Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/addressofstateirOOstatrich 
 
i*» 
 
A 13 ]J K K S S 
 
 STATE IRRIGATION COMMITTEE 
 
 Fresno and Riverside Irrigation Conventions 
 
 asd to the 
 
 AXT^I-RIPARIAN V^O-^I KR.^ 
 
 or CALIFORNIA. 
 
 IIITH OPmiONS OF THE PRESS. 
 
 !,---.( 
 
ADDRKSS 
 
 STATE IRRIGATION COMMITTEE 
 
 Fresno and Riverside Irrigation Conventions 
 
 AND TO THE 
 
 ANTI=RIP^ARIAN VOTERS 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 ^, ^ * ■» n 
 
 1886. 
 
Main Lib. 
 Afidc. Deyt. 
 
 
 
ADDEESS 
 
 Members of the Riverside and Fresno Irrigation 
 Conventions. 
 
 The undersigned, Executive Committee of the State Irri- 
 gation Convention, desire to submit a statement of their 
 action to the constituents of the above Conventions, and to 
 all people who have an interest in the encouragement of ir- 
 rigation. 
 
 This committee was directed to frame bills for laws to be 
 acted on by the Legislature. These were to remedy the 
 evils of existing laws relating to the appropriation of water, 
 and were intended to place irrigation amongst the perma- 
 nent policies of the State. To the support of these pro- 
 posed legal reforms we sought to bring an intelligent public 
 opinion, fully aroused to the importance of this question of 
 questions. The English common law doctrine of riparian 
 ownership is repugnant and inapplicable to the physical 
 conditions of this State, because it permits no use of water 
 outside the banks of a stream, unless by assent of the abut- 
 ting owner. As the waters are in volume far beyond the 
 possibility of use by him for any purpose, this doctrine 
 permits him to misrule them to waste in the sea, while lands 
 lie virgin which they would rouse to such fruitfulness that a 
 less acreage than elsewhere in the whole world would sup- 
 port a family in affluence without extreme toil. 
 
 The bills drawn by this committee were introduced in 
 both branches of the Legislature, and underwent refine- 
 ment and revision in the committees of that body. 
 
 379962 
 
IV 
 
 Meantime the intelligent press of the Stato, alive to the 
 justice of our cause, appreciating the necessity of legislation 
 to put statute and natural law in harmony, came to our 
 y' assistance. The leading journals of San Francisco realizing 
 that the highest interests of that city impinge upon irriga- 
 tion, made reiterated appeals to the Legislature in our 
 favor, while the newspapers of the interior, with inconsider- 
 able exceptions, aligned with us and gave gallant battle for 
 our propositions. 
 
 These united efforts in a great and just cause disclosed to 
 the Legislature and the people its relation to the prosperity 
 of the whole State, and our reform was proved to be of 
 general utility and application, and not a local issue ex- 
 hausting its benefits in a pent up section. Confidence in 
 the merit and necessity of our projected legislation was 
 diffused throughout the State, and was reflected in memo- 
 rials and petitions to the Legislature. 
 
 Our thanks are due and are hereby delivered in the name 
 of those who represent to the press of the State for tlie ser- 
 vice so gejierously volunteered and so efficiently rendered. 
 It brought us near to success. The same assistance encour- 
 ages a renewal of our efforts, with greater energy and . the 
 benefit of experience. Preparation for the future is not 
 complete without the guidance afforded by the full history 
 of what has been done. We addressed the Legislature with 
 a review of our case, illuminated by extracts from the press. 
 The sixty days session was drawing to a close. The few 
 riparian owners who oppose the use of water for irrigation, 
 controlling a small minority in the House, filibustered to 
 hinder there the passage of our bills, but, when the sinister 
 arts of delay had exhausted themselves, our measures passed 
 the House by more than a three-fourths vote, and were sent 
 to the Senate. There we had a two- thirds vote ready to be 
 cast in our favor if the measures could be reached. The 
 influence of the Governor's views so clearly expressed in 
 our favor, and argued with unanswerable force in his mes- 
 
sage, bad been continually at work upon the better judg- 
 ment of the Upper House. But there again filibustering 
 and all the resources of Parliamentary impediment were 
 against us, and the bills failed. 
 
 The mistaken men, who were the agents of this misfor- 
 tune to Calif of nia, should be marked, and future confidence 
 be withheld from them when they ask the votes of irrigators 
 to elevate them to office. Let them resort to the riparian- 
 ists for support. Let them depend for future preferment 
 upon the men who devote our lands to barrenness and 
 threaten our State with decay. Let them, at least until our 
 rights are entrenched in the harmonies of law, human and 
 divine, suffer the consequences of their malice or their 
 mistake. 
 
 Here ends the history of what has been done. Here the 
 account of our stewardship is rendered. 
 
 Now we turn to the future. We appeal from a filibuster- 
 ing minority of the Senate to the great people whose wishes 
 are soon to be reflected in the election of a new Legislature. 
 We would have them realize the necessity of irrigation. 
 The benefits it has already showered upon the State are in- 
 estimable, and the blessings yet to come from the water are 
 innumerable. 
 
 Great areas are already made fruitful, and enterprising 
 thousands under the protection of the doctrine of appropria- 
 tion produce a generous livelihood for themselves and a 
 groat surplus for export, which adds to the common wealth. 
 Millions of dollars are invested in canals and ditches prim- 
 arily devoted to irrigation, while the systems which were 
 built for hydraulic mining debouch upon plains that are 
 athirst, and used for irrigation will create greater wealth 
 than gilded the dreams of their projectors. 
 
 But the acreage already subjected to irrigation is insig- 
 nificant compared with the desert unreclaimed. Within 
 the rim of our great interior valleys there are 64,000,000 
 •acres, an area equal to that of Maine, New Hampshire, 
 
 v^ 
 
v/ 
 
 VI 
 
 "Vermont, Massachusetts, Khode Island, Connecticut, New 
 York and Pennsylvania combined. Yet those States have a 
 population of 13,427,270! A population which supports 
 the three imperial trade centres of the country — Boston, 
 New York and Philadelphia, besides scores of local points 
 for the concentration and distribution of the immense com- 
 merce generated in the necessities and the energies of those 
 millions of people. Going abroad for comparison, this 
 habitable area in California, naturally tributary to San 
 Francisco, is one and a fourth times the size of Great 
 Britain, with her 30,000,000 of people. Yet our valleys 
 have only 284,000 souls, and our own whole area only 6 J 
 persons to the square mile ! The whole Atlantic slope has 
 22.4 to the square mile ; the Merrimac Valley has 92.6 ; the 
 Connecticut Valley, 56.5 ; the Valley of the Hudson, 173 
 the basin of the St. Lawrence, 33 ; the Ontario basin, 78.2 
 that of Lake Erie, 89.6; the Valley of the Miami, 109.67 
 while the Valleys of the Sacramento and San Joaquin have 
 only 4.9 to the square mile! 
 
 To continue the suggestive comparison: if our two great 
 valleys were as densely peopled as the basin of the St. 
 Lawrence, their population would be 1,856,000 ; if equal to 
 the New England coast, they would have 3,538,000 ; if equal 
 to the Ontario basin, 4,523,000 ; if equal to the Valley of 
 the Delaware, 10,208,000. To sum up: The present unoc- 
 cupied area of these valleys should support 11,000,000 of 
 people, a population which would make San Francisco the 
 most desirable business city in the world, and the mart of 
 an immense commerce, as varied in the products which 
 create it as the globe-gleaned trade of London. 
 
 These results can only be secured by irrigation. By its 
 aid only can crops be raised at all in a large part of the 
 area just described, because of the light rainfall and natural 
 dryness of the climate in the desert half of the State. While 
 irrigation is needed to make returns from the soil sure 
 where a fickle rainfall now enables a full crop only one year 
 in seven. 
 
Vll 
 
 All of this area is capable of high farming. It will pro- 
 duce a commercial surplus of every necessity, luxury and 
 delicacy listed in the food supply that grows outside the 
 tropics. Noble mountains rise on either side of those 
 valleys, clad with timber which shelters the cool sources of 
 the waters for irrigation. The seashore is a short journey 
 distant. Thermal springs pour out their medicinal waters 
 near at hand, and here lies a richer soil than Belgium has, 
 under kinder skies than Italy can boast. The thought is 
 insufferable that uncongenial law shall permit human sel- 
 fishness to forbid the bans between these gifts of God, 
 and by keeping land and water wastefully apart deny the 
 world the benefits and blessings of their union. 
 
 The streams which traverse these valleys have their 
 heads in perpetual snow. Eiparian ownership denies their 
 flow to the thirsty earth and condemns it to evaporation 
 and emission in the thankless sea. 
 
 What is the law, and what ought it to be? These are the 
 questions to be settled. Shall the streams be legally open 
 to appropriation, or shall the law of riparian ownership 
 lock the water within the banks? Shall the flow be useful or 
 useless? The intelligence and enterprise of the State have 
 already answered these questions: ''The water shall be 
 for irrigation." This answer is only the reflection ^of the 
 first impulse of our pioneers, who appropriated to useful 
 purposes the waters they found wasting. This custom has 
 been projected to the comprehensive systems that are now 
 making parts of this wilderness to blossom, and there even 
 women to-day guard the gates through which flow the very 
 waters of life that support the vine and fig tree under which 
 their children play. 
 
 The efforts of the last two years have recruited the ranks ^ 
 of irrigators, until we are an army. The force is ready now 
 for organization, which should be made in all interested 
 localities. Organization is power. We must now make our 
 force effective in the politics of the State, since in politics 
 
VIU 
 
 the Legislature to which we appeal, is generated. We must 
 demonstrate the fact that there are x^olitical triumphs 
 greater than the conquest of spoils, and this is to be done 
 by going unitedly into politics to stay until our rights are 
 
 / secured. The counties vitally interested in irrigation cast 
 upwards of 40,000 votes. They control elections, for narrow 
 pluralities between parties are of late years the rule in Cali- 
 fornia. In our First Congressional District in 1884, a plur- 
 ality of 145 elected in a total vote of 83,103. In the Second 
 District the winning plurality was 119 in a vote of 37,073. 
 In the Sixth District it was 409, in a vote of 35,444. So let 
 
 \/ no irrigator despair that his vote counts so little. To get 
 the full benefit of our strength, this committee advises that 
 irrigation anti-riparian clubs be formed in every town and 
 county throughout the State, to membership in which 
 every one, no matter what his occupation, shall be eligible, 
 provided he faithfully opposes riparian monopoly of water 
 and favors appropriation for irrigation, and the measures 
 referred by us to the last Legislature. These clubs should 
 form at once. * Never mind if a club be few in number. Its 
 strength is its righteousness of purpose, and the aggregate 
 membership when it keeps step all over the State will shake 
 
 ^ the foundation of parties, and these clubs can say who shall 
 be Governor, Attorney-General and Judges of our Supreme 
 and Superior Courts, and who shall, sit in the Legislature. 
 In addition to the construction of this club organization, 
 in the further performance of our duty, we hereby call and 
 appoint 
 
 A STATE CONVENTION 
 
 Composed of all who favor the platform and objects of the 
 Fresno Convention of Irrigators, and support the measures 
 proposed to the Legislature by this organization. This 
 Convention will meet in San Francisco on Thursday, the 
 20th day of May, 1886, at 11 o'clock A. M. We urgently 
 ^ request every Club organized under this call to delegate as 
 many as can come to take part in this Convention, and it is 
 
IX 
 
 distinctly understood that participation therein is not the 
 right or privilege of supporters of riparian ownership. 
 
 When assembled the Convention will effect a permanent 
 central organization, to perfect the scheme of laws already 
 prepared by this Committee, and urge them to success in 
 the next Legislature ; also to formulate a plan of action to 
 be followed in the coming political campaign, by which our 
 strength shall be felt at every precinct in the State, and the 
 value of our supporters demonstrated to every candidate 
 for office. Through this organization it is proposed to in- 
 form both parties that we know no politics but irrigation, 
 and that our battlefield is on the irrigable plains upon 
 which the future of California is to be exploited. 
 
 J. De Barth Shoeb, J. F. Whaeton, 
 
 W. S. Green, E. Hudnut, 
 
 H. S. Dixon, L. B. Ruggles, 
 
 E. H, Tucker, D. K. Zumwalt, 
 
 L. M. Holt, Executive Committee. 
 
ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION^ 
 
 Anti-Riparian Irrigation Club. 
 
 Whereas, The necessities of the people of this State, 
 growing out of our peculiar climatic and physical con- 
 ditions, require that all the waters of the State should be 
 applied to beneficial uses, and especially to irrigation ; and 
 
 Whereas, It has been the well-established custom and 
 usage of the inhabitants of the State every since the terri- 
 tory was acquired from Mexico, and long prior thereto, to 
 enjoy and permit the free appropriation and diversion of 
 water to all who would apply it to a beneficial use ; and 
 
 Whereas, By virtue of such usage and custom, capital 
 and labor have created out of deserts and rivers enormous 
 wealth to the State, and the irrigation interests have as- 
 sumed gigantic proportions ; and 
 
 Whereas, Several hundred thousand people are now de- 
 pendent upon and directly or indirectly supported by means 
 of irrigation ; and 
 
 Whereas, Attempts are now being made to resurrect the 
 English common law doctrine of riparian rights from the 
 grave to which the will of the people long since consigned 
 it, and to impress it upon the jurisprudence of the State ; 
 and 
 
 Whereas, Such attempt, if successful, means the desola- 
 tion of thousands of homes ; it means that the desert shall 
 invade vineyard, orchard and field; that the grape shall 
 parch upon the vine, the fruit wither on the tree, and the 
 meadow be cursed with drought; it means that silence 
 shall fall upon our busy colonies, and their people shall flee 
 from the thirsty and unwatered lands ; it means that the 
 
XI 
 
 cities built upon the commerce irrigation has created, shall 
 decay, and that in all this region the pillars of civilization 
 shall fall, and unprofitable flocks and herds shall graze the 
 scant herbage where once there was a land of corn and 
 wine, flowing with milk and honey ; and 
 
 Whereas, If this attempt to forbid the uteful appropria- 
 tion of water is defeated by a righteous public opinion 
 crystallized into law, the homes now planted in the midst of 
 fruitful acres will remain the shelter of a happy people , en- 
 riched by the productive soil, and irrigation will advance 
 the frontier of verdure and flowers and fruits, until the 
 desert is conquested and has exchanged its hot sands for 
 happy garlands, its vagrant herds for valiant people, and 
 the blear plains will grow purple with the vintage and 
 golden with the harvest, and the pleasures and profits, the 
 peace and plenty that come out of the useful rivers will 
 make this land the Promised Land to millions of free 
 people; and 
 
 Whereas, We have, then, on the one hand the certainties 
 of agriculture and horticulture, of profitable immigration, 
 of surplus production for export of articles universally de- 
 sirable and necessary, and always in demand ; the growth 
 of our cities and the greatness of our State. On the other 
 hand are thirst and famine, ruin and decay, farms dis- 
 mantled, colonies abandoned, cities subjected to dry rot, 
 and the State denied her career by denying to her people 
 their birthright. 
 
