Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-08-09
THE POLICY OF GOVERNMENT INTER
FERENCE.

1t is settled now, and let us up hope for
ever, that Government interference will
take place whenever there is direct or in
direct action on the part ofany people that
tends to destroy the navigability of the
streams and harbors under the control of
the Federal Government. The RECORD
UNION, from the outset, and for many years,
has contended that this should be the
policy of the Government. 1t was always
culpable neglect, on its part, to refuse to
interfere 1t was error to say that
the Government ought to do nothing in
the matter of forbidding the destruction of
its river trusts, until the State through
which the rivers flow had put an end to
works that damaged the rivers. The hest
tating policy has now been abandoned, and
that for which this Journal so long battled
is accomplished fact, to wit, that whenever
property of the Government is menaced by
individual acts, or Il trust of the Govern
ment is threatened with injury, it is the
duty of the Federal arm to stretch forth
and check the wrong. We look upon the
action of Congress in affirming this doc
trine as of the highest and most far-reach-
ing Importance. 1t really marks a new era
in the internal policy of this nation. 1t
forever settles The question Of the duty of
the General Government to every free
highway that is the heritage of all the
people of all the country. Navigable
rivers and harborg are in Federal control,
and of necessity must be under Federal
protection to the extent of forbidding their
of years to secure from Congress this re-
cognition. We now have it without any
reservation or conditions The nation prac-
tically says the rivers and harbors are
the property of all the people, free
to the commerce of all the States
and the use of all citizens of the Republic
The whole people have an individual in
terest in them and the burden is not upon
the State of their locality to take concern
for their preservation. The nation is the
guardian of these heritages, and as such,
it Is bound to conserve their best inter
ests." Had Congress enunciated this right
doctrine fifteen years ago, as distinctly as
ii now has in the river and harbor bill
millions of dollars would have been saved
to California vast expenditure now
hav
been avoided, and this section OF the State
greatly more advanced toward its full pos
sibilities. 1t must be understood that the
legislation to which we refer does not re-
.lSte to California rivers alone. 1t is a
Government policy that applies to all nav
igable streams and natural harbors. While
we.denominate it new policy" this is
not.strictly true. In fact, years ago the
Federal Government intervenedt9 prevent
injury by artificial process to Its western
rivers and harbors 1t so acted in regard
to theharbors of the great lakes, it SO
acted II relation to the Mississippi, it en-
acted laws looking in that direction rela-
tive to atlantic harbors In the matter OF
dumping grounds, and it has several times
interviewed to prevent diversion of navi-
gable streams, and the changing of their
channels by artificial cuts in southern and
middle State. But not until the present
year has the policy Of the Government re-
garding naviglble waterway distractions
been so clearly defined by statute, or the
positive mandate issued to Government
agents to proceed by ALI legal methods to
prohibit acts destructive W navigation. 1t
may be said, therefore. that it is
2 new policy ef Con yress as TO
method at least; ;!.at the Theory of Gov
eminent duty in this regard has crystal
lied and taken such definite fo.1n. that for
all time to come there can be 30 doubt
about Il