El Paso daily herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1881-1901, 1899-12-20
PUBLIC POLICY
TContinued From 1st Page.

the defendant company can be al
lowe1?'
81 would not like to assume thai
harsh position. My idea is that the
court can ascertain exactly what effect
the building of this dam would have or
the stream, and provide for proper
supervision of the construction and
mana cement of toe dam and the use OF
the water"
| Judge Burch dwelt at some length
on. the ipadvisability of per-
hitting any corporation to acquire q
monopoly of running water.
| MR.. HAWKINS OPINION
In opening Mr.. Hawkins expressed
the opinion that if the United Sta 'es
supreme court had had before it last
MAY the testimony taken at this hear
ing regarding the navigability of the
Rio Grande, it would not have declar-
ed it navigable but would obave decid-
ed in favor of the defendant company
on tn at point as on all others.
| "There cannot be substaE tial in
reference with an unsu bs tantial right, "
said Mr.. Hawkins. And navigation
of the Rio Grande has been declared by
every illness to be at the present time
| failure If not "farce."
Judge Burch's proposition that the
interests of the people must be
the interest of the people lie in this
case. The defendant has complied
with every law, federal or territorial,
| that applies to its acts or Intentions.
1t will be under the laws of the ter
ritory after the building of the reser-
voir. The people of Texas cling to the
law of riparian rights and refuse to
permit waters to be diverted for irri-
cation. The lower Rio Graude cannot
be navigated and the people down
there will not use the waters for irrigs-
tion, and hence the proposition of the
prose cuJion resolves itself into an at
tempt to take water from people who
want 1t for irrigation and send 1t down
the river to flow past people who can
not navigate and have no right to
irrigste.
SOME POINTED WORDS.
If the government wants the court
merely to limit. instead of prohibiting,
the use of these waters in New Mex
loo, why does it not send an expert to
advise the court upon this question?
And if the people of New Mexico are
not to be permitted to divert and use
| those waters, who is to get th EN-? The
attorney general says there is no leg al
obligation resting on US to give back to
Mexico what she sold US many years
ago. If these waters belong to the
be given to Mexico. Mr.. Follett is on
record that the bitches of New Mexico
have not impaired navigation on the
lower Rio Grande, but diversion in
Colorado.
"This grasping corporation, this
English company" said Mr.. Hawkins,
proposed to give the people along it's
canals water rights more favorable in
price than we gave them in the Pecos."
Mr. ~ ~ hnn 70
nounce the action OF one Brigadier
General Arson Mills, with head
quarters in Ell Paso, head of the
boundary commission. sit is shown
by letters here in evidence" said Mr..
Hawkins, ''that he asked the state de-
partment to ask the interior depart
ment to have no more reservoir sites
granted, and the order was'issued." 1
have q right to refer to this matter be-
cause it reflects on some of the witness
es in interest in this case. The ques-
ton was referred back to General Mills
whether he wished to include the Pecos
in that probs bility, and he SAID no, be-
cause it empties into the Rio Grande
below the site for the international
dam. This action of Mills and his as
social IS stands asone of the most gigan-
tic conspiracies that ever threatened a
community's welfare. 1t is q rehec-
ton upon some of the Witnesses that
have appeared In the court. 1 do not
reflect upon the departmental justice or
any other department of the govern
ment. It is against the men that
caused this suit to be brought that we
direct our condemnation.
THAT SENATE REPORT.
Here is q senate document, in which
it is stated that Gen. Mills appeared
before q senate committee, told it
about the international dam, and said
that when the dam was completed it
could be turned over to private cor,
poration. Who is in the corporation?
Is Mills? Or Weber? Or Weber's at
torney who has testified in this court?
Or Follett? Will that corpor alton in
fiict any injury on the people?
Not only that, but it has been ad-
vanced by district attorney of this
territory, and brought before the su-
preme court of the United States, that
we are liable to Mexico for our acts in
This conspiracy has reached SO far tn at
our own agents who were employed to
protect ou- rights as q nation have &C
tually declared before this and other
courts that there is a legal obligation
resting on US to give these waters over
to foreign nation; and that notwith
standing one of the attorneys general
has written an exhaustive opinion that
there is no obligation resting upon US
whatever.
Mr.. Hawkins then referred to the
"enOrmous contention" of the plaintiff |
and it's far reaching effect. If the |
right of navigation is to stop irrigation |
along the eadwaters and tributaries |
Of pavigable streams, it means the |
death of agriculture in Colorado, Wyo-
ming, Montana, Utah, the Dakotas, |
aud other states and terri |
tories. A glance at the map will show