 Whereas, The Court of highest resort of the State, whose 
 final determination is conclusive of law, is divided upon the 
 question, and the right of appropriation and irrigation now 
 stands upon uncertain ground; and 
 
 Whereas, The Legislature has failed to take measures 
 for the protection of irrigation; and 
 
 Whereas, There are 40,000 voters in this State ready and 
 anxious to fight and vote as a unit for irrigation; and 
 
Xll 
 
 Whereas, The safe and sure road to a successful issue, 
 in the Courts and in the Legislature, is to organize, and by 
 united and harmonious action control the result of the 
 coming election — 
 
 Resolved, Th^t we, the undersigned, associate ourselves 
 together under the name of the Anti-Kiparian Irrigation 
 Club of and adopt the following By-Laws 
 
 and Pledge: 
 
Bf-LAWS A]^D PLEDGE. 
 
 AETICLE I. 
 
 The purposes for which this Chib is organized, are — 
 
 1. To maintain that the right of appropriation of water 
 for beneficial purposes, is and always has been, paramount 
 to any alleged rights of riparian owners in this State. 
 
 2. To secure the adoption of an amendment to the State y 
 Constitution, declaring that the common law of England is^ 
 not and should not be the rule of property, or the rule of 
 decision in the Courts of this State in controversies con- 
 cerning the right to appropriate, divert and use water, nor 
 
 in actions by or against actual appropriators of water for 
 beneficial purposes; and that priority of appropriation for a 
 beneficial purpose determines the right without regard to 
 the ownership of the banks of a water-course. 
 
 3. To maintain both as a physical and legal proposition^ 
 that the conditions and necessities of the People of this 
 State, and the climatic and physical characteristics of. the 
 State are, and ever have been, such as to render the com- 
 mon law doctrine of riparian rights in£»pplicable here. 
 
 4. To secure the passage of any and all other amend- 
 ments to the Constitution or Laws which will contribute to 
 establish the right of irrigation against the riparian doc- 
 trine. 
 
 5. To procure the election of members of the Legisla- 
 ture who openly and without qualification, favor and will 
 act upon the foregoing principles, regardless of political 
 affiliations. 
 
 6. To oppose through the ballot-box, and by every other / 
 legitimate means, the election of any person to office, execu- 
 
XIV 
 
 tive, legislative or judicial, who is not known to be in full 
 and active accord with every proposition contained in these 
 By-Laws. 
 
 7. To obtain confirmation by the Courts and the Legis- 
 lature as the law and the fact, that the use of the waters of 
 streams for the purpose of irrigation, is a natural want in 
 this State, and to be preferred to all other uses. 
 
 ARTICLE 11. 
 
 No person who is not in full accord with the purpose and 
 principles contained in Article I of these By-Laws, shall be 
 qualified to become a member of this Club. 
 
 Every person becoming a member shall sign these By- 
 Laws, and take and subscribe to the following pledge: 
 
 We, the undersigned, hereby pledge ourselves to use all 
 honorable means to carry out the purposes of this Club, as 
 set forth in the foregoing By-Laws; and we hereby declare 
 that the principles therein set forth constitute the first arti- 
 cle of our political creed, and that no candidate of any party 
 for office shall receive our vote or our support, unless 
 he is a pronounced believer and advocate of the principles 
 therein enumerated. 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 The officers of this Club shall be President, Vice-Presi- 
 dent, Secretary and Treasurer, and their duties shall be 
 such as are usually performed by such officers. 
 
TO THEi 
 
 ANTI-RIPARIAN VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA, 
 
 Now is the time to organize for war against Riparianism. 
 We recommend that you immediately form Anti-Riparian 
 Irrigation Clubs, and adopt the accompanying Articles and 
 By-Laws. In them you will find the Anti-Riparian Irriga- 
 tion political creed. 
 
 Begin to enroll in Clubs at once. You are forty thousand 
 strong. Unite as one man, speak with one voice, and vote 
 with one accord. 
 
 By union you can command as a right what you have 
 vainly begged as a favor. 
 
 Organize and you can have a potent voice in the selection 
 of Judges and Legislators. It is within your power to crush 
 the threatening evils of Riparianism. Fire the hearts of 
 the people with the justice of your cause. Show political 
 parties that you have the strength and the will to enforce 
 what you demand. 
 
 J. DeBakth Shore, J. F. Wharton, 
 
 W. S. Green, R. Hudnut, 
 
 H. S. Dixon, L. B. Ruggles, 
 
 E. H. Tucker, D. K. Zumwalt, 
 
 L. M. Holt, 
 
 Legislative Committee of the 
 
 State Irrigation Convention. 
 
TO THE PUBLIC. 
 
 The following is a list of the newspapers in the State 
 which have espoused the cause of irrigation: 
 
 Alameda County. 
 
 Alameda Encinal, 
 Alameda Semi- Weekly Argus, 
 Berkeley Advocate, 
 Brooklyn Eagle, 
 Haywards Journal, 
 Livermore Valley Eeview, 
 Oakland ^Inquirer, 
 Oakland Journal (German), 
 Oakland Sentinel, 
 Oakland Times, 
 Oakland Tribune, 
 Pleasanton Star, 
 San Leandro Reporter, 
 West Oakland Sentinel. 
 
 Colusa County. 
 
 Colusa Sun, 
 Maxwell Star. 
 
 Contba Costa. 
 
 (Martinez) Contra Costa Argus, 
 (Martinez) Contra Costa Gazette, 
 Martinez Daily Item. 
 
 Fresno County. 
 
 Fresno Expositor, 
 Fresno Republican. *• 
 
XVlll 
 
 Humboldt CorNrr. 
 
 (Eureka) Humboldt Standard. 
 
 Inyo County. 
 
 (Independence) Inyo Independent. 
 
 Kern County. 
 
 (Bakersfield) Korn County Californian, 
 (Bakersfield) Kern County Gazette. 
 
 Los Angeles County. 
 
 Anaheim Gazette, 
 Los Angeles Express, 
 Los Angeles Herald, 
 Los Angeles Mirror, 
 Los Angeles Times, 
 (Sabado) La Cronica. 
 Santa Ana Standard, 
 
 Marin County. 
 
 (San Eafael) Marin Co. Tocsin. 
 
 Mariposa County. 
 Mariposa Herald. 
 
 Mendocino County, 
 
 (Ukiah City) Dispatch-Democrat, 
 
 Merced County. 
 
 Merced Express, 
 
 Merced Star, 
 
 (Merced) San Joaquin Valley Argus. 
 
 Napa County. 
 
 Napa Daily Register. * 
 
XIX 
 
 Nevada County. 
 
 Grass Valley Tidings, 
 Nevada Transcript. 
 
 Placer County. 
 
 (Auburn) Placer Co. Republican. 
 
 Sacramento County. 
 
 Gait Weekly Gazette, 
 Sacramento Record- Union, 
 Sacramento Sunday Capital, 
 
 San Bernardino County. 
 
 Colton Semi-Tropic, 
 
 Riverside Press and Horticulturist, 
 
 San Bernardino Times. 
 
 San Diego County. 
 
 (San Diego) Daily San Diegan, 
 San Diego Sun. 
 
 San Francisco. 
 
 Alta, 
 
 Call, 
 
 Chronicle, 
 
 Examiner, 
 
 Pacific Rural Press, 
 
 Political Record, 
 
 Post, 
 
 Resources of California, 
 
 Spirit of the Times, 
 
 Weekly Star. 
 
 San Joaquin County. 
 
 Stockton Independent, 
 Stockton Herald, 
 Stockton Mail. 
 
JX 
 
 San Luis Obispo. 
 
 San Luis Obispo Tribune. 
 
 SaKta Barbara County. 
 
 Santa Barbara Express, 
 Santa Barbara Press, 
 Santa Barbara Republican, 
 Santa Barbara Independent. 
 
 Santa Clara County. 
 
 Los Gatos Mail. 
 San Jose Republican. 
 
 Santa Cruz County. 
 
 Santa Cruz Sentinel. 
 Watson ville Pajaronian. 
 
 Sierra County. 
 
 (Downieville) Mountain Messenger. 
 
 Solano County. 
 
 Dixon Tribune, 
 
 Vallejo Evening Chronicle, 
 
 (Vacaville) Judicion. 
 
 Sonoma County. 
 
 Petaluma Argus, 
 Petaluma Courier, 
 Santa Rosa Democrat. 
 
 Stanislaus County. 
 
 Modesto Herald, 
 Modesto News, 
 Modesto Republican. 
 
 Tehama County. 
 
 (Red Bluff) Tehama Democrat. 
 
XXI 
 
 Tulare County. 
 
 Traver Tidings, 
 Tulare Kegister, 
 Visalia Delta. 
 
 Yuba County. 
 
 Marysville Democrat. 
 
 There are many others not included in this list for the 
 reason that the Committee has not yet had access to all. 
 For their united and valuable assistance the gratitude of all 
 is due. Only through their timely aid, the gallant fight for 
 irrigation made at- the last Legislature became possible. 
 By their intelligent and exhaustive elucidation of the irri- 
 gation question, the people all over the State have been ed- 
 ucated and aroused to its importance. 
 
 The Committee, personally, and in behalf of all irriga- 
 tors, desire to tender thanks to the Press, and urge the con- 
 tinuance of the work so efficiently begun. With its power- 
 ful re-enforcement, we are confident of carrying the fight 
 against riparianism to a successful issue. 
 
 We reprint a large number of extracts from the press and 
 commend them to the attention of all. A supplement con- 
 taining extracts from newspapers, not yet received, and 
 articles hereafter published, will be issued by this Com- 
 mittee during the session of the State Irrigation Convention. 
 
 J. De Barth Shore, i- 
 
 W. S. Green, 
 
 H. S. Dixon, 
 
 E. H. Tucker, 
 
 L. M. Holt, 
 
 J. F. Wharton, 
 
 E. HUDNUT, 
 
 L. B. Kuggles, 
 
 D. K. ZUMWALT, 
 
 Executive Committee. 
 
ADDRESS 
 
 To the Legislature of the State of California, 
 
 Convened at its Twenty-sixth Session. 
 
 The undersigned constitute a Committee appointed by the State Irrigation v 
 Convention, held at Fresno, in December, 1884. 
 
 Pursuant to the powers conferred upon us by that body, we address you in 
 advocacy of several measures now before you relating to the subject of irriga- 
 tion. 
 
 Our purpose is to present tb you as briefly as possible, a few of the reasons 
 which make immediate legislation upon the subject, of inestimable import- 
 ance. Also, to convince you, if possible, that the bills mentioned are the 
 best yet proposed, and will, if enacted, go far to restore order out of the ex- 
 isting chaotic condition of the State water law, by authorizing and regulating 
 the use of water for irrigation. 
 
 lERIGATION A NATURAL WANT. 
 
 It seems superfluous to restate or add to the facts already well known and 
 often repeated, showing that irrigation is a natural necessity throughout a 
 large portion of the State; it has never been denied that such is the case. 
 The necessity has already been recognized and declared at previous sessions 
 of the Legislature. The present State Engineer bears testimony to it. Many 
 decisions of the courts have conceded the fact as one of which they will take 
 judicial notice. The extensive irrigation works already constructed, and the 
 annual expenditures of vast amounts of money upon irrigation, places it be- 
 yond controversy. 
 
 Our own testimony and that of the people in whose behalf we address you, 
 is at your command and to be corroborated by thousands in every part of the 
 State. 
 
 BENEFITS OF IBEIQATION. 
 
 The product of the soil is the principal source of the wealth of the people. 
 Artificial irrigation has made possible an enormous, almost an unlimited in- 
 crease in the area of cultivated land. This has been, and will in the future, 
 be accompanied by a corresponding enlargement of population. Each sup- 
 plements the other. Great strides have been made already in many branches 
 of industry to which irrigation is necessary. 
 
 The production of fruit is constantly becoming greater. Grapes, raisins, i./' 
 wine and brandy are among the most important of our exports. Countless 
 herds of cattle are fattened for home and foreign market from the yield of 
 irrigated land. Sheep by thousands are grazed upon grasses artificially wa- 
 tered. Our wool production is growing rapidly. With water for his land the 
 
 vy 
 
 v/ 
 
2 
 
 owner can choose at his will whatever he desires to cultivate. The possibili- 
 ties of the soil are boundless. Land-owners are constantly increasing the 
 value and variety of their productions by repeated experiments. The price 
 of land increases at an incredible ratio with the introduction of water. The 
 statistics of population, area of cultivated land, and productions of various 
 kinds will show you the wonderful progress which Southern California has 
 made with the gradual extension of irrigation. The reports of the railroad 
 and steamship companies will convince you of the magnitude of its trade. 
 The merchants of San Francisco can bear witness to the prominent position 
 which it occupies with relation to the commerce of that city. The residents 
 of that section will testify that whatever success they have attained and what- 
 ever prosperity the future has in store for them, can be ascribed to irrigation. 
 
 Without attempting, accurately, to state the acreage now irrigated, nor the 
 money invested in irrigation works, it is suflSicient for our present purpose to 
 remind you that at a moderate estimate there are now many hundred thousand 
 acres of irrigated land, and ditches and canals many thousand miles in 
 length, constructed and maintained at a cost of not less than $100,000,000. 
 
 The works already constructed will furnish means of irrigation for double 
 the amount of land now irrigated. The water of our rivers, economically 
 distributed, will suffice to extend irrigation to millions of acres yet un- 
 touched. 
 
