Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1918-01-04
Wants Drainage
La,Ds Changed

regard to the good work some men are
doing, particularly in regard to tho
laws regulating the liquor tranic,
woman suffrage and Sabbath observ-
ance, but have not seen anything IN
regard to the drainage laws OF Iowa
which seem to be more important 20
the farmers and rural communities
than the work that Is being done 20
reform our citizens and give them
greater liberties. There has been con-
siderable inferior work done upon the
drainage bitches in the state or Iowa.
most OF which has been accepted by the
various boards Of supervisors. wouia
like to offer this protest In regard 70
the training laws Of this state and the
enforcement OF same. The properly
owners are not protected. The opera
ton of said law Is not in harmony
with the United Estates constitution
which states that no body OF men OF
law shall deprive any person OF Hie'
liberty or property without due process
Of law nor deny to any person within
its Jurisdiction the equal protection OF
the law. 1t further states that no pr
vate property shall be taxed Tor pubic
use without just compensation. Tue
drainage law as found in section lsi.
of the code OF Iowa, is not in harmony
with the section Of the constitution
stating that no contracts shall be I'M
paired by the operation OF laws OF any
state
The people Of each county have the
right TO vote upon the question Oh
drainage and do not have notice OF ths
serious nature or effects OF the drain
age law at the time they cast the!r
ballot so 1t Is my opinion that the state
law upon the question OF drainage
should be amended in such a way as
to eaualize the expense OF constructors
drainage bitches or sewers in the rurai
districts Considerable litigation mas
resulted from the oppressive enect OF
the drainage law for the reason that
an unreasonable tax has been levied
upon the farms thru which the ditches
have been constructed. A graduated
scale OF assessment should be adopted
that would make ii possible to place
the burden Of the assessment where II
justly belongs. Owners OF iano hot
adjoining the ditch may reap mort
benefit than the owner adjoining often
and still pay little or no tax for the
construction of said ditch. Farmers
arc not sufficiently educated upon the
question Of engineering to be able 70
pass Judgment upon the condition OF
a ditch and as result they have been
required to pay heavy assessments n
few wears after the same has been
paid the ditch or sewer has been found
to be defective. The board OF super
yisors may have released the county
and there Is no way to make good the
defect in the drainage pipe which mas
been put in by the adjoining owner
The law should be changed so as TO
give the board of supervisors enlight-
ment as well as to restrict their power
and safeguard the tax payers. There
Is no law that would apply to our case
and II seems wise'that a law should
be made to permit the construction OF
said bitches in such way that the
farmers may be fully protected and the
cost Of the construction be equitablS
pro rated in each neighbcrhood. With
reference 10 the amount of good TO be
realized from the drainage as the law
now stands the farmer must pay his
assessments or stand the consequence
Of having his farm sold for an exor-1
bitant tax sufficient to pay for the ex-
pense OF digging a7sditch or putting IN
drainage system. A farmer can ap-
peal to the district court, but that re-
quires time and expense which must
be paid by the one beginning suit.
In Hamilton county there Is case
in which a drainage pipe was laid
with cracks and openings at the joint
of the tile from one to four inches.
causing big washouts which were al
most impossible to be repaired by the
owner and could not be repaired by
the county as there was no way pro-
vlded by law 10 do so. You may go
into court for equity. but 1t will not
be the question what condition the
drain is left IN. and this section have
stated reads plainly you have lost all
your rights TO bring further objections.
How could man object to things that
have not yet developed? Many farm
ers have felt outraged and indignant
on account Of the heavy expense placed
upon them and have humbly paid the
oppressive tax rather than go into
court and take the chance Of being de-
feated by long litigation which would
incur the loss Of large amount OF
money and time. In one instance
farmer had to pay $1,000 for improve
ments under the drainage law. An
other farmer was required to build
branch pipe which cost him 800. AS
a result Of said branch pipe the farm
er adjoining the main drainage pipe
sustained severe loss due to the water
flowing from the adjoining farm which
was drained upon the farm adjoining
the ditch, the latter having to pay ten
times the expense. receiving far less
benefit and actually sustaining dam
age due TO the wet condition Of his
farm caused by the flow Of the water
thereon from the adjoining farm.
/ do not wish to appear as q fault
finder, but am one Of several hundred
farmers In iowa who have not only
suffered inconvenience. but who are
actually sustaining heavy damage due
to the operation OF the drainage law.
/ would like to invite other farmers to
enter upon discussion Of this SUBJ
ject and hope ] may have the pleasure
of reading Your letters In Yhia nanar
in order that the farmers and general
public Of iowa may better understand
the needs OF the communities relating
to the question OF drainage. desire
to be known as one IN favor Of drain
age Of farms az many farms have been
redeemed from worthless condition on
account Of laying tile and large pipes
which have carried of surplus water
and drained swamps and sloughs Of
this state.-A. NJ. 'Christenson, Rad