The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-12-25
WRIGHT LAW is RUINOUS
A Practical Business Mar
Talks About Irrigation
Methods.
The Law, if Enforced, Means Ruin TO
Thousands of Farmers in This
State, and Is Unjust.

Henry Miller, of the great firm of NIL
Ter & Lux, was asked by CALL reporter
for his opinion with regard to the recent
decision of the United States Supreme
Court affirming the constitutionality
of the Wright irrigation law. Mr.. Miller
is very plain spoken man and uses the
most direct language. He is an earnest,
far-seeing man of business, shrewd
problem closely. Hence his opinion will
be accepted as of more than ordinary
value in relation to this subject.
Mr.. Miller said that the decision meant
ruin to many farmers if it were as sweep
ing as is generally believed. The decis-
ion is not accepted as final by the oppo-
nents of the Wright law. The Modesto
case. which was the one appealed to the
Supre me Court, simply confirmed the
organi cation of the district and the orig
mai ISIS ue of the bonds. They have been
sold since, and if there was any illegality
in their sale that sale was open to attack.
The landowners can still have redress in
he State courts against illegal or fraudu-
lent districts or bonds, and will seek it in
nearly every district in California.
The farmers in every district in the State
will make a desperate struggle to save
their homes and land from confiscation.
They have been made the victims OF
schemers and they have had their eyes
opened. All this talk about reputation. is
the veriest nonsense. 1t is a cry raised
by those guilty of either illegality or fraud
by which they are seeking to divert atten-
tion from the real facts.
Mr.. Miller mentioned the Poso district
and quoted passage from letter written
by a former director of that district as
follows:
IF there was ever displayed incom-
petence and ignorance in public work it
has been SO shown in the works of the
Peso district, for they disposed of $4,000
of the bonds of the district, collected $780,
600 cash taxes and as much delinquent,
besides some SIS, 900 warrants outstanding,
and have not given the landowners an
acre foot of water; and, further, / MAKE
the assertion that there has not been a
single bond paid for in legal manner.
"In the Alta district $4,000 was paid
for the old 1876 Canal Company system,
when they had been perpetually enjo1ned
from taking any water out of Kings River,
and have no right to-day to the water.
sin the Alessandro district $765, GOO in
bonds were issued for water rtiticates-a
mere contract-with the Bear Valley Com
panv. That company had a mortgage on
its property foreclosed, and for this high
bonded debt the landowners get nothing.
The Perris district issued $500, 600 bonds
in the same way, and is likewise lett in
the lurch. Neither of these districts ever
got water for tenth of the land"
Under the Wright law fifty or sixty men
owning land in an irrigation district, with
the assistance of a crowd of non-taxpay-
ers, are able to vote away the property OF
all the other landowners in the district.
The general effect of the decision will be
TO withdraw all lands in irrigation dis
tricts from all possibility of development
until the evil conditions existing in them
have been relieved by our own State
courts. More bonds cannot be sold, and
there is no hope of making any further
progress under the existing law.