 By the construction of reservoirs in the mountains, the water supply can 
 be indefinitely increased, and large quantities utilized, now yearly wasted 
 during the winter and spring freshets; but this can only be accomplished by 
 State means, or through the co-operation of large capital, and must await the 
 gradual development of the country. 
 
 INJURIOUS CONSEQUENCES OF DENIAL OP EIGHT OP IRRIGATION. 
 
 Of all the land now under irrigation, that portion bordering upon river 
 banks, the property of riparian owners, forms an insignificant fraction, and 
 even that is irrigated by water claimed by actual appropriation and not by 
 virtue of a riparian right. Compared with the area still to be irrigated, the 
 area in riparian ownership is infinitesmal. The consequences of depriving 
 all, or all but riparian owners, from irrigating are simply frightful to contem- 
 plate. Indeed, it is not easy to conceive them at once. The physical effects 
 upon the face of the country can only be fully comprehended by those early 
 settlers who saw a sand waste where he now beholds a prospering farm. 
 Who can picture to himself the condition of the people when the day comes 
 that tells them in the name of the law that they shall not take the water of 
 the river for their dying crops? It takes but the commonest observation and 
 the least reflection to perceive that the use of the ripa, for any practical pur- 
 pose, is impossible upon our ordinary California stream. In England and in 
 other wet countries the water is not used or needed for irrigation, and all the 
 uses of the stream for mills and the like are upon the bank. The uses are 
 such as that the water, if momentarily diverted, can be and is immediately 
 turned back in full volume. There is no use of the water desirable or prac- 
 
ticable except upon the bank. Here the reverse is the rule. The most 
 valuable and essential use of the water is to vivify the ground and stimulate 
 production by irrigation. This cannot be done on the banks; it is not ripa- 
 rian, and the water when taken out and used is absorbed by the ground and 
 cannot be returned. Every one familiar with our physical conditions, knows 
 well that a river channel through any man's land is here, as a rule, but a 
 washed-out sanely depression, bordered by a few trees and willows, and gen- 
 erally in the season when alone water is useful, only the dry, unsightly 
 bed of a sunken stream, and even when the water flows in it, no ordinary 
 small fixrraer, if owning land- upon it, can take the water out on his own land 
 unless he can first teach it to run up hill. He has to go above upon the land 
 of some upper proprietor to divert it, in derogation of the so-called riparian 
 rights below him, in order to get it out of the stream on to his own land. So 
 far as watering cattle is concerned, there are few of the great stock men of 
 the San Joaquin plains who do not rely upon wells for that purpose, and for 
 the reason that the water of the streams in the hot summer weather becomes 
 full of vegetable and animal matter, and often destroys the cattle in large 
 numbers. 
 
 But even suppose the water can be used and is convenient for use to water 
 stock. Suppose to take it away would be inconvenient to the man owning 
 more or less cattle who owns the bank. Suppose, in short, that some one 
 must suffer inconvenience and hardship, no matter which rule prevails. 
 What then is to be done? Which is better? That a few men, the limited few 
 who own the bank, should have the exclusive use of the stream to water 
 their stock, all irrigation be stopped, all the progress of the past be blotted 
 out, and ruin and destruction be brought to all the prosperous and happy 
 homes of which now irrigation i% the cause, the life and the only hope; or 
 that the stream be used so as to irrigate the greatest amount of land which it 
 is capable of irrigating, so as to stimulate production to its widest limits, so 
 as to build up homes of plenty and happy firesides, and rich and prosperous 
 communities and peoples, even if the stook men do have to sink a few wells 
 to water their stock? Which is best — the desert, with a few herds and their 
 scattering attendants, or green fields, orchards, the fcvine, the olive, the 
 orange, the ripening grain and the happiness and prosperity which attends 
 safe and certain husbandry? 
 
 CUSTOMS AND USAGES, IBKESPECTIVE OP LAW. 
 
 Whether authorized by law or not, it is a matter of common knowledge that, 
 dating back prior to our conquest, the customs and usages of the inhabitants 
 justified the diversion and use of water for agricultural and other purposes. 
 Common consent and common necessity gradually gave form'and life to the / 
 custom. The rule was adopted in settlement of disputes over water, between 
 man and man, that he who was prior in time gained priority of right. Prac- 
 tically, the common law of riparian rights was unknown. It was not invoked 
 between claimants of water, and fell into disuse. This was not alone the 
 
case between individuals, bat was universal everywhere. To the farmer 
 wishing to irrigate it never occurrtd that he could not appropriate water at 
 his pleasure. Not even the riparian owner claimed or insisted on rights ex- 
 cept by actual appropriation. Neither he nor any other appropriator 
 thought of insisting that the water of a stream should run confined to its 
 natural course any more than that they would have expected it to run up 
 stream. 
 
 This custom became, unto laymen at least, a rule of property, so that their 
 contests over water were always, as to priority and quantity, regardless of the 
 ownership or situation of land. 
 
 By the Act of 1850 adopting the common law it is provided : " That the 
 common law of England so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with 
 the Constitution of the United States; or the Constitution or laws of the 
 State of California, shall be the rule of decision in all the Courts of this 
 Slate." This provision was re-enacted in the Political Code. 
 
 This statute has been the subject of judicial conatruction in many cases, as 
 have like provisions in the laws of other States. In some of the original 
 States the substance of this law was held by the courts to be the rule of 
 their decisions even when not made the written law. By the incorporation 
 of this rule into the body of the statutes, it was the intention of the earliar 
 lawgivers of the State to follow in the footsteps of the older States. It is 
 therefore necessary to examine the decisions of the courts of other states to 
 learn their construction of this statute, and upon comparison with the in- 
 terpretation of it given by our own courts, to establish its effect upon the 
 rule of decision which should govern cases involving water rights in this 
 State. • 
 
 It must be kept in mind at the same time, that the language of our statute 
 is "the Common Law of England,** and that it is claimed by the ripariaTiists 
 that according to that common law that — 
 
 " Every proprietor of lands on the bank of a stream, has an equal right to 
 "use the waters which flow in the stream, and consequently no proprietor 
 " can have the right to use the water to the prejudice of any other proprietor. 
 •' Without the consent of the other proprietors, no proprietor can either 
 "diminish the quantity of water which would otherwise descend to the pro- 
 ** prietors below or throw the water back upon the proprietors above." 
 
 And, that it is also claimed by the riparianists that by our statute every 
 part and portion of that common law has been adopted, no matter how un- 
 Buited to our condition or repugnant to our customs and manners. 
 
 "We quote from Sedgwick on the Construction of Statutory and Consti- 
 tutional Law, a well-known work, accessible to all: 
 
 •' The colonists who settled this country were Engliskmen, with the feel- 
 " ings, the attachments and the prejudices of Englishmen. It became 
 "necessary for them to establish, or recognize and adhere to some system of 
 "law from the moment "they landed. That system was English, and'ac- 
 
"cordingly, we find the doctrine to have always been that the colonists were 
 «' subject to, and, as it were, brought with them, the great principles of the 
 •'common law of the mother country, with such modifications as the legis- 
 " lative enactments of Parliament had at that time introduced into it, or the 
 "particular situation of the colonists in their new condition requir'ed." 
 
 " The declaration of rights made by the first Continental Congress in 1774 
 "declares that * the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of 
 ** 'England, and to the benefit of such English statutes as existedat the time 
 "'of their colonization, and which they have hy experience found to be applicable 
 *• *to their social, local and other circumstances." 
 
 "This is the uniform language of our judicial decisions, whether of 
 ** Federal or State tribunals. It has been declared by the Supreme Court of 
 •'the United States * * * that the common law of America is not to be 
 "taken in all respects to be that of England; but that the settlers brought 
 "with them and adopted only that portion which was applicable to their 
 '' situation." 
 
 Further on he says : "It is very important to bear in mind the exception 
 " already mentioned, thatxouly so much of the English common law was 
 " adopted by the colonies as was applicable to their condition," 
 
 Sustaining his text, he cites cases by the United States Supreme Court, 
 New York, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. 
 
 It will also be seen by quotations from the Constitutions of several States, 
 cited by him on pages 10, 11 and 12, that the language adopting the common 
 law is similar to our statute, and while there is in them no express exemption of 
 such portions of the common law as W2S inapplicable to the condition or situation 
 of the p'lrticular community, yet such exemption has been assumed by the Courts. 
 
 The adoption of this English common law by our legislative en ictment 
 simply adopted the common law system as distinguished from the civil law 
 system which prevailed in this State under Spanish-American rule. The 
 common law system was adopted here, as it was in New York, in Ohio, in 
 Iowa, and in fact nearly all the States of the Union, but as in all the other 
 States as here, that adoption did not include those portions thereof which 
 are wholly inconsistent with our condition, habits, necessities, and institu- 
 tions as a people. 
 
 It is contended by the riparianists that the Legislature, in adopting the 
 common law of England, intended that, except as far as modified by express 
 statute, it should be rigidly followed in every particular, however absurd, 
 inconvenient, and repugnant to the conditions of life in Cdlifornia some of 
 its principles might prove to be. It is claimed that the common law as 
 adopted here is an inflexible, unyielding system of legal doctrines and rules, 
 like the law of the Medes and Persians, " which altereth not." 
 
 You are asked to believe that in selecting t'uis system as her code of " un- 
 written law," California has, so to speak, deliberately encased her young and 
 growing form in a cumbersome, ill-fitting suit of medieval armor, which is 
 so riveted and joined together that nothing but legislation, and not even 
 
6 
 
 that, can remove it. This theory attributes to the common law a rigidity 
 and fixedness of character which it does not possess even in England. It is 
 there a growing, changing system, accommodating itself, from age to age, to 
 the necessities and convenience of the nation. 
 yj Common law is but customary law, and a custoii not in accordance with 
 the needs of the people could not possibly be established. 
 
 Sedgwick says, at page 10: "Bat the common law is perpetually 
 "fluctuating." * * * " it was therefore necessary to fix a time after 
 " which any changes efifected in the common law of the mother country would 
 • ' have no effect here." 
 
 At page 4, he says: "To this source (i. e., custom,) is also chiefly to be 
 *' traced the great body of the original English law ' that ancient collection of 
 " unwritten maxims and customs called the Common Law,' which still exer- 
 " cises such extensive sway in both England and America, and on which we 
 " daily see engrafted regulations owing their origin to the same principle." 
 
 Since the system possesses this plastic character in the land where it or- 
 iginated, it must continue to possess it where adopted here, whether adopted 
 by express statute or by voluntary recognition of the courts as a part of our 
 heritage as descendants of the English nation. 
 ^ It has been uniformly adjudged in this country that the common law, how- 
 ever adopted, is in force here only so far as it is adapted to our situation, 
 wants and institutions. 
 
 Says that great New York jurist. Judge Bronson: "I think no doctrine 
 " better settled than that such portions of the law of England as are not 
 " adapted to our own condition form no part of the law of this State. The 
 " exception includes not only such laws as are inconsistent with the spirit 
 " of our institutions, but such as were framed with special reference to the physi- 
 " cal condition of a country differing widely from our own. It is contrary to 
 " the spirit of the common law to apply a rule founded on a particular rea- 
 " son to a case where that reason utterly fails. Cessante ratione legis, cassal 
 '* ipsa lex." 
 
 20 Wend., 159. 
 
 So, also, one of the most eminent of American jurists and statesman, 
 Judge Thurman of Ohio, lays down the same rule in language too plain to 'be 
 mistaken. He says: " The English common law, so far as it is reasonable 
 " in itself, suitable to the condition and business of our people, and consis- 
 •* tent with the letter and spirit of our Federal and State constitutions and 
 " statutes, has been and is followed by our courts, and may be said to con- 
 " stitute part of the common law of Ohio. But whenever it has been found 
 " wanting in either of these requisites our courts have not hesitated to 
 " modify it to suit our circumstances, or, if necessary, to wholly depart 
 " from it." 
 
 2 Ohio State Rep., 329. 
 
strictly in accord with this view is the opinion of Chief Justice Wright, of 
 Iowa, where in delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court of that State, 
 after declaring the common law to be there in force, he continues: "To say 
 ** that every principle of that law, however inapplicable to our wants'or in&ti- 
 " tutions, is to continue in force until changed by some legislative rule, we 
 " believe has never been claimed, neither indeed could it be with any degree 
 •' of reason." And farther in the sims opinion, he says: " When the com- 
 *' mon law has been repealed or changed by the institution of either the 
 " States or National Government, or by their legislative enactments, it is, of 
 *' course, not binding. So, also, it is safe to say when it has been varied by cus- 
 *' torn, not founded in reason, or not consonant to the genius and manner of the 
 " people, it ceases to have force.'^ 
 3 Iowa, 402. 
 
 Says Mr. Justice Story: "The common law of England is not to be taken 
 " in all respects to be that of America. Our ancestors brought with them its 
 " general principles and claimed it as their birthright; but they brought with 
 *' them and adopted only that portion which loas applicable to their situation." 
 2 Peters, 144. 
 
 The reports of the American Courts are full of kindred decisions. These 
 are to be found in Illinois (one decision by Judge Trumbull), in Arkansas, in 
 Mississippi, in Pennsylvania, in Massachusetts, in Tennessee, in Wisconsin, 
 and indeed in all the States where the question has ever been raised. 
 
 Can any good reason be given why beautiful California should not be sub- 
 ject to the same enlightened ruFe, or why her fair present should be destroyed 
 and her future made hopeless to enforce the contrary one? 
 
 In connection with the proposition here advanced, we beg leave to refer in 
 the appendix to this address, to the case ]of Coffin vs. Left-Hand Ditch Co., 
 decided by the Supreme Court of Colorado, a great irrigating State like our 
 own, in which the common law pertaining to riparian rights is held to be in- 
 applicable to the condition of the country and to form no part of its laws, 
 even prior to the adoption of the Constitution, which expressly authorized water 
 appropriation. 
 
 The conclusion must be that, by the Act of 1850, we adopted only such 
 portion of the common law of England as was applicable to our condition, 
 and whatever we did take of the common law included a power and duty ex- 
 isting in Judges and Courts exercising common law jurisdiction to modify the 
 common law when demanded by common necessity, and reconcile conflicting 
 decisions arising either from such modifications or from the misapprehension 
 as to the applicability of any portion of the common law, and this without 
 any usurpation of the powers of the Legislature. 
 
