The record-union., 1898-05-06

eral be requested to advise this board
whether or not it has the right to per-
form work on the navigable portion OF
the Feather River, and on the Sacra-
mento River above the mouth Of the
Feather River, such works being part Of
the work deemed necessary for the i'm
provement of the navigable character
of the Sacramento River and for the
promotion of the drainage of said river
within the portion covered by the re-
port of the Commissioner of Public
Works, dated November 16, 1896
Accompanying the resolution is a
letter of your Secretary, in which he
says: AS I understand the matter,
Sections ,, 3 and especially the last
part of Section 4, on page IL, Statutes
of 1897, might be construed as limiting
this board to only doing work de-
scribed in the report of the Commis-
sioner of Public Works
Section 2 of the Act in question pro-
vides that for the purposes of this Act
the report of the Commissioner of Pub
lie Works, dated November IT, 1896,
and accompanying reports and plans
of engineers, shall be adopted and made
the basis of operations, and the plans
therein specified for promoting drain
age and improving and rectifying river
channels shall as far as practicable,
be carried out and finished as herein
provided
Section of the Act contains the
following provision: The Commissioner
of Public Works shall determine the
character and extent of the work to be
done in accordance with the said re-
full n
on and complete the same
Section provides that, There is
hereby appropriated out of any money
in the State Treasury not otherwise ap-
propriated the sum of 100000, to be
paid to the said Auditing Board, and
to be expended for the purpose herein
after specified, to wit: and
for doing all other work described in
said report, to improve and rectify
river channels so as to promote drain
age
IF the adoption and Incorporation of
the report into the law by reference
merely was within the power of the
Legislature. I am of the opinion that
while the question is not altogether
free from doubt, it seems to have been
the Legislatures intention that the
be done must be- in accordance with
the said report. The provisions in
Section 2 that the plans specified in
the report shall, as far as practicable.
be carried out and Finished as pro-
vided in the Act, does not seem to have
been intended to vest in the board au-
thority to do work not specified in the
report, but only to do the work therein
specified as far as the provisions of the
Act render it practicable. All these
provisions are more or less ambiguous,
and their meaning is on the whole very
doubtful (Signed), w. F. Fitzgerald,
Attorney General
AS TO DREDGING.
The following resolution adopted by
the Board of Supervisors of Placer
County, signed by the Chairman and
forwarded to the Secretary of the Com
missioner of Public Works, was read
and placed on file:
Whereas, The Commissioner of Pub
lie Works in his report to the Governor
of the State, dated November 10, 1896,
on the subject of dredging and levee
building in California, asks for the
cooperation of those interested in the
matter to give US all possible assistance
in order that the work may be done,
and
Whereas. Placer County is most
earnestly interested in said work; now
therefore be it
Resolved. That Placer County re-
spectfully but urgently requests the
Auditing Board to the Commissioner of
Public Works to at once build one or
more of such dredgers for use on the
rivers in this State as will meet the
requirements of the report of said
Commissioner of Public Works, to the
end that the work of clearing said riv-
ers of debris and construction of levees
may Immediately begin by the hy-
draulic ejector dredger and levee-
building system.
Resolved That this board pledges
itself to cooperate with said Commits
sioner of Public Works and the Audit
ing Board in their efforts to dredge the
rivers and keep them clear of debris,
and to build levees to protect low
lands. as suggested by the said report
of the honorable Commissioner"
Then the opinion of the Attorney
General published in full in Tuesday, s
| Record -Union') to the effect that un-
der the Act of the Legislature creating
the Auditing Board some Of the money
appropriated must be used for the pur-
| chase and operation of a dredger, or
dredgers, was taken up and was the
cause of a long talk and the advance
ment of many and different opinions.
State Treasurer Green was present
and he and Chairman Corcoran viewed
differently the proposition of purchas-
ing a dredger. Mr.. Corcoran said he
had never opposed the purchase of a
dredger, except for the reason that
there is no place on the river where
one can be used.
Engineer Nurse called attention to the
fact that the dredger named and rec
commended by the Commissioner of
Public Works was that known as the
Bates dredger, and that it had since
been condemned by expert engineers.
On motion of T. B. Hall, Nurses
statement was ordered spread upon the
minutes.
Nurse called attention to the fact that
| the proprietor of the Muir dredger
claimed that his machine would raise
solid matter thirty feet, while none of
| the others made would raise it more
| than ten feet. Nurse said before he
would recommend the purchase of a
| dredger that would not raise material
twenty feet he would resign. He said
| it would cost the State nothing to try
| the Muir dredger, as it's proprietor had
| offered to put in one, which, if not
| satisfactory, might be declined by the
| board
The proposition of dredging the New
town cri-