The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-12-22

owners? 1t seems to us that sound
public policy dictates that we should
take the position that the water should
belong to the people, that is to say, to
the farmers who till the soil; that the
water should become an easement to the
land and there should never be any sep
arate ownership Of water from the land.
Corporate ownership of water for irri-
cation and for municipal water works
has become the curse OF California and
it is becoming the stumbling block OF
Colorado Within q few years thirty ir-
rigation corporations have sprung up IN
Montana, many Of which now own and
operate quite extensive systems of irri-
CATION works; but there is not one large
irrigating canal owned by the farmers
who own the land and till the soil. Does
it not seem strange that states, coun-
ties, cities and school districts may is
sue bonds to build improvements, but
the owners Of land, the tillers of the
soil, have no way by which they may Or
ganize as community or municipality,
issue bonds and build irrigation works,
and yet the water is the blood of their
agricultural life. They must wait till
some corporation comes along, lays
claim to the water supply, the reservoir
sites and builds the canal and forever
thereafter holds the farmer as depend
ency of the irrigation corporation. This
is all wrong and should be remedied by
wise legislation at once. We do not I'M
dertake to advocate the repeal or the
restriction Of the present broad and lib
eral privileges given by our laws to irri-
cation corporations, but we do
clam in justice to the tillers
OF the soil and to the
land owners that the law should
make them as able to organize with an
irrigation district, issue bonds and build
an irrigating canal as county. city or
school district, to call an election, issue
bonds and build a county court house
or city water works or a school house.
California has, after thirty years Of liti-
cation and unjust extortion upon the
farmers, finally awakened to the great
wrong which the state has suffered in
delegating all the powers to corpora
tions, giving them title to the sources of
water supply. About three years ago
her legislature after much labor passed
what is known as the wright Irrigation
District Law" This law is the acme of ir
rigation legislation. 1t is at least gen
Grafton ahead Of our present legislation
upon the irrigation question. In three
years over ten millions of dollars have
been invested by the farmers through
the sale of irrigation district bonds at
six per cent interest. The cost to them
for water for irrigation is less than half
the fixed charges Of the irrigation cor
porations.
The state of Washington, seeing the
great benefits derived by California
through the operation of this law,
passed the same bill, almost verbatim
last February, and already irrigating
districts are springing up in many
places. If the legislature Of Montana
shall at it's coming session pass a bill
similar to the wright Irrigation Dis.
trict Law" of California, with few
amendments, they will have done more
for the state of Montana than by any
other legislation they could have un
dertaken. The Wright act provides
that a farming community may organ
ize and issue bonds and assess and col
lect taxes in about the same way as 9
school district would proceed to build {
school house or make other public i'm
provements. They are also authorized
to adopt local laws, for the equitable
distribution of the water. The irriga
ton district is made little government
within the county government and il
possessed of every function necessar.
to the construction, maintenance ant
operation of complete system Of irri
CATION works, or for the purchase o.
works already constructed The bond
run twenty to thirty years at six pc
cent and cannot be sold for less tina,
ninety cents on the dollar. The bond
sell about AZ readily as city or schoo
district bonds.