The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-03-18
THE TIDE LAND BILL
REVIEW o. The sruAT'oss.


XHoD0D0kS1Y - 49, - -
ssrssa Uslu Nsxs wsek-Caavsss
q - ssasAs.
oxYursA March M-TAs DDS iG1ds bin vi
ysobahzy = reported - ne esnaae wsdnssday
or IAuxsday, and tn chances exe eocd tAnf en-
s1dnrnx3on a. ths MEASURE vfll ~ begun ca Ytl
day. Il = noe Improbable, hevevef. thae IN
whole msssr may b defsEFsd unt1l next week
and - shis, tho mos Important question . b
considered b the legislature. vau - tnksn ~
last before adjournment conspaca0n prsce'
dent for such delay Il foaad in she action ~ ~
coassatus5onsl couvsnfion last summe1. Afte1
ever other subject had bssu settled IL dds
lands were taken up. and. afsse ten dayS -
hets, ne various pcopoaifious vere cIyssauiSed
into TIE serpe dcclarnfiou 70 b found In article
II Of the constitution. r. would Be considered
nothing les than great public misforfune q
the labon Of the Legislature should prove =
puny ana skoFtive - those OF the constitutional
conventisn. bat the signs are ominous thas Juss
such m unvorfhy conclusion win b reached
The reason Of such dire prophecy h found II
the threatened deadlock between the House
and senate on the bill that last Tuesday night
passed the former body By one vote more than
. constitutional majority. The situation il
about q follows: Eastern Warrington = Op-
posed TO the bill - II passed and b strongly
urging Ill it, representatives 70 hkhf u 70 the
death. II y very we'll known that certain East
ern senatou who had declared themselves fos
the bin are now, perforcs. opposed 10 IT. and
win remain opposed unlsss some very radical
changes and concessions arU NADIA The prin-
cfpal grounds OF objection are:
The theory OF riparian right . fnlly recog-
nized in the bill. and IL Is not concuFred
in by any portion Of the Eastern senators.
Conceding, however. that the riparian owner
has . right Of easement from the shore to deep
water over the ode lands, how does this right
secure or imply the right Of purchase OF tide
lands. The policy OF the bill Is plainly 70 trade
to the riparian owner . right Of purchase for
his alleged vested night Of easement The
Eastern Warrington members want 70 know
who gets the best of the trsde-she state or the
shose owner? Further, they want to know
when. where and how the shore owner has ever
agreed TO waive his right Of easement for the
right OF purchaser II the shore owner has Q
vested night OF access to deep water over the Ode
ian0s what il TO prevent him from asserting II
ct any time in the future when the STATE or .
private person attempts to shut him on?
There 10 the most serious objection to the
manner OF appraisal Of the tide lands laid down
in the bill local boards of appraisers are pro-
vided In each OF the counties and these, they
claim, can not expect 70 be fresi 70 m the tide
land Influences The result would Be mimi
mum appraisement Of the lands ana consequent
loss TO the state of large portion Of the money
II had . right to expect from tho sale Of these
landa
An attempt win be made 10 place the mat
Ter OF sale and appraisal wholly In the hands
Of : state board. majority Of which shan b
chosen from lantern Warrington. whore fyee-
dom from prejudice In tide land mattsrs II -
sumed 70 be indigenous to the soil
The theory that 6nds high favor east Of the
mountains 10 sale Of the lands ct public auc-
ton, regardless Of Improvements. prior rights.
or anything elsa The chief exponent Of this
singularly impartial doctrine was Speaker
Feishan. who urged II warmly and sloQuently
In the House, but Il met such pronounced dis
favor and was rejected % heartily that it was
abandoned The speaker then favored sschems
% recognise the impfove9 and shore owner only
when he had made actual improvement This
plan. while Il might not b very popular In
Eastern washington, was much more practical
BILE, bat the House likewise voted II down. Ills
likely TO Be again urged In the Senate, with
what chances Of success remains TO b eeeu.
These ere the most apparent grounds foR the
Aght against the bill There ere many minor
matters OF detail with which severe fault II
found, bat they are - various a. the minds Of
the members themselves and cannot be stated
In fall
The reasons for support Of the bin are Just ~
important ~ those againstit They ara. princi-
which must b recognised In some shape. and
e would be the sublimity Of folly for the state.
by refusing TO recognize these rights 70 antagon-
ire every shore owner on Puget sound and
Grays harbog and Shoslwater bay. n would
precipitate inserminable litigation and the re-
salt would Be that the state would not reap .
moiety Of the worth Of it, heritage Besides,
- a.
out Of ten IN impfover and never jumper. and
IT is but just and right that the state amply
recognise the man who hes done 20
much TO build mp the state and contributed 20
greatly 70 the volume OF its commerce. The
good sense OF this reasoning II fully ad-
nisted By Ill. % far - the improver 10 con-
cerned. and no project 70 deprive him Of his
dues has eve, been seriously made, except In
the instance OF tho plan 70 sell oil the lands q
pubic auction regardless Of improveme nts.
Whatever 10 done. the improver 10 safe.
The claim that boards Of appraisal IN the ssv-
eral tide land counties wo1id b influenced BY
local prejudice II regarded - . reflection upon
the honesty and integrity Of the people Of those
conntiea
II the whole disposition Of the tide lands were
TO be centered in one board. II would find itself
confronted with task which. In confederation
Of the variety Of interests IN the counties and
too gigantic TO b performed without local
boards Of management and appraisal There ID
sound sense, too. IN that claim.
A careful canvass has been made OF the
Senate and IL IL found that there 10 Just an even
division of advocates and opponents Of the bill.
with one doubtful. tbs:
For tho bili-Aussiu. Baker. C1osgh, Drum.
Fsirweather. Guilfosl. Jones. Kinnear, Knee.
land LAndes Luce, 0uines, Parkinson, Rine.
hart. Seaborg. Wood. wooding-I-.
Against the bili-FAriss. ForSyth. Houghtou,
Hunssker, HYDE. Iawrsnce. Payne. Preston. SNOW.
Thompson, G. r.. Thompson, l. p, Van Houten,
vessal, Watt. whallsy, wilson, Wolfe-i7.
Donhtfal-Lons-i.
The senator who made this canvass 10 IN
enemy OF the bill He has conceded 70 the
friends every one of the senators not known
TO be against IL with the exception OF Long who
has been absent for several DAYS. and whose A.
fstade cannot be guessed II 10 pretty certain
that Fairweather. Lace. Clough ard several 9TH
ers who are accounted amongst the support win
ask for modification OF some OF the provisions Of
the bill; and 10 10 known, also, that several Of
the orrossttoa-ysn Houten for oue-wffI vote
for the bill II certain changes are made Nearly
al the senstcs realize the great necessity Of
some kind Of legislation and. uncuessionably,
IN earnest effort viii be made 20 modify the
measure In snch manner that q majority can
support t. great objection 10 this course
however, Il ieund in the desire Of the friends Of
the bill in the House that 70 pass che senate
without amendment TIE hsI went through
the lower house with such very narrow major
isy that IT'S return there in amended shape 10
certain 20 iecpardsxe its chances IL womb be
worse than vain. however. to try to set the bill
through the senate wsshosf alteration. ard the
result II sure To be THAI Il VIII go 70 the House
Again II II PASSES the senate.
The eshi in the senate win b much the cane
~ tat IN the House. There 10 . certain tsc4sou
tat viii oppose the BIZ, In any share. ana that