 Our courts, including the Supreme Court as it is now constituted, have 
 recognized and acted upon these rules ever since their organization, most 
 frequently in cases involving water rights. 
 
 The following is a list of cases involving rights acquired by appropriation, 
 beginning with the Supreme Court as it was first constituted, and ending in 
 
the Court as it now stands, and also cases by the Uoited States Supreme 
 Court : 
 
 Irwin vs. Fhillips, 5 Cal., 140. 
 
 Tartar vs. Spring Creek Co., 5 Cal., 397. 
 
 Conger vs. Weaver, 6 Cal., 555. 
 
 Hill vs. King, 8 Cal., 338. 
 
 Butte Co. vs. Vaughan, 11 Cal., 153. 
 
 McDonald vs. B(ar River Co., 13 Cal., 232. 
 
 Rupley vs. Welch, 23 Cal.. 455. 
 
 N. C. <b S. Co. ys. Kidd, 37 Cal., 314. 
 
 Osgood vs. El Dorado Water Co. , 56 Cal. 
 
 Atchisonvs. Peterson, 20 Wall., 507. 
 
 Basey vs. Gallagher, 20 Wall., 670. 
 
 Jennison vs. Kirk, 98 U. S., 458. 
 
 Broder vs. Natoma Water Co., 101 U. S.. 274. 
 
 These cases show that our courts have adopted the rule above stated, and 
 have squarely asserted the power to pass upon the fact as to whether or not 
 a portion of the common law of England was inapplicable to our situation or 
 condition. They also assumed the right to modify the decisions of their 
 predecessors, in a number of cases, as will be readily observed by any who 
 will read the decisions. 
 
 Instead of quoting from these various decisions we give an extract fiom 
 Mr. Judge Field's opinion in Atchison vs. Peterson, which summarizes them 
 all. He says (20 Wallace, 511): " As respects the use of water for mining 
 ** purposes, the doctrines of the common law declartory < f the rights of riparian 
 " owners were at an early day, after the discovery of gold found to be inap- 
 *'j?Zica6Ze, or applicable only in a very limited extent to the necessities of 
 *• miners and inadequate to their protection. ^ 
 
 '•This equality of right" (riparian), "among all the proprietors on the 
 '* same stream would have been incompatible with any extended diver- 
 " sion of the water by one prospector, and its conveyance for mining 
 " purposes to points from which it could not be restored to the 
 " stream. But the Government being the sole proprietor of all the public 
 •• lands, whether bordering on streams or otherwise, there was no occasion 
 ** for the application of the common law doctrine of riparian proprietorship 
 " with respect to the waters of these streams. The Government by its silent 
 *' acquiescence assented to the general occupatiou of the public lands 
 *• for mining, and to encourage their free and unlimited use for that pur- 
 " pose reserved such lands as were mineral from sale and the acquisition of 
 " title by settlement. And he who first connects his own labor with property 
 ** thus situated and open to general exploration, does, in natural justice, 
 *• acquire a better right to its use and enjoyment than others who have not 
 *• given such labor. So the miners on the public lands throughout the Pacific 
 " tStates and Territories, by their customs, usages and regulations, everywhere 
 
9 
 
 '• recognized the inherent justice of this principle; and the principle itself was at 
 " an early period recognized and enforced by the Court in these States and Ter- 
 •* ritories." 
 
 In the case of Basey vs. Gallagher, 20 Wallace, 682, the views expressed 
 and rulings made, just now quoted, are held equally applicable to the use of 
 water for purposes of irrigation, and no distinction, it is held, is made in those 
 States and Territories by the custom of miners or settlers, or by the Courts^ in 
 the rights of the first appropriator from the use made of the water if the use 
 be a beneficial one. 
 
 Thus stands the law of appropriation, as applied to the public lands. It 
 had its origin in the necessities of the situation and condition of the people 
 and the country. 
 
 The two great resources of the State are, and have ever been, mining and 
 agricultur?. The climate, topography and physical condition of the State 
 and the necessities of the people have rendered the diversion of water from 
 streams, both for mining and agricultural pursuits, essential. 
 
 All of the lands in the State except Mexican grants were, at the time of 
 our admission into the Union, public lands of the United States. The 
 climate, topography and physical condition of the State and the necessities of 
 the people have not changed in kind since 1850. They have remained the same 
 through all the years, notwithstanding the gradual alienation of land by the 
 Government to individuals. The common Jaw became no less inappli- 
 cable because the land no longer remained public. 
 
 The same customs and usages in regard to the appropriation of water for all 
 useful purposes were practiced universally, with a total disregard by all 
 of ownership of land whether public or private. It was these usages and 
 customs which caused the courts to take notice of and' declare the inapplica- 
 bility of the common law of England, as to public lands, and to recognize 
 the right of appropriation as to such lands. They performed their duty by 
 ascertaining the fact of the inapplicability of the riparian law, and then de- 
 clared it not to be the law. The same duty was incumbent on them with 
 relation to lands reduced to private ownership when occasion arose, the 
 inapplicability being the same. But until the case of Lux vs. Haggin the 
 opportunity never came, as all cases arising were between appropriators on 
 public lands. 
 
 The case of Ferreavs. Knipe, 28 Cal., 340, .was the case of an appropriator 
 against one who, claiming as a riparian owner, had stopped all the water of 
 the stream. The question as to whether an; appropriator' s right was 
 superior to the riparian right was not necessary to the decision, and was not 
 determined. The Court decided that, assuming defendant was a riparian 
 owner, he had no right as such to obstruct all the water in the stream in. 
 such a manner as to become lost by absorption and evaporation. All else in 
 the opinion is mere dictum. 
 
 As a matter of fact, the question of relative superiority between riparian 
 rights at common law and rights by appropriation are not necessarily in- 
 
/ 
 
 10 
 
 volved in any ca^e, exoept the recent case of L'lx vs. Hajfm, in which tha 
 four Justices constituting the majority of the Ojurt held that rights by ap- 
 propriation cannot be acquired as agiinst a private riparian owner; and this 
 case is on rehearing, and not yet settled law. 
 
 Any decision in favor of a riparian owner and against an appropriator, 
 must disregard an existing fact; a fact demonstrated to exist by the customs 
 and usages of thirty-five continuous years — and that is, that the necessities 
 of the people, and the climate and physical condition of the State, make 
 the English riparian doctrine, in any form, inapplicable here. This ques- 
 tion of fact yet remains to be finally determined by the Courts. 
 
 The law of riparian rights and the law of appropriation will not assimilate. 
 Either can exist only by the exclusion of the other. The true course is to 
 ascertain and determine the question of applicability. The present Supreme 
 Court have the same power and right to determine and declare this, and to 
 reconcile conflicting decisions as their predecessors had. 
 y We submit to your good judgment that the representatives of the people 
 have also a good right to declare by statute the /ad that the portion common 
 law of England, as expounded by the courts, to be repugnant to and incon- 
 sistent with the climate, topography, and physical condition of the State and 
 the necessities of the people thereof, and the laws thereof concerning the 
 appropriation of water for purposes of irrigation. In future water litigation 
 the Supreme Court may accept it, or they may reject it, as binding authority, 
 so far as the past is concerned. Or they may consider it as evidence of the 
 fact, although not conclusive. But with the added clause, "and to that 
 extent form no part of such laws," it will govern their decisions in contro- 
 versies arising over rights to be hereafter acquired. We shall have no new 
 riparian owners to put stumbling blocks in the way of irrigation. 
 
 We ask you, we urge you, in behalf of the irrigators of the State, and in 
 the interest of the entire people, to so legislate upon the subject of irrigation 
 as to assure the continued advance of the State by the development of its 
 agricultural interests through the means of irrigation. 
 
 We are convinced that if nothing is done at this session, the progress of 
 the State will receive a serious check, entailing upon the people the loss of 
 millions of property. Your failure to pass the pending bills will be regarded 
 as a public calamity affecting the material welfare of the whole State. 
 
 We earnestly request you to enact the bills which we have heretofore 
 nrged upon your committees. We believe that the passage of Senate Bill 210 
 and Assembly Bill No. 410 in the form in which it has already passed the 
 Assembly, is the best possible, indeed, the only feasible solution of the 
 question, as between riparian owners and appropriators. Under the ex- 
 isting state of uncertainty irrigation must be suspended until assured of 
 protection by the law. If riparian rights are to be upheld, irrigation must 
 no longer be numbered as one of our industries. What we ask by this bill 
 is that we may be allowed to pay riparian owners for whatever rights they 
 have to water which is more necessary for irrigation than for any purpose to 
 
11 
 
 which they can apply it; but wish to be protected against their exorbitant 
 demands by a provision for ascertaining just compensation for loss or 
 damage. 
 
 If Bills 410 and 210, guaranteeing water for irrigation, shall pass, we 
 further urge the enactment of the bills proposed for the formation of Dis- 
 tricts and the regulation of water distribution, for amending the water-right 
 clause in the Constitution and for the adjudication of claims to water. 
 
 We do not claim for these measures that they are infallible or beyond 
 criticism. The very men who have declared that this is a subject full of 
 complications and difficulties, have required of us 'the presentation of bills 
 to which no objection could be made. No such bill can be framed. With 
 the experience of all the ages of the past, no legislator has ever been able 
 to draw a revenue law free from serious objection, yet no one has argued 
 from this that we should have no revenue laws. 
 
 These bills have been carefully prepared, revised and amended. They have 
 the unanimous endorsernent of irrigators, and of nearly all the riparian 
 owners on streams where irrigation is carried on. No one has proposed any 
 better measures, and a beginning must be made. There is a burning neces- 
 sity for action now. We appeal to you with confidence to accede to the 
 united wishes of the people of all California, with few exceptions, and en- 
 act all of these bills. With great respect, we remain 
 
 Your most obedient, etc., 
 
 J. DeBARTH SHORB, 
 J. F. WHARTON, 
 W. S. GREEN, 
 R. HUDNUT, 
 H. S. DIXON, 
 L. B. RUGGLES, 
 E. H. TUCKER, 
 D. K. ZUMWALT, 
 Legislative Committee of the State Irrigation Convention. 
 
12 
 
 IN THE SUPKEME COURT OF COLORADO. 
 
 [Spring Term, 1883.] 
 
 COFFIN KT AL. V. THE LEFT-HAND DITCH CO. 
 
 1. Water Rights in Colorado — Not Governed by Common-law Rules as 
 
 TO Riparian Proprietorship, The doctrine of priority of right to 
 water by priority of appropriation has existed in Colorado from the 
 earliest appropriations of water within the boundaries of the State, 
 and not simply since 1876, when the Constitution was adopted. The 
 right, from the very nature of the case, existed prior to any legislation 
 on the subject. The*common-law rule is not applicable to Colorado. 
 
 2. Same — Protection of. The right of one who by prior appropriation has 
 
 secured the beneficial use of water is entitled to protection as well after 
 patent, to a third party, of the land over which the natural stream 
 flows, as when such land is part of the public domain, whether or 
 not the water be mentioned in or expressly excepted from the grant. 
 The Act of Congress protecting in patents such rights '-was rather a 
 voluntary recognition of a pre-existing right of possession, consti- 
 tuting a valid claim to its continued use, than the establishment of a 
 new one. 
 
 3. Same — Legislation had in View op these Rights by Appropriation. 
 
 All the legislation on the subject in Colorado, including the Act of 1861, 
 1862 and 1864, • had in view the existence and protection of rights 
 secured by prior appropriation. 
 
 4. Same — Right not Dependent upon the Locus of Use. The right of 
 
 water acquired by prior appropriation is not in any way dependent upon 
 the locus of its application to the beneficial use designed. That such 
 prior appropriation diverts the water from one stream to another, across 
 the natural water-shed, does not affect his rights. The Acts of 1861 
 and 1862 do not conflict with this view. 
 
 Appeal from the District Court of Boulder County. 
 Messrs. Carr and Eime for appellants. 
 Richard R. Whiteley for appellee. 
 Helm, J.: 
 
 Appellee, who was plaintiff below, claims to be the owner of certain water 
 by virtue of an appropriation thereof from the south fork of the St. Vrain 
 Creek. It appears that such water, after its diversion, is carried by means of 
 a ditch to the James Creek, and thence along the bed of the same to Left- 
 hand Creek, where it is again diverted by lateral ditches and used to irrigate 
 lands adjacent to the last named stream. Appellants are the owners of lands 
 lying on the margin and in the neighborhood of the St. Vrain below the 
 mouth of said south fork thereof, and naturally irrigated therefrom. 
 
 In 1879 there was not a sufficient quantity of water in the St. Vrain to 
 supply the ditch of the appellee and also irrigate the said lands of appellants. 
 A portion of appellee's dam was torn out and its diversion of water thereby 
 seriously interfered with by appellants. The action is brought for damages 
 
13 
 
 arising from the trespass, and for iajanctive relief to prevent repetitions 
 thereof in the future. 
 
 The answer of appellants, who were defendants below, is separated into 
 six divisions: 
 
 First — A specific denial of all the'material allegations of the complaint. 
 
 Second — Allegations concerning an agreement made at the date of the con* 
 striiction of appellee's ditch; by this agreement the parties constructing such 
 ditch were to refrain from the diversioa of water there through when the 
 quantity in the St. Vrain was only suffiaient to supply the settlers thereon. 
 
 Third, fourth, fifth and sixth, are separate answers by individual defend- 
 ants setting up a right to the water diverted, by virtue of ownership of lands 
 along the St. Vrain, and in some instances also by appropriations of water 
 therefrom. But it nowhere appears by suffisient averment that such appro- 
 priations of defendants' making the same were actually made prior to the 
 diversion of the water through appellee's ditch. 
 
 Demurrers were sustained to all of the above defenses or answers, except 
 the first, and exceptions to the rulings duly preserved; trial was had before a 
 jury upon the issues made by the complaint and answer as it then remained, 
 and verdict and judgment given for the appellee. 
 
 Such recovery was confined, however, to damages for injury to the dam 
 alone, and did not extend to those, if any there were, resulting from the loss 
 of water. 
 
 We do not think that the Court erred in its ruling upon the demurrers, and 
 we believe the verdict and judgment sustained by the pleadings and evidence. 
 
