The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1893-01-31
His Objections to the Huffman
Water Commission Bill Con-
sidered in Detail.
Wiser to Point Out It's Faults
Than Try to Defeat
1t Entirely.
Remedies That are Suggested for the
Things which We're Made tho Sub.
ject of Criticism.

lOuNA khu y v - SAk As
issue of the 25th inst, criticising the water
commission bill OF Mr.. Huffman. and while
agree with him that the bill ID objection
able. do not agree with him That the OBJ
~isctions are insuperable. Ii they were.
there would DO little hope of ever enacting
q law which would preserve to the people OF
Montana their constitutional rights in the
water which is 80 necessnry to the develop
ment o. the natural resources OF the state.
take il that Mr.. Shuart and the people
OF the state do not wish to see the control
of the water pass into the hands OF private
individuals or private corporations. tor 1t IL
we'll known that there would be . class OF
water-lords instead OF landlords who would
dominate the state. But to avoid this
the state muat act quickly or she will lose
her rights to the extent that the regaining
of them will be very costly. Every week
there are water companies being organized
to take possession OF the water rights and
reservoir-sises still untaksn. these projects
generally not being in the interest OF the
development Of the country but for the pur-
poses of speculation. 1t being admitted
that this position Is correct, il Ia not too
much to say that Montana's efforts in this
direction must be in the nature OF an ex-
pertinent. because the results OF similar
efforts ON the part Of other states have not
been as successful as anticipated, and Mon
tana must profit by their experience. Mr.
Hufman's bill outlines an experiment,
based to some extent IN the experience OF
other states and other lands, and it is wiser
for good citizens to point out its faults and
suggest amendments rather than endsavor
to defeat its purposes entirely.
Mi, Shuart says that the ndame de-
feet Of the bill is that it proposes to lay the
burden of the support of the system upon
the whole people through taxation, while
the benefits would accrue TO the compare
tive v few. This would DO serious if il
could not be corrected, but a simple amend
ment providing that fair tolls shall be
cha ged for water and that all surplus over
| the cost of maintenance. the interest on the
bonds, and the provision for the SINKING
fund shall go into the general fund OF the
state. or cout sc, in the first years OF the
system the surplus would be on the wrong
side, but in time this surplus would repay
the taxes previously advanced, aud would
60 far toward sustaining the state Cove n
mert, and through this means each cltlzen
would secure his share OF the water created
for all. and III which each and every person
ia entitled to his sha o. Ce tainly a FUN
va q . w obo
leads one to believe in the pc feet fairness
of Mr.. Shuart's statement that his G i'll
cism is a friendly" one.
Mr.. shuart cri.icizes the bill because it
does not state how the bonds are to be
paid and whether or not the state IL 10
guarantee the payment as we'll as pay the
interest. The criticism is good, but would
have been wiser had Mr.. Shuart suggested
the one OF two simple amendments neces-
sary, and aud expressed the o. lnlon whethet
or not the payment OF the bonds should
be guaranteed by the state. l believe ina
this guarantee will be necessary, for Mr..
shuart himself says that the district bonds
in California, even secured by the lands as
we'll rs the irrigation property, som times
requires this in order TO End a market. the
bonds OF these departments would nave
the advantage of those district bonds. be.
cause those districts are frequently sinai
in extent, cont oiled by local interests. anc
therefore more or less unreliable, Whlle the
proposed system in Montana would bt
p a~ctically a state enterprise. 1T 1t Is OBJ
lected that the state cannot constitution
ally guarantee these bonds issued by thu
water commission, the form of the com
mission may be changed so that tins efor
would become purely a state enterprise.
Mr.. Stuart objects to this bill or syster
because it Is a forced development of tn
country. be pursuing apparently two line
in this objection. The tirst Is that tho It'll
TO the lands are still n tho general govern
ment and that there will be no market TO
the water, bsslng his conclusion on tn
statement of the land now II ing under lrrl
CATION bitches a very large proportion
still uncultIvated. l believe that IL tn
state establishes some such system as lni
down in this bill and it becomes know
throughout the United States that a ma
can get a homestead of eighty acres fo
which the state will furnish water at a ia
rate, MIR. Shuatt would find that lhe iush t
, the arid lanus would be as great as to th
humid. There ia a very great d fferenc
; between lacing oneself under III
control Of the state and under tn
control OF Il private corporation. In
other line in shis objection is ths
l the agricultural industry is much d.
. pressed, prices are low. and that wit
forced DEVELOPMENT there will either TO
low an over pfoduction or thsre will be Il
market TOR the altar. That 10 q peculiu
S suggestion TO come from a Montanlal
though l will admit that Mr.. Shuart is nj
the only one who has made 1t, but 1T r.
calls to my memory my stndy of this histor
OF southern indiana, where nifty years hs
Z the farmers drove their hoga one or tW
A hundred miles TO the Ohio river and so
I th-m at a cent or two q pound. Double
i there We, @ IN those days and IN that se'
- tIou worthy citizens who deprecated al
& forced Development of the country. b.
i looking over that 5ectlOu OF Lnc slate az u
u present time one haf dly feels inclined
. Qraut that such citizens were the wise mt
of the dav.
u 4 minor objection presented by Mr.. SE'
art is that the vast land grant OF the Mort
Il ern tactic railroad Will be greutly ii
r Dteased In value az the expense OF 81
people. This u admitted, but il ID Il mi
fortune which cannot be avoided. wheth
: this or any other general system Is adopt'
a or whether the entire matter is left to p
ygte enterprise. 1t will always be- the pc
20 pie who Will &dd value to the land viii
n viii 10 constantly DO taken by the railroi
company. But even for this evil there Is
remedy, If tha people only choose 10 apr
II, and this reIGedY. in my opinion, Is I
~ only way by which the people will be al
~ to throw off tho control OF the Northe
" Pacific railroad company. Let tho psoI
change .he sna laws of the state 80 that
/ revenue shall be- collected from land valu
lG only, relieving all Improvements OF taI
Il ton, and this Northern Pacific compa
n and all other persons, companies and CO
10 porations who AIe holding large bodies
N land for speculative purposes Will We
II quickly dispose OF their holdings.
20 With your consent, Mr.. Editor. | will
view some othor t~eatures of the bill at n
III other time. WILL, kFNNEDY
10 Hslens, Jan. 2S.
ry
or Notice.