The weekly true Democrat. (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1905-1912, 1907-05-31
THAT DRAINAGE
PASSED AGAIN
Which Means That IL win Ne Fousbi
AGaIA 20 q Finish.

Monday the Drainage Bill, which had
already gone through the Senate, was
passed in the House by vote Of IS to
IA, the vote for and against as follows
For passage -Messrs. Avant, Rag
gett, Carter, Cobb, Crawford, Decker,
Doke, DUPONT, Farris, Faulkner, Geig-
er, Griggs, Harvell, Johnson, Kilgore,
Kirkland, knight (Citrus), knight
| (Columbia), Lassiter, Long, MeypiL
Hams, Malone, Mathews, Neel, ParkinA
son, Paul, Peaden, Peoples, Pettigrew,
Reese, RichbOurg, Rowe, Smith, Smell,
Wartmann, Willis Levy, Williams,
Wilson (Hernado), Wilson Tee -Se,
/ Against Passage - Mr.. Speaker
Messrs. Alternately, Calkins, Clar'ta,
Donegan, HartsfeG, Hooker, McKen,
zie, Melton, MillinOr, Morrison, Russell
Watson, Wells---14.
While the present law is not as sweep
ing as was the former proposition,
making the Board constitutional, and
creating constitutional ezars Of the
Boards FIVE members, we still hold %
the opinions of this gigantic drainage
scheme we did before and during tho
campaign which gave such a decided
majority against Il, ana still feel TINT
not another dollar should be spent on
Governor Broward's drainage scheme
until the courts have settled the owner.
ship of the Everglade lands and experts
have shown the feasibility and pFactF
cability of it all cOnclusively and salts.
factorily to the people Of Florida, and
must say we are surprised that 9 ma
jority Of the Legislature should have
passed the bill.
On the subject we copy the following
from the West Palm Beach Tropical
Sun of the 18th:
The new irrigation bill known as the
Crane bill in the Senate, and as Bill no,
AGA IN the House, Is similar ~ the olt
drainage bill, and fully as unjust IN that
IL imposes q tax on a few for the benos
at Of all. The bin differs from the Old
one mainly in the fact that the area to
be taxed Is definitely specified. Astha
lands decided by the General Govern
ment Of September %, 1850, are sub
ject to a drainage tax Of five cents per
acre. This area is practically all tho
land in Southern DeSoto county, Lee,
Dade and Monroe. This bill carries
with il not only an unjust basis Of tax
alton, but Is Objectionable also Tor tho
| following reasons
No complete and thorough survey Of
been made 70 determine what part, IL
any, of this territory is susceptible Of
drainage, or the practicability Of drain
ing same, or the value thereof
The United States Government has
recently been having the territory en-.
amined and surveyed to ascertain tho
practicability Of such drainage, and IN
Til that examination is completed and
a report on same Is made Il IL not do
sirable to expend the money ofth0
state or Taxpayers upon any project
Of drainage In this region.
No complete and detailed estimates
Of the cost of the drainage and reela-
nation In this district have been made,
and no complete plans and estimates 0f
the amount or cost Of the work have
been made, and no money should be- x-
pended on same without these detailed
plans and estimates.
A large portion Of the area included
in the district mentioned IN this, act
probably at least twO-thirds Of same,
Is In the southern part Of what lie known
as the Everglades, and Is not worth re-
claiming from an economical or prolltn-
bic standpoint. The lower or southern
part Of the territory contains but littlo
soil and Ia rocky, and the fall is very
slight, and the drainage of same would
not, from financial standpoint DO
practicable or desirable.
The evidence taken in the litigation
in reference to this matter in the United
States Circuit Court at JaeksoDville,
showed that the drainage Of aslarRo
part of this area or the effect OF taking
the water from same would eapbe tho
destruction Of the soil thereof BY FIRE,
and In many respects unfit the same for
cultivation II the water is entirely takcu
from this land
Some Of the afiidauts filed ia tho
litigation above referred to, egtablish
that draining the water from largo
part Of the area referred TO willeeriouf,
ly affect the climate Of the East Coast
Of Florida, lessening the heat IN winter,
increasing the cold in that region, and
thereby injuring the fruit and Vegeta-
bic crops along the East Coast
No man can estimate, and no one
knows the amount of work or length OF
time or probable cost of this work Of
drainage in the district referred 10 IN
this amendment, and the state ought
not 20 enter upon the proposition nor
tax property based on such uecertam
information.