 Were we to accept appellants' views upon the subject of water rights in this 
 State, it would yet be doubtful if we could justify the trespass. And if the 
 agreements were actually made as stated in the second defense, that fact 
 would not excuse their act in forcibly destroying the appellee's dam without 
 notice or warning. It is suflficient upon this subject for us to say that, 
 even if such agreement were legal and binding, and included subsequent set- 
 tlers on the St. Vrain, yet appellee 'was entitled to notice of the insuf- 
 ficiency of water to supply the demands of appellants; it might then, per- 
 haps, have complied with the agreement without serious injury to its prop- 
 erty. 
 
 But two important questions upon the subject of water rights are fairly 
 presented by the record, and we cannot well avoid resting our decision 
 upon them. 
 
 It is contended by counsel for appellants that the common-law principles 
 of riparian proprietorship prevailed in Colorado until 1876, and that the 
 doctrine of priority of right to water by priority of appropriation thereof was 
 first recognized and adopted in the Constitution. But we think the latter 
 doctrine has existed from the date of the earliest appropriations of water 
 within the boundaries of the State. The climate is dry, and the soil, when 
 moistened only by the usual rainfall, is arid and unproductive; except in a 
 few favored sections, artificial irrigation for agriculture is an absolute neoes- 
 
14 
 
 sity. Water in the various streams thus acquires a value unknown in 
 moister climates. Instead of being a mere incident to the soil, it rises, when 
 appropriated, to the dignity of a distinct usufructuary estate or right of 
 property. It has always been the policy of the National, as well as the Ter- 
 ritorial and State Governments, to encourage the diversion and use of water 
 in this country for agriculture, and vast expenditures of time and money 
 have been made in reclaiming and fertilizing by irrigation portions of our un- 
 productive territory. Homes have been built and permanent improvements 
 made, the soil has been cultivated, and thousands of acres have been ren- 
 dered immensely valuable, with the understanding that appropriations of 
 water would be protected. Deny the doctrine of priority or superiority of 
 right by priority of appropriation, and a great part of the value of all this 
 property is at once destroyed. 
 
 The right to water, in this country, by priority of appropriation thereof, 
 we think it is and has always been the duty of the National and State Gov- 
 ernments to protect. The right itself, and the obligation to protect it, existed 
 prior to legislation on the subject of irrigation. It is entitled to protection 
 as well after patent, to a third party, of the land over which the natural 
 stream flows, as when such a land is a part of the public domain, and it is 
 immaterial whether or not it be mentioned in the patent and expressly ex- 
 cluded from the grant. 
 
 The Act of Congress protecting in patents such right in water appropriated, 
 when recognized by local customs and laws, •' was rather a voluntary recog- 
 nition of a pre-existing right of possession, constituting a valid claim to its 
 continued use, than the establishment of a new one." 
 Broder vs. Natoma W. & M.Co., 11 Otto, 274. 
 
 We conclude, then, that the commonl^law doctrine giving the riparian owner 
 a right to the flow of water in its natural channel upon and over his lands, 
 even though he make no beneficial use thereof, is inapplicable to Colorado; 
 imperative necessity, unknown in the countries which gave it birth, compels 
 the recognition of another doctrine in conflict therewith. And we hold that, 
 in the absence of express statutes to the contrary, the first appropriator of 
 water from a natural stream, for a beneficial pvirpose, has, with the qualifica- 
 tion^ contained in the Constitution, a prior right thereto to the extent of such 
 appropriation. 
 
 See /Sc^eVZingr vs. Rominger, 3 Col., 103. 
 
 The Territorial Legislature, in 1864, expressly recognizes the doctrine. It 
 
 " Nor shall the water of any stream be diverted from its original channel 
 to the detriment of any miners, millmen or others along the line of said 
 stream, who may have a priority of right, and there shall be at all times left 
 isnfficient water in said stream for the use of miners and agriculturists along, 
 said stream. 
 
 Session Laws 1864, p. 58, Sec. 32. 
 
15 
 
 The priority of right mentioned in this section is acquired by priority of 
 appropriation; and the provision declares that appropriations of water shall 
 be subordinate to the use thereof by prior appropriators. This provision 
 remained in force until the adoption of the Constitution; it was repealed in 
 1868, but the repealing Act re-enacted it verbatim. 
 
 But the rights of appellee were acquired in the first place under the Acts 
 of 1861 and 1862; and counsel for appellants urge, with no little skill and 
 plausibility, that these statutes are in conflict with our conclusion that 
 priority of right is acquired by priority of appropriation. The only pro- 
 vision, however, which can be construed as referring to this subject, is 
 Section 4, on page 68, Sess. Laws of 1861; this section provides for the ap- 
 pointment of commissioners, in times of scarcity, to apportion the water of 
 the stream *' in a just and suitable proportion," to the best interests of all 
 parties concerned, with a due regard for the legal rights of all," What is 
 meant by the concluding phrase of the foregoing statute? What are the 
 legal rights for which the commissioners are enjoined to have a "due 
 regard?" Why this additional limitation upon the powers of such com- 
 missioners? 
 
 It seems to us a reasonable inference that these phrases had reference to 
 the rights acquired by priority of appropriation. This view is sustained by 
 the universal respect shown at the time said statute was adopted, and subse- 
 quently by each person for the prior appropriations of others; and the cor- 
 responding customs existing among settlers with reference thereto. This 
 construction does not, in our judgment, detract from the force or effect of 
 the statute. It was the duty of the commissioners under it to guard against 
 extravagance and waste, and to so divide and distribute the water as most 
 economically to supply all of the earlier appropriators thereof, according to 
 their respective appropriations and necessities, to the extent of the amount 
 remaining in the stream. 
 
 It appears from the record that the patent under which appellant, George 
 W. Coffin, holds title, was issued prior to the Act of Congress of 1866 here- 
 inbefore mentioned; that it contained no reservation or exception of vested 
 water rij^hts, and conveyed to Coffin, through his grantor, the absolute title 
 in fee-simple to his lands, together with all incidents and appurtenances 
 thereunto belonging; and it isrclaimed that, therefore, the doctrine of priority 
 of right by appropriation cannot, at least, apply to him. We have already 
 declared that water appropriated for a beneficial purpose is, in this country, 
 not necessarily an appurtenance to the soil through which the stream sup- 
 plying the flame naturally flows; if appropriated by one prior to the patent- 
 ing of such soil by another, it is a vested right entitled to protection, though 
 not mentioned in the patent. But we are relieved from any extended con- 
 sideration of this subject by the decision in JBroder vs. Natoma W. <fc M. Co.,. 
 supra. 
 
 It is urged, however, that even if the doctrine of priority or superiority of 
 right by priority of appropriation be conceded, appellee in this case is not 
 
16 
 
 benefited thereby. Appellants claim that they have a better right to the 
 water, because their lands lie along the margin and in the neighborhood of 
 the St. Vrain. They assert that, as against them, appellee's diversion of 
 said water to irrigate lands adjacent to Left-hand Creek, though prior in 
 time, is unlawful. 
 
 In the absence of legislation to the contrary, we think that the right to 
 water acquired by priority of appropriation thereof is not in any way de- 
 pendent upon the locus of its application to the beneficial use designed. And 
 the disastrous consequences of our adoption of the rule contended for, forbid 
 our giving such a construction to the statutes as will concede the same, if 
 they will properly bear a more reasonable equitable one. 
 
 The doctrine of priority of right by priority of appropriation for agri- 
 culture is evoked, as we have seen, by the imperative necessity for artificial 
 irrigation of the soil. And it would be an ungenerous and inequitable rule 
 that would deprive one of its benefit simply because he has, by large expen- 
 diture of time and money, carried the water from one stream over an inter- 
 vening water-shed, and cultivated land in the valley of another. It might be 
 utterly impossible, owing to the topography of the country, to get water 
 upon his farm from the adjacent stream; or, if possible, it might be im- 
 practicable on account of the distance from the point where the diversion 
 must take place, and the attendant expense; or the quantity of water in 
 such stream might be entirely insufficient to supply his wants. It some- 
 times happens that the most fertile soil is found along the margin or in the 
 neighborhood of the small rivulet, and sandy and barren land beside the 
 larger stream; to apply the rule contended for would prevent the useful and 
 profitable cultivation of the productive soil, and sanction the waste of water 
 upon the most sterile lands. It would have enabled a party to locate upon 
 a stream in 1875, and destroy the value of thousands of acres, and the im- 
 provements thereon, in adjoining valleys, possessed and cultivated for the 
 preceding decade. Under the principle contended for, a party owning land 
 ten miles from the stream, but in the valley thereof, might deprive a prior 
 appropriator of the water diverted therefrom, whose lands are within a 
 thousand yards, but just beyond an intervening divide. 
 
 We cannot believe that any legislative body within the Territory or State 
 of Colorado ever intended these consequences to flow from a statute enacted. 
 "Set two sections are relied upon by counsel asY)roducing them. These sec- 
 tions are as follows: 
 
 •' All persons who claim, own or hold a possessory right or title to any land 
 or parcel of land within the boundary of Colorado Territory * » * when 
 those claims are on the bank, margin or neighborhood of any stream of water, 
 creek or river, shall be entitled to the use of the water of said stream, creek 
 or river, for the purpose of irrigating, and making said claims available to 
 the full extent of the soil, for agricultural purposes." Session Law&i, 1861, 
 p. 67, Sec. 1. 
 
 "Nor shall the water of any stream be diverted from its original channel 
 to the detriment of any miners, millmen or others along the line of said 
 
17 
 
 stream, &nd there shall be at all times left sufficient water in said stream for 
 the use of miners and farmers along said stream." Latter part of Sec. 13, p. 
 48, Sess. Laws 1862. 
 
 The two statutory provisions above quoted must, for the purposes of this 
 discussion, be considered together. The phrase, "along said stteam," in the 
 latter is equally comprehensive, as to extent of territory, with the expression 
 "on the bank, margin or neighborhood," used in the former. And both in- 
 clude all lands in the immediate valley of the stream. The latter provision 
 sanctions the diversion of water from one stream to irrigate lands adjacent to 
 another, provided such diversion is not to the "detriment" of parties along 
 the line of the stream from which the water is taken. If there is any conflict 
 between the statutes in this respect, the latter, of course must prevail. We 
 think that the "use" and "detriment" spoken of are a use existing at the time 
 of the diversion, and a detriment or injury immediately resulting therefrom. 
 We do not believe that the Legislature intended to prohibit the diversion of 
 water to the "detriment" of parties who might at some future period conclude 
 to settle upon the stream ; nor do we think that they were legislating with a 
 view to preserving in said stream sufficient water for the "use" of settlers who 
 might never come, and consequently never have use therefor. 
 
 But "detriment" at the time of diversion could only exist where the water 
 diverted had been previously appropriated or used; if there had been no 
 previous appropriation or use thereof, there could be no present injury or 
 "detriment." 
 
 Our conclusion above as to the intent of the Legislature is supported by 
 the fact that the succeeding Assembly, in 1864, hastened to insert into the 
 latter statute, without other change or amendment, the clause "who have a 
 priority of right," in connection with the idea of "detriment" to adjacent 
 owners. This amendment to the statute was simply the acknowledgement 
 by the Legislature of a doctrine already existing, under which rights had ac- 
 crued that were entitled to protection. In the language of Mr. Justice Miller 
 above quoted, upon a different branch of the same subject, it "was rather a 
 voluntary recognition of a pre-existing right, constituting a valid claim, than 
 the creation of a new one." 
 
 Error is assigned upon alleged defects in the proof of appellee's incorpora- 
 tion. 
 
 But this is an action of trespass; the defendants below were, according to 
 the verdict of the jury, and according to the views herein expressed', wrong- 
 doers; and, considering the nature of the action, we think the proof of incor- 
 poration sufficient. 
 
 The judgment of the Court will be affirmed. 
 2 
 
18 
 
 The Spirit of the Press on the Subject of 
 Irrigation. 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 Proceeding's of the Senate Irrijjfatingf Convention. 
 
 In our last issue we gave a sketch of the proceedings of this Convention, 
 covering the first day of the session. We mentioned that when the Conven- 
 tion convened at Riverside last year, standing committees on Resolutions 
 and Legislation were appointed, to report at the present meeting. They were 
 not ready to do so, and it was agreecl to add three additional members to each 
 committee, to be appointed by the Chair. The writer had the honot to be 
 appointed to that on Resolutions. The two committees were directed to 
 deliberate and act together, and subsequently they were combined into one. 
 The duty of this combined committee was to prepare the work of the Con- 
 vention; to decide upon and prepare the points upon which legislation was 
 required, and submit their work to the Convention for discussion and ap- 
 proval. As James DeBarth Shorb, Chairman of the Committee, was also 
 Chairman of the Convention, a Vice-Chairman was appointed to preside over 
 that body while he attended the deliberations of the committee. The com- 
 mittee immediately retired to a room prepared for the purpose. It comprised 
 18 members and we were surprised at their intelligence, ability and thorough 
 Tinderstandiug of the subject. Several of them were able, experienced law- 
 yers, three were editors, and the rest canal-owners and irrigators. There was 
 no hesitancy about proceeding to business. E».ch member was full of the 
 subject, and more work was proposed than could have been accomplished in 
 a month. The most important matters were selected, such as were believed 
 "would cover the entire ground, and these alone acted upon. Nothing was 
 adopted without discussion, or until all opposition was overcome and a 
 unanimous vote could be had. Each member kept steadily in view the wants 
 and interests of his own district, and as it was not always possible to har- 
 monize them, a great deal of prolonged and warm discussion was the result, 
 and ^hile there was some not fully satisfied, they were convinced that they 
 could not have been granted more consistent with the general interest. As 
 the work progressed it was reported to the Convention, and last Saturday the 
 final report was made and, after some discussion, the work of the committee 
 was adopted unanimously; whereupon the Convention adjourned, after first 
 perpetuating the committee, which divided itself into variouo departments 
 for diflferent branches of work, the principal of which are the Executive and 
 Finance Committees, the latter of which added to itself several members 
 from the outside whom it was thought could render essential aid in this de-' 
 
19 
 
 partment, and a meeting of the entire committee was had subsequent to the 
 adjournment of the Convention, at which a definite understanding of the 
 work to be done was had and final arrangements made. The amount of 
 money necessary for immediate use was estimated and apportioned among 
 the counties principally interested in irrigation. The Executive Committee 
 was assigned the task of framing the matters adopted by the Convention into 
 bills, which they are to see presented simultaneously in both Houses of the 
 Legislature, and the passage of which they are to urge personally by every 
 honorable means in their power. The bills they are authorized to introduce 
 will, no doubt, effectually settle all the difficulties in the way of irrigation, 
 especially riparian rights, if the final decision of the Supreme Court should 
 sustain them. In iiiht event, which we believe is not unlikely, a way has 
 been devised to get them out of the way and apply all the running streams of 
 the State to irrigation, on a basis of justice to all who require water for that 
 purpose. 
 
