriations or rparianisis-
had acquired vested rights, he was in favor of
unfolding those rights; and the Constitution of
the country does and will continue TO protect
them.
Cross spoke on behalf of his constituents, so
far as their interests might be affected by the
amendment and the bin under consideration
The real merits of the bill had, he thought, been
overlooked and side issues chiefly discussed
He rehearsed the early history of mining-the
miners being the first among piOneers-to show
that at first everybody believed in the right to
divert water from the streams to his own use
As mining grew the population increased. and
demand was created for the products of the
soil In late years. as the value of water be-
came great for beneficial purposes, the question
of the right of diversion became an important
one, and the power of the Courts has been called
into TequiSitiOn in order to settle disputes that
had arisen. This question having become one
of vast importance to the welfare Of the State,
the Governor has felt called upon to bring the
Legislature together in order 10 pass laws that
viii set aside decision OF the highest Court,
which decision, it has been claimed, works
an injury to Il great industry. The
speaker then reviewed at length the
progress of improvement and accumulation of
wealth in older countries. and drew compari-
sons with the methods prevailing here Com
ing down to the question OF the moment, he
claimed that the progress of the southern part
of the State had been built upon barren soil
through the diversion and use of water Return
these waters back from the bitches into the
streams, to flow idly 70 the sea, and those see
! tons must go back to q condition of desoaiion.
| He did not believe in wrecking property rights;
and if there be in the proposed amendment
| anything calculated to disturb those rights, the
law of the land will intervene ard protect them.
| He favored the reconsideration of the vote and
the passage of the amendment One of two
! things must eventually resuit-either the capt.
talisis of the state must use their money to CON
! struct these canals and bitches to convey the
| water ont from the streams to where irrigation
is necessary, and sell il to the small farmers, or
/ clse the moneyed men must not only build the
! canals but must also buy and own the lands.
! The small farmer cannot afford to construct
! canals to bring ont water upon the deserts, and
| somebody must do it for him. Better that some
man should become rich as CTcesus, if by the
use of water he can make fertile and wealthy
| the otherwise lizard. scorpion and snake-r ridden
desert plains, than that they should remain des-
! olate and unproductive.
! Pending the conclusion of the gentlemans
/ speech, the Senate at $40 p. II, adjourned