The record-union., 1891-09-23
THE HYDRAULIC MINING PROP
OSTTION.

By invitation of hydraulic miners of
Iowa Hill the Supervisors of this county
are this week TO visit that section of
Placer County and observe whether or
hydraulic process, is within the category
of the kinds of mining that contribute
materially to the filing Of the navigable
streams, and the destruction of, or great
injury to bottom lands along such rivers
and their tributaries.
If the Supervisors, after viewing the
works and examining the drainage from
them, believe the working of these mines
to be injurious TO the streams and low
lands, then the miners will submit with
out contest to the issuance of the perma-
nent injunction the Supervisors now con-
template praying the court to issue.
These mining men are confident that
they do not contribute to the injury of
the streams and valley lands, and they
propose to submit the occular proofs to
the Board of Supervisors and to abide by
their judgment, because it is cheaper for
them than to make the showing in court
and engage in a long contest, and because
they dislike litigation even with the as
surance of victory.
What objection can be reasonably made
to this proposition? When the defend
ant proposes to the plaintiff that he de-
eide the case at issue, the plaintiff who
declines is a fool. The people of the
valley are not the enemies of the people
of the mines. They have not gone into
the courts to invoke the protection of the
law in a spirit of malignity or anger
With them, it has been, and is, a case of
necessity, a case of first duty-self protec-
ton. They cannot sit idly by and see the
free highway, upon the borders of which
they reside, filed and destroyed by artifi-
cial processes, and their lands and homes
buried in a sea of mining slickens and
sand. Ifthere is anywhere, and by any
one, hydraulic, or other mining sys-
tenn in operation that does not do damage
to the valley, the people thereof have no
cause of complaint against such system.
The valley is right in the position it has
taken, and the courts have wisely inter
preted the law in the matter of hydraulic
mining. If there are now or are hereafter
discovered unobjectionable systems of
hydraulic mining the valley wishes them
to be employed; it is impossible to fore
cast what science and skill may devise
and accomplish in this matter. We be-
lieye that there is ground that can be
worked by hydraulic process without in
jury to the rivers or valley lands. Wher-
ever this is possible, common justice de-
mands that it shall not be interdicted In
fact, the people of the valley and the
country have contended that the law was
against systems that do injury such as al
ready referred to; that the miners who
take care of their mining detritus are not
forbidden to work their ground.
There is not a thinking man in the Sac
ramento Valley who would not gladly see
mining restored to its former state of
prosperity, and to its one-time vigorous
ability to contribute 10 the common in
dustry and wealth of the State, provided
it can be done without invasion of the
rights Of riparian owners, Iowland
dwellers, and the best interests of the
valley.
The people of this valley ask for no in
justice to be done for their gain, and in
sistthat none shall be done to their injury.
Therefore the proposition made to the
Supervisors of this county is one that the
board did well to accept. 1t is common
honesty and decency to go and view the
ground, the works, and the drainage
from them, before taking legal steps in
the premises.