New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-03-19
THE GENESEE RIVER COMPANY.


The Genesee storagereservoir project has
frequently been before the Legislature. The
scheme to erect a great dam in the neighbor-
hood Of Portage and food large tract OF mats
with the surplus water OF the rainy season 10
regulate the flow Of the river and supply the
mills OF Rochester in the dry time has been
favorite one with Rochester business men and
politicians. Hitherto it has generally been pre-
sentcd in the form Of demand that the State
undertake the enterprise and on that account
has met with opposition as an attempt to build
up n political machine with State patronage
and nm improper levy on the public treasury
for an undertaking largely OF private interest
Evidently in despair Of securing an appropr1a-
ton the friends Of the plan have turned their
attention In another direction, have apparently
found n method by which they can make the
Genesee River yield them richer harvest than
they before dreamed, and their bill. which
passed the Senate yesterday, Is one to confer
upon them extraordinary powers to condemn
land impound waters, sell and transmit power.
supply villages with water, and last but not
least to make the State pay them for any
larger supply than It now receives for the Erie
Canal
We are by no means disposed to antagonize
any well-considered and equitable plan for the
Improvement Of the Genesee River. Nor are we
frightened by the notion that n private cor
poration should develop that water power to
its own advantage. A dog-i emanger pol
lev no more becomes State than an individual.
If the State is not prepared to regulate and con-
serve the waters Of the upper Genesee we see
no reason why private enterprise should not
have the right under suitable restrictions to do
60 The river IL subject to floods and low
water In the summer time the flow through
Rochester is scarcely enough TO cover the bed
and keep it clear OF refuse. though how far
that may be due to diverted streams In mill
races and how far 10 drouth may be open 10
question. But, on the whole. there appears 10
he reason to doubt that a storage reservoir
would benefit n large number OF people. and if
private corporation wishes TO confer this
benefit in the expectation Of getting n reason
able return, we'll and good, provided all public
and other private interests are adequately pro-
tected
Perhaps there may be some question rs to
the rights Of property-owners near Portage, and
certainly the natural scenery Of Portage Falls
and the famous High Banks should not be care
lessly sacrificed. Both Of these questions have
to do with local details Of which cannot
speak, but the duty of the Legislature Is plain
to make sure that both natural beauty and prop
erty rights are guarded. A further duty, and
one more plainly in need Of exercise. Is regard
for the future needs OF the State itself. The
project was urged upon the State on the ground
that the present supply was insufficient for the
canal and that m-racos were robbed 10 fill
feeders When II was answered that the State
had already paid the millers in full for all water
It needed and the mills were entitled only TO
what the State left, it was said that the deep
ening of the canals would make even all the
water TO be had regardless of the mills INSULT
Gent. Yet In the face of that assertion these
Rochester hackers Of the scheme ask the State
to give away It's reserve rights in the river
without compensation. and pay corporation
to get back the water which they say it i'm
peratlvely requires We think Senator Els
worth was entirely right in denouncng the
clause compelling the State to pay for any
water It may hereafter need.
1t must be remembered that the State owns
this water, that corporation cannot use it, or
condemn necessary land, or build n dam except
by favor OF the state. 1t would only be just
compensation for the grant Of eminent domaln
and the other valuable gifts extending all over
Western New-YOrk which the bill confers to
require the company to furnish free whatever
water the State may require. If the company
has profitable field in furnishing power and
water to manufacturers and villages It can af-
ford to pay the State for that chance TO make
money. If 1t has such profit In prospect,
and expects TO make its money merely by sell
ing water for the canal. it has no right TO n
franchise. II Is not proper 10 charter a COM
pany to do piece OF State work by indircctlon
which the State has not seen 1T to undertake
for itself