 The following are the ideas adopted by the committee and approved by 
 the Convention, which, as far as necessary, are to be shaped into bills by 
 the Executive Committee and their enactment into laws by the Legislature, 
 urged : 
 
 1st. That the cubic foot per second be adopted as the unit of measure- 
 ment throughout the State. 
 
 2d. It is important and desirable to institute a system of making all water 
 rights a matter of proof and record. 
 
 3d. A declaration by the Legislature that all the waters of the State in 
 natural streams and lakes belong to the people, and are subject to appropria- 
 tion by the people for irrigation, mining, manufacturing; and other useful 
 purposes. 
 
 4th. To provide such machinery for the voluntary formation of irrigation 
 districts by which the owners of lands may acquire water rights, and assess 
 the land for the purpose of constructing canals, ditches, or other irrigation 
 works, ox for purchasing those already constructed. 
 
 Provided, that waters already appropriated shall thereafter be utilized as 
 at present through existing works or the extension of the same, so far as may 
 be necessary, for the irrigation of lands dependent thereon; and further pro- 
 vided, thut no lands shall be taxed for the construction of works of irrigation, 
 except lands actually to be irrigated by said works. • 
 
 5th. To so extend the Law of Eminent Domain as to allow an irrigation 
 district, or a corporation, outside of an irrigation district, to condemn and 
 pay for rights of way, lands, canals, ditches, and water-claims and rights of 
 whatever nature held by any person or corporation, or any other private rights 
 .of property, however existing or acquired, or by whatever name designated, 
 which may be necessary for the appropriation or use of water. 
 
 Provided, that in condemning, water used at the time of the commencement 
 of an action for the same, a manifest greater public interest shall be shown. 
 
. 20 
 
 [That the irrigation district with power to condemn is defined as the sub- 
 district within the hydrographic district, while the hydrographic district is 
 one without condemnatory power, bnt with regulation power only.] 
 
 6th. To provide for a thorough and complete annual accounting for all 
 the waters used by any and all districts or companies, and lor a proper dis- 
 tribution of the waters of any stream between appropriators, and for such 
 other police regulations as may be necessary. 
 
 7th. That Section 1492 of the Civil Code, which declares that the rights 
 of riparian proprietors are not affected by the preceding twelve sections of 
 the Code providing for rights to water by appropriation, should be repealed, 
 and its place supplied by a declaration that the common law of riparian 
 rights does not apply to this State. 
 
 8th. That a change should be made in the law of limitations as regards 
 diversions of water. 
 
 9th. That the committees on Legislation and Eesolutions be consolidated 
 and be known as the Legislative Committee, and be continued in existence 
 after the adjournment of the Convention, with power to draw, or cause to be 
 drawn, a bill, or bills, for passage by the Legislature, according to the prin- 
 ciples embodied in their report, as approved by this Convention, and to pre- 
 sent the same to the next Legislature for passage; and to do such other things 
 as they deem proper to effect the objects of this Convention ; and with power 
 also to appoint from among its members an Executive Committee, with the 
 usual powers of such committee. 
 
 The following was adopted as their views of law by the committee and 
 approved by the Convention: 
 
 1. Where there is so wide a diversity of opinion as now exists in this 
 State, as to what the law is in relation to water rights, it is clearly the duty of 
 the law-making power to so improve it as to leave it free from all ambiguity, 
 and render it definite and easy to be understood by the people and the 
 courts. 
 
 2. That the Legislature has this power, is made plain by Section 2, Article 
 I, of the Constitution, which reads as follows: ** All political power is inher- 
 ent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security and 
 benefit of the people, and they have the right to alter or reform the same 
 whencfver the public good may require it." 
 
 3. The Constitution of our State recognizes and sanctions the appropria- 
 tion of water, and does not recognize or sanction the doctrine of riparian 
 rights. Its language is as follows: •* The use of all water now appropriated, 
 for sale, rental or distribution, is hereby declared to be a public use, and 
 subject to the regulation and control of the State, in the manner to be pre- 
 scribed by law." 
 
 4. Title 8th of the Civil Code, providing for the appropriation o^ water, is 
 the law of the State, and wherever the common law of England is antagonist 
 
21 
 
 tic to or inconsistent with any section of said title, it has no force or effect 
 as law in this State. 
 
 5. Law is defined by our Code as "the will of the people solemnly ex- 
 pressed." The language of the Code is as lollows: 
 
 ' * Section 4466. Law is a solemn expression of the will of the supreme 
 power of the State. 
 
 "Section 4467. The will of the supreme power is expressed — 
 
 1. By the Constitution. 
 
 2. By the Statutes. 
 
 " Section 4468. The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant 
 to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Consti- 
 tution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this 
 State. 
 
 In view of the fact that the Governor was then probably engaged in the 
 preparation of his message, it was agreed to call his attention to the im- 
 portance of this question of irrigation, and that a memorial should be drawn 
 up, engrossed and sent to him without delay. W. S. Green, editor of the 
 Colusa Sun, and a member of the committee, was appointed to draw up such 
 memorial. He performed his task promptly, and his work was approved by 
 the committee and confirmed by the Convention as follows: 
 
 To His Excellency George Stoneman, Governor of California: Your mem- 
 orialist, the State Irrigation Convention, assembled at Fresno, respectfully 
 begs leave to call your attention to the great value of the interests involved 
 in the matter of irrigation, to its importance to California as a State, and to 
 the fact that much remains to be done by the State in its sovereign capacity 
 to make the rights of irrigators certain, definite and secure, and request that 
 Your Excellency will lay the same before the Legislature, with such recom- 
 mendations as in your judgment shall be right and proper. The land that 
 must be irrigated in the immediate future in the San Joaquin and Sacra- 
 mento valleys embrace an area of not less than 5,000,000 acres. This area 
 does not embrace more than one-half the possibility of the future. There is 
 available water enough to supply all the land. Upon a very large portion of 
 this area the rainfall is so small as to make farming an impossibility without 
 iirigation, and upon the whole of it the rainfall is so uncertain as to prevent 
 that diversity of farming so necessary to the prosperity of a people. Fur- 
 thermore, all the counties to the south of the San Joaquin Valley depend 
 upon irrigation for their prosperity. With the proper encouragement and 
 security given to irrigation, millions of people will in a few years be added 
 to this great and fertile territory; but with irrigation hampered, thwarted 
 and destroyed by an unfriendly attitude of the law-making and law-executing 
 authorities of the State, the present population of this territory is greater 
 than can be supported, and instead of adding millions, a loss of tens of 
 thousands must be suffered. Notwithstanding the imperfections and uncer- 
 tainty of our laws, and their adverse construction by our Courts, great inter- 
 
22 
 
 ests have grown up that if permitted to fall through must blight the pros- 
 perity of our State. It is hardly necessary to enamerate to you in detail all 
 that has been done. In Fresno county there has been constructed 200 miles 
 of main canal, at a cost in round numbers of $1,000,000, irrigating at the 
 present time 394,000 acres of land. Tulare County has constructed 250 miles 
 of canal, at a|co3t of $1,000,000, and irrigates 200,000 acres of land. Kern 
 County has 200 miles, costing about $2,000,000, and irrigating 600,000 acres 
 of land. Los Angeles County has in operation about 120 miles of canal, 
 
 constructed at a cost of and waters 60,000 acres of land. San Bernardino 
 
 County has 100 miles of canal and has 14,000 acres under irrigation, costing 
 $500,000. Merced County has in course of construction a canal with a ca- 
 pacity of 3,000 cubic feet per second, upon which $500,000 has been ex- 
 pended, and it will require $500,000 more to complete it. It will water 
 360,000 acres. These lands with water are the most fertile and productive 
 on the face of the earth. Without it they are arid and worthless. In other 
 counties of the State there are other works either contracted or in course of 
 construction, and with proper encouragement and protection these works 
 will go on and on until California will become the garden of the world. 
 These irrigated lands are divided generally into small farms of ten to forty 
 acres, and upon each is a family, contented, prosperous and happy. 
 
 To give you some idea of the value of the water so used for irrigation, we 
 have simply to refer to the fact notwithstanding the adverse circumstances 
 above set forth, water rights and irrigable lands otherwise of no value, are 
 worth in the market almost fabulous prices. In San Bernardino county 
 there are two ditches, the shares in which are selling at from $800 to $1200 
 per share, each share being equal to about one inch of water. This would 
 make the water worth from $40,000 to $64,000 per cubic foot per second. 
 Unimproved land at Riverside is selling at from $200 to $800 per acre, with 
 the privilege of water, while land with no immediate prospect of water, but 
 equal otherwise, will bring but a nominal price. Those are by no means 
 exaggerated or isolated instances. On the contrary, with the fostering care of 
 California's sovereignty and power rightly and judiciously exercised, giving 
 encouragement to settlers and tillers of the soil, and security to capital, 
 that portion of California now considered valueless for farming purposes with- 
 out irrigation, will become the most densely populated, the most valuable 
 portion of the American Continent. Take what has been done, even under 
 adverse circumstances, and multiply the result by the cubic feet of water, 
 and the acres of land that can be brought together, and the sum almost stug- 
 gersthe credulity of man, and the recital of results would seem more like an 
 Arabian tale than a plain statement of facts. In view of what has been ac- 
 complished; in view of the possibilities of the future, your memorialist feela 
 that it is not asking too much when it prays for the support of the power of 
 the State, and the enactment into statute law of the following privileges : 
 
 1. Making the cubic foot per second the unit of measurement. 
 
 2. Making water rights a matter of proof and record. 
 
23 
 
 3. Declaring that all the waters of the State in natural streams and lakes 
 belong to the people, and are subi'ect to appropriation by the people for irri- 
 gation, mining, manufacturing and other useful purposes. 
 
 4. Providing machinery for the voluntary formation of irrigation districts, 
 by which the owners of land may acquire water rights, and assess the land 
 for the purpose of constructing or purchasing works of irrigation, and pro- 
 serving rights already acquired. 
 
 5. Extending the law of Eminent Domain so as to allow irrigation dis- 
 tricts or corporations outside of irrigation districts to condemn, take and 
 pay for right of way lands, canals, riparian claims, and such other private, 
 or corporate property as may be necessary, always, however, having in view 
 the greater public use. 
 
 Providing for an annual accounting for all the waters in the State used for 
 irrigation, and for a proper distribution of the waters between appropriators, 
 and lor such other public regulations as may be necessary. 
 
 The following was adopted to bo shaped into the form "of a memorial to 
 Congress: 
 
 Resolved, That it is the desire of the irrigators of California that theU. S. 
 Government should adopt measures to preserve the water sheds and sources 
 of supplies of the springs and streams now used, or which are likely to be used 
 for irrigation in California. 
 
 Fires in the mountains should be carefully guarded against. Ripe timber 
 Fhould be so cut, when taken, as to insure a second or new growth, and 
 should only be cut in such quantities as will not materially effect the melting 
 of the snows in the warm season. 
 
 Verdure on mountains arrests the rains and water percolates into veins on 
 which the springs depend. Forests have a marked effect on the melting of 
 snow, retarding it very much, so that snow in a forest which would be 
 months in dissolving and running off, would on a bare hill, under like tem- 
 perature, disappear much more rapidly even to the extent of creating dis- 
 astrous floods, as has often been the case under these conditions. 
 
 Carelessness of hunters, shepherds and brush-burners, and the natural 
 demands of commerce for firewood and lumber, must, if not regulated, make 
 such changes in the reservoirs of our mountains and so diminish their water- 
 holding capacity, as to seriously, if not permanently injure the agricultural- 
 ists and others dependent on their waters. 
 
 We therefore urge this subject to the attention of the proper authorities, 
 especially of our Sanators and C ^ngressmen, and pray for their favorable 
 action. 
 
 The following resolutions were adopted, some of them recommended by 
 the Committee and others proposed directly to the Convention by members 
 of that body : 
 
24 
 
 Resolved, That Dewey & Co. be employed to print 1000 copies of the pro- 
 ceedings of this Convention, in pamphlet form for the sum of $100, to be de- 
 livered in two weeks. 
 
 Resolved, That a Finance Committee of seven be appointed to raise funds 
 to meet expenses incident to this convention, and for all other necessary 
 expenses. 
 
 Resolved, That Will S. Green be appointed a committee of one, with 
 authority to expend a sum not to exceed $150, for the printing and circula- 
 tion of a newspaper supplement containing the address of George Church, 
 and the reports of the Joint Committee as adopted by this Convention. 
 
 Resolved, That the sincere thanks of the members of this Convention who 
 have come from a distance, are due and most cordially tendered to the citi- 
 zens of Fresno for the many courtesies extended and the attention shown to 
 visitiiig members. 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary of this Convention prepare a petition to the 
 State Legislature, setting forth the principles adopted by this Convention in 
 guiding its Legislative Committee in the drafting of proposed Legislative 
 enactments, and asking the Legislature to favorably consider the same, and 
 that these blank petitions be circulated through the State with a view to 
 securing the largest possible number of names to the same. 
 
 Resolved, That this Committee would earnestly req uest that all friends of 
 irrigation, now members of this Convention, will in their individual capacity, 
 visit Sacramento during the session of the Legislature, to aid and assist the 
 Executive Legislative Committee to secure such legislation now demanded 
 by, not only every irrigator, but also by every true citizen and lover of his 
 State. 
 
 Resolved, That any member of the Executive Committee who may not be 
 able to attend the meetings of such Executive Committee, may appoint an- 
 other member of the Committee on Legislation to represent him at such 
 meeting. 
 
 Resolved, That the members of this committee are authorized and requested 
 to use all proper influence in obtaining the endorsement of all public bodies 
 in this State on the action of this Convention. 
 
