The record-union., 1893-01-30
WHY NOT A PERSONAL APPEAL.

The REcoRD-UNIoN suggested some
weeks ago that it would be an excellent
idea for the Legislature to send COM
mittee Of its own body to Washington,
and ask that in the name of the sovereign
State of California it be permitted to
appear at the bar of the House and re-
spectfully address the national body, say
ing to it in effect, that the State of Cali
fornia finds flowing through its most
fertile territory great river over which
the Federal Government exercises sole
control. That the river by reason of
natural and artificial causes has greatly
declined and received injury, to which
the State, as such, was not party. That
the river is a source of danger and loss to
the people of the State, overfows their
lands and destroys their homes. That it
is navigable stream of high importance
and is the great drainway of the chief
valley of California.
The committee would then add that the
navigability of the stream is so endan-
gered that it must be needed, and that the
State asks of the National Government to
Immediately concern itself upon that
subject, correct The river to restore its
navigability and make this great heritage
of all the people of the Union no longer a
menace to the property and lives of the
citizens of California.
Of course such proceeding would be
novel. Only twice in our history has
there been anything resembling it. But
we cannot see any reason why a sover-
eign State may not address the national
body in this way. Certainly if consti-
tuted committee from a State Legislature
asks ten minutes in which to be heard.
the House of Representatives could not
well deny it. 1t surely could go into
committee of the whole to hear a respect
ful petition orally delivered, in the name
OF and by authority OF an integral mem
Der of the Union.
II the committee was heard, the hear
ing would awaken the interest of the
whole Nation; if it was denied, the very
fact of the refusal would command the
attention that is desired. If it is said
that there is no precedent for such a pro-
ceeding, then it may be replied that pre-
cedents must have beginning. If it is
said that it would open a door for the
practice of hearing States through the
mouths of legislative committees, we re-
ply that there is no good reason why
such should not be done. But it would
not be resorted to except in great emergen-
eies, such as now confronts California.
and Congress would have no reason TO
fear frequency of such appeals.
What is wanted is an appeal out of the
common, for the Federal Government to
take care of its own property; to make
navigable stream fully so, and prevent it
from becoming unnavigable, and that in
such an interest State Legislature. by a
chosen committee, should be heard by
the National Legislature since the method
OF petition has proved Intellectual after
being fully employed.
The idea Of the Legislature taking such
a step and sending committee of its
own body TO Washington robed in all the
dignity that a sovereign State can confer.
and making respectful demand for a
hearing, not by counsel but in person.
was presented to the Drainage and Re-
clamation Convention on Saturday. But
that body failed to grasp the idea. 1t did
not rise above the consideration of a
common lobby committee of non-ofi-
cials, and finally some one suggested the
brilliant idea that the Legislature could
not appoint such committee; that it was
the sole right of the Governor to appoint
and so the matter was dropped.
Of course the objection raised is absurd.
The Legislature has the right to send a
committee wherever it pleases. Its
action in doing so in no wise depends
upon or infringes on any power. duty or
privilege of the executive. OF course,
too, no one with a thimbleful of brains
has had any thought of asking Congress
to consider low land reclamation. It.