The record-union., 1896-01-22
AN ExAMPLE OF sEcrToNAIIsM.

We find in Los Angeles paper what
we consider to be a remarkable exam
pie of ignorance, narrow -mindedness
and uncharitableness. The paper in
question, which claims to be a leading
exponent of public opinion, denounces
the recent river convention held. at San
Francisco and the appeal made to Con-
gress by it as sectional, unjust and
egotisticaI,'' because the convention
dealt in strong language in calling it to
do its bounden duty and care for the
rivers in the State that it owns and con-
trolls.
The journal from which we quote
says Of the memorial adopted by the
convention:
Here are some extracts: sThe i'm
Improvement Of the navig gable waters of
Northern and Central California con-
stftutes the most important question
engaging the attention of the people of
he State" If instead of the words "the
people of the State" the words the
people of Northern and Central Califor
nian had been used no one would have
objected But the statement as 1t
now appears is untrue. The improve
ment of the rivers and harbors of the
State is the most important question
engaging the attention of the people of
the State, but the Improvement of the
waterways of a section are only 'the
NEST important question to that par
ticular section. Here is another SEN
tence of the same untruthful character,
because it only applies only to one river,
not to all the waterways as it should:
BESIDE this question of their improve
ment all other questions affecting the
welfare of California pale into compar-
ative insignificance" 1t is this sys-
tenn of ignoring this section and fancy
ing that San Francisco and its tribu-
tary territory is all California that Gre
ated and keeps alive a division senti-
ment.
viii our contemporary tell us what
the making of harbors on the coast has
to do with saving the navigable rivers
from the destruction with which hy-
drauIic mining menaces them? VIII it
name a navigab1e river in the south or
name navigable river in the south; or
damaged by the down. pouring of slick
ems and detritus9 VIII it poiat out on
the map single stream in the south
that is under Federal control and that
Congress alone can deal with? Will
it point out, if 1t can, why the welfare
Of the vast drainage area of the Sacra-
mento, the san Joaquin. the Feather
and the Yub1 Rivers. the property of
/ the State, paying taxes to it, upholding
it and Government. and doing its full
share in the scheme of free government.
is not the concern of all the people of the
State?
In the name of common deeency,
what is there sectional, partial. unfair
or unjust in addressing Congress in
strong language, even extravagantly
strong language, in setting forth the
necessity for its keeping it's contract
made when it assumed control of these
navigable streams2 What is there in
the appeal to Congress for the only
navigabIe rivers of the State that
Southern California is not concerned
in, as well as northern and central Sec
tons?
BY what possible route does the Los
Angeles Express" arrive at the con-
clusion that the effort TO secure in Con-
gress passage of such measures as will
conserve interests that concern all the
taxpayers, al values. all assessments.
ali internal commerce. all mining and
ferming. climatology and forest growth.