 Resolved, That the Chair appoint a committee of three to proceed to San 
 Fran( isco and attend the meeting soon to occur of the Board of Trade and 
 Board of Irrigation of that city, there to represent our interests, and to 
 obtain their aid and endorsement; and that the Chairman of the Convention 
 be made the Chairman of the Committee. 
 
 Resolved, That we recommend that the office of State Engineer be con- 
 tinued, and that the necessary appropriations be made by the next Legisla- 
 ture to complete the work already cut out, and such other work as may be 
 necessary in connection with the duties of said oflfice. 
 
 Resolved, That the thanks of this Convention, and we believe we hazard 
 nothing in saying the thanks of every one connected with the subject of 
 
25 
 
 irrigation, are most heartily tendered to the present incumbent for the very 
 able, eflQ.cient and thorough manner in which the work has been conducted 
 80 far, and believe it was a wise and fortunate selection when the duties of 
 the office were committed to the care of that very efficient officer, William 
 Ham. Hall. 
 
 Resolved, That the Chairman of this Convention appoint a committee of 
 three, who shall examine the reporter's transcript, arrange the proceedings of 
 this body in proper order, make all necessary corrections, and turn the same 
 over to the publisher. 
 
 Resolved, That, whereas, the Supreme Court has ordered a rehearing of 
 the water case recently decided, in order to give opportunity for others than 
 the parties to the suit to intervene and be heard before a final decision of the 
 case, and 
 
 "Whereas, other appropriators are preparing to represent their interests be 
 fore that Court; and whereas, the number of irrigators is as a hundred to one 
 when compared with the appropriators. 
 
 Resolved, That this Convention recommends to the small irrigators of the 
 State, whose places must become desolate if riparian rights prevail, to take 
 measures to be properly represented before that Court, that they may make a 
 final appeal for a fair consideration of their rights before their ruin becomes 
 fiual. 
 
 The Executive Committee has power to call the Convention together again 
 whenever, in their opinion, it shall be advisable. A motion made in con- 
 vention that the next meeting be called at Sacramento was lost. The perma, 
 nent committees appointed to act after the adjournment of the Convention 
 are composed of the following members: 
 
 Executive.— J. D. B. Sborb, Los Angeles; F. H. Wharton, Fresno; H. S. 
 Dixon, Fresno; W. S.Green, Colusa; L. B. Kuggles, Tulare; S. M. Holt, 
 San Bernardino; E. Hudnut, Kern; E. H. Tucker, Fresno; D. K. Zumwalt, 
 Tulare. 
 
 Committee on Boaed or Trade. — J. D. B. Shorb, Los Angeles; J. W. 
 North, Fresno; P. Y. Baker, Tulare. 
 
 Finance. — T. Hughes, Fresno; J. D. B. Shorb, Los Angeles; C. I. F. 
 Kitchener, Tulare; J. G. North, San Bernardino; W. S. Green. Colusa; A. 
 Weihe, San Francisco; E. Hudnut, Kern; Dr. Eicker, Merced. 
 
 S. F. Alta. • 
 
 Paste Tliis in Your Hat. 
 
 The bill to make irrigation lawful and possible, has passed the Assembly 
 by the following vote: 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Ashe, Banbury, Barnes, Barnett, Buhlert, Carter of Contra 
 Costa, Clark, Cook, Corcoran, Daley, Deveny, Da Witt, Dooling, Franklin* 
 
French, Goucher, Gregory, Hazard, Henley, Hnnt, Hussey, Johnson, Jordan, 
 Kalben, Lafferty, Long, Loud, Lovell, May, McDonald, McGlashan, McMur. 
 ray, Mears, Moffit, Munday, Patterson, Pellett, Pyle, Reeves, Roseberry, 
 Rubs, Sullivan, Swayne, Torrey, Van Voorhies, Watson of El Dorado, Ward 
 of San Francisco, Weaver, Woodward, Yule and Mr. Speaker — 51. 
 
 Noes. — Messrs. Allen, Colby, Coleman, Davis, Ellison, Firebaugh, Heath, 
 Henry, Heywood, Hollister, Jones, McJunkin, Walrath, Watson of Alameda, 
 Ward of Batte, and Wood— 16. 
 
 The lead which Assemblyman Jordan took in the filibustering of the ene- 
 mies of irrigation, together with his notice of motion to reconsider the pas- 
 sage of the bill, given for the purpose of delaying the transmission of the 
 bill to the Senate, places him with the sixteen "noes" who have recorded 
 themselves in favor of restoring Southern California to its primeval condition 
 of wilderness and desert. Out of all the irrigation measures offered to the 
 Legislature for consideration, this bill alone contained assurances which 
 make irrigation possible. A.11 other bills upon the subject are either for the 
 regulation of the use of water for purposes of irrigation, the adjudication of 
 conflicting claims to water for the same purposes, or for the perpetuation of 
 foul and pestilential swamps of the great basin of the San Joaquin in the in- 
 terest of half a dozen greedy cattle kings. The simple question presented to 
 the Assembly by this bill was, shall the waters of natural streams be applied 
 to the development of the State by irrigation, or shall they be confined to 
 their channels, so that such water as is not lost by evaporation, absorption 
 or dissipation in swampy hog wallows, must flow useless to the ocean? Fifty 
 Assemblymen responded to these questions by an "aye," announcing them- 
 selves as men who either knew the necessities and demands of the people, or 
 believed that the people, in demanding the right of irrigation, knew their 
 own necessities. Seventeen out of eighty of the assembly, less than one- 
 fourth of that body, declared themselves against irrigation, against farming, 
 fruit-raising, viticulture and horticulture in Southern California. Every 
 "no" put himself on the record against encouraging immigration into 
 Southern California; as opposed to opening up the magnificent resources of 
 the San Joaquin Valley; as opposed to preserving to ono-fifth of the people 
 of the State the fruits of many years of industry; as favoring the abandon- 
 ment of the irrigable land of half of the State to the lizard, the horned toad, 
 and the burning sun. The people of this State will remember the fifty — 
 neither will they forget the seventeen. The first roll-call in the Senate on 
 this bill is watched for with interest, and will be a companion list to the 
 above, to show the people who are the friends of State progress, and who, in 
 defiance or disregard of public need, cast their votes to destroy whole com- 
 munities of people and bring disaster to a fair land. 
 
27 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 Tbe Governor's Messagfe on Irri^fation. 
 
 The Governor sent bis message to the two Houses of the Legislature last 
 Saturday, which after being partially read in each House, the further read- 
 ing, owing to its great length, was dispensed with, and it was ordered printed 
 for the use of members. It is a well written paper and, although of unusual 
 length, nothing in it appears that could, with due regard to the public inter- 
 ests, have been left unsaid. He makes many wise and useful recommenda- 
 tions, few of which, from the shortness of the session and the disposition 
 of Legislators to waste time, it is feared, will be acted upon. It is a surprise 
 to the general public to learn that the finances of the State are in good con- 
 dition. He shows that there has been progressive decrease in the rate of 
 State taxation. If the railroads would pay their taxes it would be very light 
 in future. The fact is mentioned that the Controller has discovered defalca- 
 tions on the part of State oflScers amounting to $167,587.77, and in this con- 
 nection, he says: 
 
 "Iwonld recommend that additional clerical aid be furnished the Con- 
 troller to enable him to prosecute inquiries in other directions, the force 
 now allowed him by law being only sufficient for the performance of the 
 usual routine work of the office during office hours." 
 
 The portions of the message, however, that chiefly interest the people of 
 this county, are the following : 
 
 "The subject of general agricultural irrigation is one which has for many 
 years been gradually but surely increasing in importance, until the questions 
 to which it gives rise have come to take rank as leading issues in our State. 
 And since the prosperity of our people is largely dependent upon the results' 
 of the artificial union of waters and soils, it becomes my duty to ask your 
 most serious attention on this subject. 
 
 "The question of irrigation is not a local one, interesting only particular 
 portions of our State. Our climatic surroundings make California a region 
 where artificial watering is an absolute necessity for the full development of 
 our agricultural resources, and the possible requirements and support of 
 populations such as exist in our sister States of the Atlantic seaboard. There- 
 fore, let the representative of no county consider that his constituents are 
 not closely concerned in the irrigation problem, for all agricultural dis- 
 tricts in the State are by nature irrigation regions of some type, and are to 
 be developed as such in the not distant future. Every community has 
 interests more or less directly staked upon success in applying waters to 
 thirsting lands. 
 
 " It is clearly evident that this union of lands and waters cannot be accom- 
 plished under a law which gives every dweller upon the bank of each stream 
 the right to have the waters flow, as by nature designated, within their 
 banks. 
 
 " Our Supreme Court, by a recent decision, has declared sach law to exist; 
 and while this decision is, no doubt, in accordance with the law as it now 
 
28 
 
 -stands on our statute books, it appears that a new enactment is necessary to 
 meet the wants of our people. If the owners of the stream channels own 
 the waters, then there should be a law under which, after due compensation, 
 these waters may be taken and used in irrigation. Such legislation is nec- 
 essary, whether the irrigation is to be practiced alone on bank lands or on 
 those not bordering the streams. For, as the right to hold the water in the 
 streams is an individual one, appurtenant to each land owner on the bank, it 
 is evident that one property owner on the bank has it in his power to defeat 
 a proposed plan of irrigation desired by the entire community in which he 
 resides. 
 
 "The issue is not one between riparian claimants and appropriators of 
 •water, corporate or individual, in either case, but between the outstretched 
 plains, from river to river, on the one hand, and the lands bordering the 
 river channels on the other. Shall the waters fructify our plains, or shall 
 they be lost in the sandy beds of the stream channels, or, flowing onward, 
 be lost in the sea? Our Constitution protects the rights of property, and our 
 Courts, in accordance therewith, adjudicate on property questions as between 
 individuals. The duty of the Legislature is to provide laws such as will 
 insure the prosperity of the general commonwealth. 
 
 " The conflict between riparian claimants and the appropriation interest is 
 not the only problem presented by the irrigation question. There is another 
 class of conflicts which are continually in progress between the different 
 users of water, and which are only kept within moderate bounds by the 
 apparent necessity for appropriators to unite and make common cause 
 against the riparian interest. These clashings are the result of the defects 
 in our water-right system, if such it can be called, which accords privileges 
 without requiring sufficient proof and adequate rpcordation of the fact of use. 
 Eights to use water, under our Civil Code, are mere undefined and unproven 
 claims, the extents and dates of which are known only to their holders or 
 claimants. There never can be any settled conditio a of affairs in the irriga- 
 tion interests till this evil is remedied, whatever be the solution of the prob- 
 lem of riparian rights. There should be a record and title to water claims as 
 clear and indefeasible as to land holdings, and the enactment of a wise law 
 would, in my opinion, accomplish this. 
 
 ** Water-rights being definitely adjusted, determined and recorded, the 
 question of the administration of the streams presents itself as a living issue. 
 Even when the extent of individual rights is clearly known, it is not expected 
 that twenty or thirty claimants of water, under, perhaps, more than a hun- 
 dred claims of different dates, and for varying amounts, scattered for many 
 miles along a stream which is continually varying in volume, will be able to 
 fairly part out their portions of the water, unless there is some authority 
 which will compel observance of the law and obedience to administrative 
 miction. The history of these questions uniformly tells us that such rights 
 must be administered by some executive power, or unending litigation and 
 injured interests result, until the strong, overcoming the weak, monopoly 
 
29 
 
 of waters follow, and monopoly of land is the final re&nlt. There must be- 
 administration of streams where irrigation is practiced, and for this some 
 carefully devised legislation is necessary. » * ^^ 
 
 "During the two years just past the State Engineer has been chiefly en- 
 gaged in completing his generaFreport on the subject of irrigation, together 
 with the special maps of the State heretofore ordered to be made. His work 
 is now in the condition wherein publication should be commenced." 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 Tlie Irrigation Bills. 
 
 The prospect of legislation on the water question looks better. The House 
 has ordered the bill creating water districts to be engrossed, by a vote which 
 shows that there is in reality no serious opposition to the measure; and Bill 
 210, repealing Section 1422 of the Code, is in a fair way to become a law. 
 The representatives of the Fresno Convention stick to their notion about a 
 Legislative " declaration " as to what constitutes the law. But, after all, this 
 idle formaliiy can do no harm. We suppose that if the Legislature should 
 pass a bill to declare that two and two make four, or that the sun rises in 
 the east, no practical mischief would follow. 
 
 The essential point is to provide machinery for the condemnation of water 
 rights by the State in the name of the people, and for the just distribution 
 of water after it has been acquired for a public use. This point, it is be- 
 lieved, is measurably secured by the bill which was engrossed in the Assem- 
 bly on Thursday. If the Senate can be persuaded to act promptly in accord 
 with the House, this bill alone will repay to the State the cost of the Legis- 
 lative session. What is needed is to get the business of State irrigation 
 started. Once started, it can be improved upon and modified as circum- 
 stances dictate. It is not to be expected that we can establish a perfect sys- 
 tem of irrigation at the first jump. Other countries have taken centuries to 
 mature their systems. 
 
 The public are watching, not without uneasiness, the course of the Senate 
 on this question. It is known that the riparian owners have some strong 
 friends in that body, and indications have not been wanting that certain 
 Senators are prepared to adopt an obstructionist policy, doubtless in the 
 interest of the capitalists, who foresee that legislation will defeat their hopes^ 
 of securing a monopoly of water. The friends of irrigation must be vigilant 
 and wary. They doubtless control a majority of the body, but their objects 
 may be defeated by parliamentary tactics. No time should be lost in passing 
 Reddy's bill for the aquisition and distribution of water. All effort should 
 be concentrated on this measure, to the exclusion of others of less import- 
 ance. When machinery is provided to carry out the great principle that the 
 water-ways, as the highways, of the State belong to the people thereof, irri- 
 gation will be in a fair way of becoming a practical reality. 
 
30 
 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 Tlie Irrigratiota Bills. 
 
