The record-union., 1897-02-11
SAVING THE RIVERS.

tinues to object to the proposition to
clear the channels of the naVigable
streams and open the deltas of the Sac
in pending measures, not because the
work is not needed; not because the
benefits to the State will far exceed
the cost, but because, as it puts it, such
work ought to be a Federal charge
The rivers are the property of the
United States. says the Chronicle"
not of the State of California; there
fore the treatment they need should be
applied by the Federal Government.
Let us look at that proposition. 1t
comedies the necessity for something
being done 10 preserve the integrity of
the navigable streams. 1t comedies that
the result of such clearance would be
direct and vast benefit to the people,
not only to those who travel upon this
free highway, but to all who are re-
lated in any way to the prosperity of
the State, and to the cost of main
tanning State government. These things
we say, are conceded by any argument
that admits that the Federal Govern
ment should treat the streams.
But the Federal Government does not
do the work. We have been labOring
with it since 1872 to engage it in rec
lamation of the navigable channels of
these rivers. But California is so dis
tant from Washington, the demands for
river and harbor work at the East are
so enormous the river bills are so
loaded down with riders whenever
California rivers are named for i'm
provement, that hope has almost re-
solved itself into despair of getting re-
lief from the Federal Government. In
the meantime the streams are more and
more degeneratin commerce is more
and more suffering in consequence, and
the hope of restoring the natural drain
age of the great valleys grows fainter.
Under such conditions what should
people situated as are Californians do?
The obvious answer is help themselves.
This is all the more important when 1t
is taken into account that as an Incl
dent. natural and inevitable. of deep
ening the streams, lands lying along
them will become so much more valu-
able as to augment the States assess
ment roll enormously, and thus actu-
ally work a great economy.
Yet in no sense can the proposition to
clear the navigable streams be said to
be a plan to spend State money for pri-
vate benefit. The State should never
do that, nor should it refuse TO benefit
itself because private interests will also
receive benefit. Precisely the same
thing would result if the Federal Gov
ernment at once treated the stream.
betterm6nt of the navigabiIity of the
rivers no matter whence the betterment
proceeded. Always and everywhere
public Improvement inures of necessity
fit of those who own property within
the field Of the public work. But who
will undertake to say that because of
that common truth no public better
ments should be made.
Our contemporary pronounces the
proposition to make an effort to save
the chief nayigable rivers of the State
from further degradation a contemplat-
ed steal" and adds that if it only knew
what dredger was to be used in the
work, it would know more particularly
concerning the steal" Our contem-
porary confesses it's ignorance of what
has long been public matter Some
months ago State engineers called at
tention TO the work prosecuted upon the
Mississippi River by the Federal Gov
ernment with success under a new sys-
tenn Of dredging, and suggested that the
application of the same means to the
Sacramento and San Joaquin would be
one of the most beneficial steps that
could be taken.
Later in official reports the same sub
iect was treated elaborately, and re-
ceived much attention from the press of
I
tive in his biennial message to the Leg
isture invited attention to the PROPOSE
ton to better river conditions and ur-
gently advised that body in very en-
phatic language that when the Federal
Government neglects to do such work
and State interests suffer in conse-
quence. 1t is the duty of the State to
step in and do for itself that which is
demanded in the interests of commerce.
drainage of the valleys and the restora-
ton Of the navigability of the streams.
out Of these propositions to look into
the system employed by the United
States engineers on the Mississippi with
such remarkable results. assuming it to
be found to be all that it is represented
and applicable to California, the present
measure before the Legislature had its
birth
Unfortunately for the qualification of
our contemporary curiosity and lack
Of information, there is no machine
named in the bill, neither is there any
machine hidden behind the proposition.
Nothing could have been more open and
more debated than has been this pro-
position TO clear the channels and open
the deltas by machine devices. If the
bin is not sufficiently guarded and
hedged about to prevent stealing, then 1t
will be a matter of no great difficulty
to set up all the safeguards necessary
If there is any steal contemplated in