Middletown transcript., 1891-08-27
Law FOR THE RAINMAKERs.

3 Experiments are expected to decide
|; whether the production of rssn BY
) the use Of explosives is practicable
The question whether it can be done
} on q large scale and sufficiently
ecomically to justify general resor
[ to showers artifcially produced may
not De SO promptly determined; but
subsequent experiments may be ex-
, pected to settle these points also
Should all the scientific doubts as to
the practicability of the new cloud
compelling scheme be dissipated
some very interesting questions of a
constitutional and legal character
must inevitably arise.
If we are to enter upon the work of
forcing the clouds to drop "their
garnered fulness down." when neces-
sary, or the even more serious task of
compelling them to bring up fresh
supplies from distant points, it is OBJ
vious that it must be done in syste-
matte manner. II would hardly be
practicable for every farmer and gard
ener to establish little rain factory
of his own. The difficulty Of bring
ing down rain from clouds immediate
| ly above particular spot has already
been noted in these columns. The
moisture may not be there. If we
assume that the experiments are to
succeed, it seems necessary also to as
sumo that the disturbance produced
in the atmosphere by explosion will
set in motion currents of air which
will bring moisture-laden air from
points more or less remote. The
claim that this can be done has not,
perhaps, been distinctly made, but it
appears to be implied, for it seems
necessary, to make the scheme success.
full.
1t is clear that, if we are to go into
the business of producing rain artiti-
cially. the necessity for regulating it
will Immediately be felt. Will it
be matter of State or Federal con-
cern !? Congress has power to regulate
eee e IL cree anaeHg The States bat the the
importation or expectation of rain
clouds from one State into another
could hardly be construed as COM
merce, unless, indeed, syndicates
should be formed to carry it on as
regular business. Nevertheless, it is
easy to see that complications might
arise between the States, growing out
of their claims to passing rain-clouds.
1t might be practicable for the State
of Indiana to divert to~its own parch-
ed fields, by the use of gases and dyn-
amite, an extensive cloud, on its way
10 break long drouth in Kentucky,
or vice versa. Acts of this sort would
not be conductive to amity among the
States, and the Supreme Court might
be asked to put a astop to them by in
junction. Such controversies between
States could hardly arise unless it
was found practicable to bring cur
rents Of air, and with them rain
clouds, from considerable distances
but they might easily arise between
citizens of adjoining States residing
near the border, even if the distance
to which the atmospheric disturbance
extended was comparatively small.
As between citizens of the same
State there would be no question of
jurisdiction, but there might be many
of personal rights. The proprietor Of
farm. owns it up to the sky. The
clouds above it belong to him. His
property in them is, doubtless, of a
qualified nature, similar to that which
he has in the wild animals and birds
in his woods and fields; when they
fly away they are no longer his. So
when the clouds pass away his right
to them is at an end. But this may
be construed to mean that they shall
pass away in obedience to the forces
Of Nature acting without interference.
To divert cloud by artificial means
before it had time to discharge its
moisture upon the fields of the tenn
porary owner would seem analogous
to obstructing or diverting a water
course. and might afford ground for
an action.
Apart from these questions of terri |
torial rights, others Of serious nature
might have to be met. Who is to de.
eide when the emergency is great |
enough to justly an interference with
the order of Nature in the production
of rain I? 1t is not likely that every
body will want rain at the same time.
When farmer A thinks he ought to
have good rain to help out his corn
or revive his grass, farmer B may
wish to save his hay or thresh his
wheat, and farmer c may be going to
a picnic without an umbrella. Whose
interests are to be consulted, whose
preference is to be respected, in such
cases? If A compels the clouds to ir-
rigate his cornfelds and they slop over
and rum BIS hay, and spoil C's new
Sunday suit, must not A be made
answerable in damages !? Is he not
bound, according to the legal maxim,
SO to use his own clouds as not to in
jure the hay and the fine clothes Of
his neighbor
1t is easy to foresee that there will
be proposition to avoid these diff
culties by turning over the regulation
of the rain to the Government. That
is the modern device for avoiding all
sorts of difficulties.
But it is clear that the Federal
Government has no authority under
the Constitution sthat would enable
It to discharge such functions in a
satisfactory way. 1t cannot enter
upon or acquire any land in the States
without the consent of their Legislator.
es. The State governments might,
indeed, take charge of the matter, but
they would be subject to great en-
barrassments. The interstate COM
plications that might arise have al
ready been limited at, but these would
be by no means the worst. Id the
exercise of the discretion necessarily |,
III IL IL s.a1i