The record-union., 1895-04-24
WILL DAMS RESTRAIN
Some Points From Judge Sawyer's
Decision.
Important Facts Which We're Laid
Down Clearly in the North
Bloomfield Case.


tion under the Camiuetti bill.
The Liberty Hill Company filed af1ida-
Wits alleging the construction of dam
in the channel of Bear River sufficient to
impound the debris from defendants
mine for ali time. and motion was made
to modify the injunction and allow de-
fendant TO work it's mine and deposit The
debris in the river above the dam. Coun-
ter affidavits were filed and the motion
was resisted. The motion was denied by
Judge Sawyer, who said:
"In the lace of the conflicting views of
engineers on the subject, it is Impossible
to be satisfied of the sukficiency of this
dam. The whole matter rests in mere
opinion. We have no right to blindly
speculate upon matters of such conse-
quence. With our limited facilities we
can not forsee, with reasonable certainty,
what may occur in these mountain rivers,
confined in deep canyons, which some-
times become irresistiD Die torrents. Moth
ing short of the attribute and prescience
OF Omnlscience is equal to the task OF de-
termining the sutticiency OF such dam;
and nothing should be accepted as suf-
ficient, except upon the most indisputa-
bic and demonstrative evidence. . y =
! The lamentable failure OF the State in
building debris restraining dams under
an expenditure OF half a million of dol
lars, and the equally unsuccessful efforts
OF private mining companies, shown in
! the debris case, 8 Sawyer, 4S0, furnish
warning against relying too confidently
upon the skill or opinions OF engineers,
| however eminent. i ne restraining and
| impounding dams erected by the State,
whose interest it was 10 make them suf-
| tiCient, were in the plains, on compare
| lively low grades. That of the Eng
! lish dam, doubtless, was in a more
! difficult position, and was a water
dam merely. These were on a larger
! scale, il is true, and, possibly, some of
| them in more dangerous positions than
the present one; but, If so, it is only
| difference IN degree. The same princi-
| pies of physics and dynamics uuderlie
| and control and govern them all. 1t is
! not for us, with our limited facilities, to
estimate and speculate upon possIbili-
| ties, and measure OF and lay down a line
| indicating just how far trespassers may
| encrOach upon the domain and Overpow-
ering forces of nature, within the sup
! posed limit OF reasonable possibility or
| probability, with safety to the rights OF
| parties below upon whom the trespasses
are committed. a court having power
| to enjoin the nuisance might, with just as
much propriety, refuse an injunction
| against the erection by the owner on his
! own premises OF q magazine for the stOr-
age OF dynamite, adjoining and next to
! his neighbOr's house, upon the evidence
| of experts i'll the matter that the magazine
| IS constructed with the most perfect skill,
! and thatit is and will be guarded by all the
| means for securing safety known to sci
! ence. Such magazine might never eX-
plode, yet it is liable TO explode any mo-
ment.
"And the same would be true of one of
| these debris dams, built across one Of
1 fn q
roaring torrents.
"It Is for the pecuniary interest of hy-
/ draulic miners to get out as much of the
! precious metals as possible, with the least
possible expense. The interests of the
! moving party in this matter are simply
to tide over the present and escape in
functions until its mines can be worked
| out. What happens atterWard is no con-
Germ Of his. %
lit may well be doubted whether any
| restraining dam. however constructed,
across the channel of the main mountain
rivers, of a torrential character, should
! be accepted by the courts as sufficient
protection to the occupants of the valley
/ below liable to be injured"
! In rendering his decision in the cele-
brated case OF Woodruff VS.. North Bloom
field Gold Mining Company, Judge
! Sawyer said:
In view of these undisputed, indis-
could possibly be more averse than we
are to applying any remedy 10 the griev-
I ances complained OF that must put an
! end to hydraulic mining, ii any other
can be revised admitting of its contInu-
| ance, compatible with the safety and
rights Of the public, the complainant and
| numerous others similarly situated, OF
! whom he is a representative. We have,
therefore, sought with painful anxiety
| some other remedy; but mono has been
suggested that appears TO US to. be al all
adequate TO the eXigencies OF the case, or
at least none available in che present
stage OF the case. Two were suggested in
MendelPs report:
~. The purchase OF large tracts of low
lands III the valleys, which are now or
may be permanently covered with water,
without material injury TO navigation or
other property owners, and turning the
entire uba River, with it's debris, into
them, using them as settling reservoirs
so. the building OF impoundiug dams
at suitable points on the river to hold
back the heavier portions of the debris.
The first seemed to be regarded as too
expensive to be feasible. The second is
the only one suggested and urged in this
case, and much testimony has been taken
as to the practicability and safety of the
plan. As is usually the case, the views of
different engineers and experts, distiB-
guished in their profession, differ widely
upon the points OF practicability and
safety. The larger number of witnesses
called, and much the larger amount OF
testimony, so far as mere opinion goes,
are doubtless in favor OF the practiCabiIity,
| If sufficient means are furnished. But all
the practical experiments heretofore
made, aJ great expense, unGer the super
vision Oi the State and OF competent en-
giueers, have been lamentable failures.
The dams constructed were doubtless in
| Ia llt i,af
guaranty have the court, and those whose
lives and property are at stake, that any
future works of the kind will not also be
detective? AS at present advised, with
some knowledge OF the operations of the
tremendous forces Of nature, we cannot
undertake to say, upon the mere opinion
of experts generally at variance, as il
this case, however competent that the
, scheme would be practicable and safe
) We cannot define in advance what works
shall be sufficient and authorize the con-
tinuance OF the acts complained OF upon
the performance of any prescribed con.
ditions.
"In view of past experience. here anC
elsewhere, with the damming up o.
waters, and of the wide difference O
opinion of competent engineers on the
subject, it is clear that we should not be
justified in an attempt to prescribe in adj
/ vance any kind of dam under which
t large community should be compelled t
c live in dread of a perpetual. seriously
: alarming and ever-present menace. Ever
the pure waters of Niagara, within the
: memory of man, have made sensible
: impression upon their bed Of compac
S rock, adapted to its purposes by an Al
e mighty and Omniscient power. Portions
" of it's solid walls from time to time yielC
to the force of the mighty flood and arr
precipitated into the abyss below. Says
the author of the article on Niagara Falls
/ in the NelO american CycLOpetl1a: In th,