The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1897-02-19

nation of the arid lands OF the state in
compliance with the Carey act, and
beg leave to return same To the house
with the recommendation that i'm con-
sderation Of its great importance and
the magnitude of its scope, and also as
the bill is already printed, IL he placed
on general orders for the consideration
OF the whole house. This recommended
ton, however. carries with il no en-
dorsement from the members of said
committee. but on the contrary we
| deem IL our duty in recommending II
for consideration To point out somewhat
at length the most noticeable and OBJ
| teCtionable features of the bill.
We deem II In its present shape ex-
ceedingly Objectionable and there Is
grave doubt i'm the minds Of the MEM
bers OF the committee whether a bill
could he framed wherein the possible
benefits To acruc would warrant the
state in accepting the inevitable risks.
| The objections We hereby present are:
That its present appearance in gem
eral lead us strongly 10 suspect that It
is framed not So much with view to
protect the interests Of the state as to
serve the purpose of others interested.
That the board should consist of not
less than seven members, and that they
he subject IN removal AT the discretion
Of the governor.
The empowering OF five men with the
| unlimited authority this act contem-
plates, and the possibility of involving
the state Ia large amount. The pos
sibility and probability that settlement
and the money received from sales of
land viii not lie more than sufficient TO
maintain running exposes. and that the
land will eventually fall into the hands
of the bondholders, and IL sold AT all by
them, could be i'm large amounts. and
the best lands of the state would there
by he held by corporations and syndi-
Gates. to he disposed of by them as they
see fit. This would thus nullify the
universal intent of the federal govern
ment and the state IN dispusing of its
domain to actual settlers only and in
limited amounts.
In certain sections Of the state where
land liz held in alternate sections by the
state and by a corporation, we believe
opportunity for corporations to dispose
of their lands tn better advantage than
the state would make IL possible for
such corporation To sell all of their
land by undertaking before the state
could sell any, and AT the same time
require the state To maintain the canal.
The fact that any sales of land the
state might make with an inseparab bile
water right. as they would lie COM
PEELED to do To sell the land at ALL
would compel the state to maintain the
canal at whatever cost. Although the
implication is and the opinion seems to
prevail that the state shall not be liza
BILE, the fact that the bonds are coun-
tersigned by the secretary of state. and
have the great seal of the state attach
ed thereto. gives rise tn grave doubt as
to the ability of the state To be relieved
of such responsibility; the fact also
that no provision is made for the bonds
to read specifically relieving the state
from any liability. and the further fact
that the only provision I'm the bill look
ing towards such relief specifically re-
lates only to contracts for work done.
| demands the most careful scrutiny and
attention.
Where the state could again be liable.
would he in case Of the money being
exhausted before completion of work
and the Sl250 per acre limit reached.
and without being able To secure more
by bonds. A condition would then CON
front the state of lot of land bonded.
a canal worthless until completed, and
no way of completing 1t unless the state
stepped in and made the necessary ad-
vanccs.
That the bonds draw interest at six
per cent. payable semi-annually. and
the interest coupons also draw interest
at same rate which would double the
principal i'm T. tu II years.
The state could give no title To set
tiers. without assuming the obligation
of the bond.
The state must sell any corporation
owning land under the canal an indie
feasible right to any amount of water
at a price left entirely with the COM
mission.
1t is provided that the state auditor
shall examine into any accounts paid
by warrant. hut does not provide for
examination of accounts paid by bonds.
In the exercise of the right of eminent
domain where canals are constructed
through a country in which alternate
sections are owned by "A corporation.
the right of way for such a canal might
be made a large and unnecessary cost.
The proviso to sell only to settlers l60
acres each is proper. but would not APP
ply should the land go for the bonds
when IL could then be sold In one inn
mense body IL desired.
The commissioners give no bond, and
yet may have the handling of twelve
and one-half million dollars.
The proposition is simpliiied I'm con-
sidering its application To a body of
lHnu Indl bNI'u NY
the state. excepting the few settlers
that might he already upon II. In ap-
plying IL however to Il country in which
alternate sections are owned by cor
poration, and by the state, and where
il would he manifestly impossible tn
benefit the property of one without an
equal advantage to the other, II would
appear eminently just that each should
bear it's share OF the burden to secure
the advantage.
We believe IL to he a subject that de-
mands the best consideration of COM
mittee consisting of the whole house,
and that IL would he presumptuous for
committee of seven members I'm
matter of such magnitude. to recon-
mend either its absolute adoption or re-
lection.
IL can be improved, by amendments
In the way suggested, hut in curtailing
the authority Of the commission. their
power for good would receive the same
check as their power for evil. our final
recommendations are, that in its con-
sidcration, its general practicabiltty.
safety and eXpediency should be proven
beyond reasonable doubt. and that N
would he better to delay even now than
to incur any risk in an experiment on
the sale contemplated by this bill.
T. c. AEMITAGE.
Chairman Committee on Irrigation and
Water Rights.
The ways and means committee re-
ported back O'Malley's anti-gambling