Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1907-01-02
DISCUSS DRAINAGE QUESTION
Farmers Of the County Hold Interesting Session Court House and
Discuss Present and Prospective Ditch Laws.

Senator Thorpe and Representative
elect Johnson, for public meeting to
consider the drainage laws, quite a
number of farmers and others interest.
ed met at the court house last Thurs
day and participated in discussion
and exchanged opinions relative to
ditch matters that will result in the
presentation of proposed change in
the present ditch laws at the coming
session of the legislature by our rep
resentatives from this county
The meeting opened a little later
than the hour set. which was 10 a. IN
1t was about lO:M when County
Attorney George H. Bitterness an
nounced that he had been delegated
by Mr.. Thorpe to ofticiate in his stead,
as Mr.. Thorpe was unable to be pres
ent to preside on account of illness.
The meeting opened with an attend
ance of about =, mostly farmers, and
before the close Of the afternoon SEES
sion there were about 10 present in all.
Mr.. Bitterness was chosen as chairman
OF the meeting and B. p. Hovey of
tennessee was selected as secretary
After stating the object of the meet
ing, the chairman invited those pres
ent to give an expression of their
views. AS it was understood that the
meeting had also been called for the
purpose Of considering the road Ques-
ton, It was left to the choice of those
present as to what to take up first for
consideration. J. C. Monson took
the initial step by introducing mo-
ton that ditch matters be taken up for
discussion, which was carried He
was the first speaker on the subject
and put himself on record as being
strongly opposed to the present ditch
laws and said that they ought to be
thrown out of the statutes. 1t was
wrong to assess those who did not
want a ditch, whose land was such
that no drainage was necessary and
consequently would derive no benefit.
He favored law that would not place
unequal assessments upon the parties
interested. Land having natural
drainage should not be assessed, nor
should any assessment be placed upon
hat Tod fou Il
H. Anderson Lobnitz, who was the
second speaker, favored a law that
would prevent one party from having
the power to tie up any ditch proceed
ing on account of stubbornness, and as
had been the case in some instances,
put a stop to what would prove a
great benefit to the many. He con-
tended that We should have more strict
laws regarding such matters: that we
should be compelled to put in nothing
but the best Of bitches: that the law
should be changed where the commun-
ity as whole is assessed for the ben
eft of the few. Only those receiving
actual benefit should be assessed.
P. J. Haley said that the old law
had been given long trial and had
not proven satisfactory. There should
be three distinct ditch laws, one gov
erning an outlet or main ditch, an
other as applied to short or branch
bitches and third as to tile ditchi1 G.
Every man should bear his burden
according to the benefits derived from
the main ditch. The engineer and
viewers were spoken of as being ham,
pered in some instances under the old
law. In regard to short bitches the law
does not go far enough. We must
ditch scientifically as we'll as farm
scientifically There should be stricter
laws to overcome stubbornness. The
speaker recommended compulsory
law reg arding highway drainage. He
had made somewhat of study OF
ditching and offered some good sug-
gestions. More harmony should be ex-
ercised in securing drainage on our
farms. he suggested the Illinois
system of drainage as being very
good one to put into practice. There
all farmers we're in harmony on these
matters.
August Beckman brought up the
m after of ditch assessments. He rec
commended that the time for paying
them be extended. AS it is now the
present system of tax alton is working
a great hardship upon a great many
farmers and he even ventured to as
sert that some we're in danger of not
being able to hold their farms. Ten
years is rather short time in which
to pay the assessments and the time
should be extended to fifteen or twenty
years.
j: S. Anderson agreed with Mr..
Haley in the proposal of three distinct
: laws. He did not believe in one man
paying for the improvements on an
others property and was bitterly op-
posed to the present inequality. The
law should be changed so as to have
the state make an appropriation to
help out those now paying for others.
Mr.. Haley was opposed to having a
Judge preside over judicial ditch
matters, as his decisions would some
times knock out a much needed ditch.