Evening star., 1898-12-12

been temporarily laid aside earlier in the
day. Mr.. Babcock said that the simple pur-
pose of this bill was to acquire the water
rights at Great Falls not already owned by
the government. The question. he said had
for a number of years been before Congress
and had been recommended by all off1clalS
associated with the water works OF the
District of Columbia.
MIR. DOckery asked what relation this had
10 electric ligh.ing. Mr.. BabcOCk SAID thdt
the power would be at the disposal of the
District. and that there was enough power
10 light the parks and streets of the Dis
triCt but that there was no provision in
this bill for the establishment of electric
lighting plants The purpose was to Sc
cure the right of the government to the
water for the water supply of the District
Of Columbia. Mr. Dockery and Mr.. Pitney
both suggested the possibility that the
measure might involve a great expenditure
Of money by The government.
Mr. Gaines Protest.
Mr.. Gaines said he wanted to protest
against the government going into the
water business. He wanted to get at the
bottom Of ihis business. He wanted to
know Mr.. Dockery asked for the reading
of the report He said that he did not
think the bill had any merit in 1t at all. 1t
provided for rowing commission to con-
Gemn land Mt will. and would involve very
large expenditure OF money. Mr.. Babcock
replied that the proposition had been very
eXhaustively discussed 1t had stood the
light Of day. and could stand it. II did not
provide for any rowing commission. He
yielded To Mr.. King who reported the bill.
Mr.. King said that the desire of Mr.. Dock
cry 70 have the report read could not he
that information might be had. he and
others I'm the House fully understood the,
question. The bill he said. was one that
should pass. that the government might he
relieved from being subjected perpetually
to suits fCI damages On account of the use
of water.
Mr. King reviewed the history of the legal
status of the riparian privileges at Great
Falls and the citys connection with the
subject.
Shall We continue this partial owner
skip continue the litigation said Mr.
Kius "or shall we by one act determine all
tn. questions and enlarge the water supply
Of lhe District?
Plain Business Proposition.
Mr. King declared there was no job in
This bin as had been intimated. The bill
presented a plain business proposition. and
every person connected with the matter
vJs q reputable person. The District COM
nittce had not found any job in the bill.
He said the question of the value of the
land abutting upon the water was of no
Importance: the riparian rights were alone
Of value.
In response to Mr. Pitney Mr. King said
that tn. fact that the government owned
land on one side of the river would not pre-
cIude the owners of land on the other side
from damming the river and utilizing the
Y ater power for themselves.
Mr.. Moody feared that the effect of this
act would commit the government to
policy of engaging in the electric light busi-
ness. He was not aware that such policy
was agreed upon by the government.
Mr.. King said he did not understand that
the passage OF this bill would commit the
government to furnish electric light if it did
not want to do SO.