The record-union., 1893-03-17
TIE FORD BILL.
Arguments Made Before Governor
Markham Yesterday,
For and Against the Ford Hydraulic
Mining Bill Recently
Passed.

Governor Markham held court yester-
day. He was the Judge and is likewise
the jury and is above ali the executive
sitting upon the fate of the bill. There
appeared before him yesterday forenoon
citizens protesting against the bill, and
citizens asking him to approve it. The
following named persons were present:
From Yuba County - Mayor n. A.
Rideout, Colonel E. Woodwork, 7. j.
Sherwood, DR.. Hamilton, B. f. Dam,
Supervisor Atkisson, J. C. White, AS
semblyman d. P. burst, Hon. c. P.
Berry, j. NJ. c. Jasper, w. T. Phipps.
From Suffer County-L. 2. Farmer, L.
B. Hull, l.. d. Nash, Eli Davis, Hon.
George Ohleyer. b. +. Walton, w. +.
Hoke. W. \. Rogers, n. b. Kiitley.
From Sacramento County-R. T. Dew
lin, ]. NJ. Morrison, Judge II. A. May
hew, p. j. krull, l. Erull.
From Placer County,. NJ. Fulweiler
and Senator Ford.
HON. r. It. DEVLIN
Appeared for the petitioners and at once
entered upon argument of the constitu-
uonal objections involved. He asked the
Governor to decline to approve the bill
bCNohoO lbC <lCb 10 Observation-Disclosures II
provides that hydraulic mining shall be
lawful so long as it does not do material
injury to navlgable streams and adjacent
lands. This, therefore, he said, author
lied any damage to unuavigable streams,
and IN other cases some damage. But
the State has not the power to authorize
one to do any injury to another without
a taking of property by due process OF
law" and after due compensation made.
He cited i'll support many decisions of
courts, and notably from the United
States Circuit Court for California, by
Judge Sawyer, and from the Supreme
Court in the Gold Run case.
The Act is unconstitutional, he contin-
ued, because it is a taking without due
process of law and without compensa-
ton, rights secured every person under
the Constituhon-that is, that no prop
erty shall be taken without the process of
the law being observed under the guar
antee Of the right TO life, liberty and prop
erty.
The Act is unconstitutional because it
is not competent for the State to exercise
power over the streams except for their
conservation in the interests of all the
people for their benefit. 1t cannot au-
thorlze any injury of the streams under
that power, nor their obstruction, much
less their destruction, nor the trespass
upon any private right upon the margin
OF the stream.
Even if hydraulic mining was declared
public use, there could be no exercise
of the right of eminent domain to con-
denim lands without compensation. He
read at length from authorities on these
points. He objected to the bill because
1t Is special legislation and cited Wiscon-
sin and New Jersey cases in support.
Governor Markham asked him ii our
laws do not prevent mills from putting
WGnGt NJ
piled that they do; that is to prevent a
wrong, to prevent injury, but Senate
Bill No. 30 is one to authorize injury by
some. If the bill said that anyone might
deposit matter in streams that would not
be special legislation, but this bill ex-
cludes the placer, the quartz and other
miners.
The bill. he said, conflicts with the
Caminetti bill, which this same Legisla-
ture asked Congress to pass. That bill
torbids deposition in the sEeams or trib-
utaries to the injury of navigable waters.
Material injury" is not used in that bill.
That bill is intended for the best interests
of farmers and valley alike, and gives the
speedleSt dellVerance, apparently, from
present perplexities. The Ford bill turns
both back ten years and into litigation
again.
In response to Governor Markham he
said that Congress, by the harbor bill.
long law and undisputed, exercised the
right to prevent indirect injury to har-
bors, even by deposit of Objectionable
matter on the margins of bays and rivers
and sounds, that by natural wash, storms
and floods might be carried into the navi-
gable waters. So in the Caminetti bill
Congress reaches to the indirect and re-
mote as well as immediate threat to the
navigaDle rivers, and hence it forbids de-
position of debris on river tributaries,
n q a fn
cept as provided in Section Of the bill,
which is a preventive section, to prevent
damage 20 the rivers.
Again, the miners had expressed it as
the sense of their class that the decisions
OF the courts should be respected and the
DEGREES obeyed, but that if any plan
could be devised on the line of the de-
cisions to have hydraulic mining re-
sumed, it should be done. On that basis
Congress had passed the Caminetti bill
Heretofore all proceedings had been by
injunction, on the ground that the injury
by hydraulic mining became public
nuisance. The Ford bill proposes 10 put
into the law an answer TO that. The Civil
Code says that nothing done under the
code shall be deemed a nuisance. Hence
the Act would cut Off the remedy now
afforded for injury.
1t is said the bill crystallizes the law on
the subject. 1t does not. 1t needs no
capitalization. Is it necessary to crystal
lie into an Act the right TO be a shoe
maker, or carry on blacksmithing, or to
do merchandising
Finally, the Government has repeatedly
said, We will not apply appropriations
to treat the streams until hydraulic min
ing ceases. This Act is intended to be
State declaration, and as such will say to
the Federal Government: Hydraulic
mining has not ceased; it is by law au-
thorized now. So the result will be to re-
open all the old wounds ana put US back
ten years to fight the battle over again.
At this point recess was had for one
hour, until l:50 P. NJ.