 Both houses of the Legislature are engaged daily in considering the irriga- 
 tion question, and endeavoring to formulate a law practically adaptable to 
 our peculiar local conditions. Under the decision of our courts, the old Eng- 
 lish common law of riparian rights has, up to this time, held good; but it has 
 been plain to every observing citizen, that the continuance of this rule would 
 ■work great injury to the State by seriously retarding the development of its 
 resources. Quite a number of bills are pending before each of the legislative 
 branches, which, though they differ la detail, all have embodied in their 
 scope and meaning the proposition that the waters of running streams may be 
 utilized for irrigating purposes. The riparim owners object to this declara- 
 tion, and adduce some plausible arguments in their own behalf. They assert 
 that they purchased their lauds at a comparatively high figure because of their 
 water facilities, which entered into the computation of the value of the prop- 
 erty, and that it is not fair that they should be deprive.l of this principal 
 element of value. We do not understand that any pending bill proposes to 
 absolutely deprive the riparianist of such water as he may need for his farm- 
 ing, manufacturing or domestic purposes, but it is proposed that water, which 
 can be utilized in the irrigation of lands which, without it, would be value- 
 less, shall not be permitted to go to waste by flowing off into the sea. The 
 first thing for the Legislature to do, is to sit down emphatically and unmis- 
 takably on the pretensions of the riparianists that, because they own strips of 
 land on the banks of rivers, the waters of such rivers belong to them alone. 
 The establishment of such a doctrine would retard the development of the 
 State indefinitely, while its rejection, and the legal declaration that the 
 waters of our streams shall be used to irrigate our lands, would correspond- 
 ingly advance it. As to the pending bills, their respective merits and the 
 details embodied in them for the execution of various systems, are matters of 
 comparatively small moment. Let the principle contended for by the irriga- 
 tionists be thoroughly established, and ail will be well. 
 
 s, ^ San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 A Wolf in Sheep^s Clothinif. 
 
 Why Senator McClure's filibustering bill to establish a Commission to ex- 
 amine and report upon water rights and irrigation should be called a **com- 
 promise," is a mystery to the common understanding. The riparianists have 
 always favored such a measure, and their Sacramento organ advocates it. 
 Somewhat more than six years have elapsed since theoflSce of State Engineer 
 was created to accomplish the same object which it is now proposed to effect 
 through a Water Commission. A vast amount of valuable information has 
 been collected by Mr. Hall, a portion of which has been published and dis- 
 trlbated, and the balance in unpublished form, has long been open to the in- 
 
31 
 
 epection of iuquiriug legislators and others. Only the negligent or wilfully 
 ignorant can plead want of information upon the subject. 
 
 It may be admitted that the irrigation problem in its entirety is intricate. 
 It is not unlike all other questions of magnitude, involving large detail. No 
 original legislation is ever expected to be without a flaw. The most that can 
 be done is to make a beginning, from which, with the aid of practical expe- 
 rience, may be moulded a system which shall in the course of time become 
 Buited to all wants and adapted to every necessity. 
 
 The whole {State favors an irrigation law which places all laud upon an 
 equal footing, regardless of its situation. The dissenters are an attenuated 
 fraction cf riparian owners who have not availed themselves of the right of 
 appropriation. The nature of most of our streams is such that even a small 
 quantity of water cannot be diverted without sensibly affecting^ the flow at 
 some point on the stream. No half-measure can avail irrigation. The utter 
 and complete repudiation of the English common law, so far as it affects this 
 subject, affords the only avenue of escape from a total collapse of irrigation 
 thronghout the length and breadth of the State. Localities in which irriga- 
 tion is not a natural want, will not be injuriously affected. 
 
 Such of the riparian owners as oppose this course, shelter themselves under 
 the protecting shadow of our Constitution, which ordains that "no person 
 stall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law," 
 and that •' private property shall not be taken without just compensation." 
 They should not be denied the benefit of every syllable of these constitutional 
 bulwarks of property. But there is another provision of the Constitution 
 which the sovereign people of the State have made the law of the land: that 
 the use of water for sale, rental or distribution is " a public use," and it is 
 this provision which, while according the rip.trian owner the benefit of the 
 guarantee to his property rights, makes it possible to remove him from the 
 path of State progress upon just compensation, by due process of law. Six 
 years of investigation by the Slate Engineer, together with the knowledge 
 and experience of those who have given irrigation years of practical study, is 
 enough to make a beginning upon. In the Wigginton bill there is safety to 
 irrigation and constitutional protection to the riparian owner. In the dis- 
 trict bill there is opportunity for experiment; without risk of injury to the 
 irrigator. There are other measures equally important and necessary. After 
 their passage it may be well to yoke the State Engineer with a Commission, 
 or constitute a separate Commission, and endow them with perpetual suc- 
 cession; otherwise they will come to the Legislature every two years for an 
 extension of time. 
 
 By McClure's "compromise" the riparianists get the kernel and the irriga- 
 tors the shell. In a contest where one side asserts that nothing shall be 
 done without its consent, and refuses to consent to any action whatever, 
 there is no such word as compromise. 
 3 
 
32 
 
 San Francisco Alta. 
 
 Riparian Doirs-in-tlie-IIIaiigfer, 
 
 The small band of cattle-owuers who are, in the main, owners of great 
 tracts of pestilential fever-breeding swamps in the Tulare Valley and else- 
 where, having failed to "convince" the Legislature that southern California^ 
 should be destroyed, are now at it tooth and nail in a last desperate effort to 
 overcome the will of the majority in both Senate and Assembly by dilatory 
 tactics. 
 
 Filibustering against the Irrigation bills is the order of the day with the 
 minority. Powerless to defeat the desire of the people, by specious argu- 
 ments to their faithful representatives, the riparianists now hope to talk 
 the bills to death, or obstruct their consideration by proposing other unsat- 
 isfactory measures. 
 
 Since a riparian owner could not use water for irrigating his own lands, 
 by mere force of his riparian right it might reasonably be supposed that he 
 would favor a law of appropriation by which he, equally with all others, 
 could divert the streams from their channels. But no! he claims that it is 
 his vested right to have the stream pursue its wonted course, and he must be 
 compensated for being deprived of that right. The new Constitution has- 
 furnished means enabling the Legislature to provide for such compensation 
 by the first clause of Section 1, Article XIV, which is this: " The use of all 
 water now appropriated, or that may be hereafter appropriated, for sale, 
 rental or distribution, is hereby declared to be a public use and subject to 
 regulation and control of the State in the manner to be described by 
 law." 
 
 It is under this constitutional declaration the the use of water is public, 
 that the Wiggington Irrigation bill and the Irrigation District bill pro-' 
 pose to permit the condemnation under the law of eminent domain. Each 
 of these bills authorizes the purchase from the riparian owner, of water 
 which he does not and cannot either use or sell, upon making just compen- 
 sation. To the fair minded man, it seems that if there is any injustice or 
 any wrong in this, it is not to the riparian owner. 
 
 The riparianist having first said that it is unconstitutional to take the water 
 tmless by paying for it, now claims that it is unconstitutional to take it and 
 pay him in the face of the constitutional provision just quoted. Nothing 
 will satisfy him. The majority should take the reins in their own hands, 
 and not suffer the obstructionists to kill the bills just on the eve of success. 
 
 San Francisco Gall. 
 
 Riparian Rin^litg. 
 
 Senator Gross said in a debate on the irrigation bills that the only thing 
 this Legislature can do in regard to irrigation is to repeal the riparian doc- 
 trine so far as it relates to lauds patented by the United States hereafter ;■ 
 
33 
 
 that under the laws of the nation no riparian proprietor can be deprived of his 
 rights. The Nevada County Senator assumes in effect that the ownership 
 of the water running through a tract of land has become a vested right of 
 which no citizen can be deprived. Ihis position is based on the ground that 
 in the absence of statute the English common law governs in the matter. 
 The effect of this position is that a man who has perfected a title to a tract 
 of land through which happens to pass a stream of water large enough to 
 supply a city or irrigate a county can effectively object to the diversion of a 
 portion of that stream from its natural channel. If this doctrine had been 
 in force thirty years ago the county which Mr. Cross so ably represents in 
 the Senate would have retained its treasures of gold until the present time. 
 Comparatively little of its mining was done by the aid of water in its natural 
 channel. Early in the fifties a water company diverted water from its natural 
 channel wherever it could be found and conveyed it by flume and ditch to 
 the gold-bearing hills of Nevada County. The use of the water so diverted 
 made Nevada at an early period in the history of the State one of the most 
 noted mining counties. The plea of vested rights can hardly be set up as an 
 assumption. California has necessarily nothing to do with the common law 
 of England. The conditions which determine the equities in the use of 
 water are quite different in the two countries. A person purchasing land in 
 California upon the assumption that English common law would govern the 
 use of water does so at his own risk. A positive statute might at any time 
 set the common law aside. The dominant consideration in the determination 
 of this water question is the greatest good to the greatest number. The 
 State has a right to make any laws to govern the use of water which it deems 
 to the greatest benefit of its citizens as a body. The individual rights which 
 the law must respect are the rights acquired under law. It is monstrous to 
 assume that a person on the strength of holding a tract of land should possess 
 the right to withhold from a large body of people an essential of their exist- 
 ence. The law would confer no such right in a country where such abuse 
 could be made of it. The common law of England was the result of centuries 
 of obvervation and practice, and was adapted to the conditions prevailing in 
 that country. The conditions prevailing in this country, if prevailing at the 
 time in that, would have prevented any such system of laws to govern the 
 use of water. 
 
 Sacramento Record-Union. 
 
 Tlie Irrlg'ation Contest. 
 
 The people are agreed upon the need for an irrigation system, and are all 
 of one mind concerning the use, for irrigation, of all waters that can be 
 diverted to that purpose, consistently with the best interests of the State and 
 all its citizens. When we come to methods, it is discovered to be the 
 most difficult problem for solution that has yet presented. But we have 
 faith that it will be solved. The future of the valleys needing irrigation. 
 Tinder a wise system of use of the waters, will be one of the greatest possi- 
 
34 
 
 bilities, wealth and prosperity. Where we uow have hundreds of homes, we 
 shall have thousands; where we now have one consumer, we shall have fifty 
 or a hundred. Every interest, commercial and industrial, will be advanced, 
 and all the people will be benefited. But not even this glowing future can 
 bo realized at the expense of the destructiou of the navigable streams. They 
 are necessary for commercial uses and sanitation; they secure to the interior 
 commercial advantages not otherwise obtainable; they cheapen transportation; 
 they build up trade; they are free highways, the heritage of all the people. 
 Let our friends the irrigators, who declare that they do not propose or wish 
 to take as much as a thimblefall of water from the Sacramento Eiver to the 
 impairment of navigatiou, aflBrmatively express in their bill that nothing in 
 the irrigation legislation shall be construed as the exercise of sovereignty 
 to the injury of navigable streams, and they will have won to their position 
 whatever of influence may have heretofore been timid about pronouncing for 
 them on this account. 
 
 Stockton Independent. 
 
 Wbat Irri^fatlon -would do. 
 
 An exchange remarks that there are five million acres of land in the Sac- 
 ramento aud San Joaquin valleys susceptible of irrigation by a well-planned 
 system of canals. The same paper goes on to say that ** if these lands were 
 so irrigated they would produce from fifty dollars to three hundred dollars 
 an acre annually each, but say one hundred dollars, averaging between 
 alfalfa and grapes, this would give a yearly product of five hundred million 
 dollars." This is not an extravagant estimate. But the land must be irri- 
 gated in order to be made productive. California is capable, or rather could 
 be rendered capable, of supporting a much larger population than that of the 
 entire New England States, but in order to make that possible, our industrial 
 system must undergo a very radical change^ Irrigation would not only make 
 the cultivation of green crops possible but profitable, and the culture of such 
 crops would, as a matter of course, increase the demand for agricultural 
 laborers. It is commonly admitted that a well regulated system of irrigation 
 must be established before the agricultural resources of the State can be 
 fairly developed. 
 
 The Oakland Daily Times. 
 
 The irrigation legislation which is pending at Sacramento, is of intense 
 interest to the arid sections of the State, and it should become a law. 
 
 Los Angeles Express. 
 
 The straggle now in progress in both branches of the Legislature upon 
 the subject of water rights is one of immense importance. It constitutes an 
 
35 
 
 attempt to legally define the rights of riparian owners, and owners by appro- 
 priation — to draw the precise line between the two, showing where the one 
 commences and the other ends. The riparian owners claim the right to all 
 the water in the streams running through or in front of their lands. The 
 owners by appropriation claim the right to divert water from the running 
 streams to irrigate lands back of the streams, and not bordering upon them. 
 As the number of people who are served by appropriation is many times as 
 great as that of the riparians, and as the principle of appropriation is mani- 
 festly the principle of "the greatest good to the greatest number," and is the 
 principle upon which vast sections of the State have been redeemed from a 
 ■wilderness to a garden of beauty and luxuriance, it is the one which ought to 
 prevail. The people will be represented in this Legislative fight by those 
 who advocate the idea of appropriation; the riparians will be represented by 
 their money. It will probably be found that the strength of the latter will be 
 found mainly in the city of San Francisco, whose members are but little 
 affected in the matter one way or the other. 
 
 The Visalia Weekly Delta. 
 
 Irrigation. 
 
 The Sacramento Capital, which still continues to work manfully in the 
 interest of irrigation, referring to work in the committees, says: 
 
 ''The Irrigation Committee men have been hard at work all the week, but it 
 is very much feared that the riparian men have captured the Legislature, as it 
 is a fact that they are spending a great deal of money to defeat the most impor- 
 tant measure that has come before the body during this session. It is a well 
 known fact that the appropriators have but little or no money to spend on 
 the fight, as they represent the boue and vim of the southern part of the 
 State, while the large landholders ave backed by some of the wealthiest cor- 
 porations in the State. If the bill does not pass, the people may rest assured 
 that money defeated it." 
 
 We are not ready to believe that a majority of both houses have fallen into 
 the hands of those who have combined to defeat the bills, when so great an 
 effort is being made to set the matter before the Legislature in its true light. 
 The question has been so thoroughly discussed of late and so much informa- 
 tion regarding it has been placed in the hands of members of both houses, 
 that we are still hopeful of good being accomplished. 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 Colossal Misstatements. 
 
 Last Wednesday evening the "ripariauists" and their attorneys appeared 
 before the Joint Irrigation Committee of the Senate and Assembly, and, if 
 the Examiner reports them correctly, they made some very gross misstate- 
 
36 
 
 ments. Senator Cox, of Sacramento, however, loomed up as the colossus of 
 the occasion, and made for himself a record worthy of Eli Perkins, Tom Ochil- 
 tree, or Annanias of old. He is reported by the Examiner as saying that "he 
 ■was one of those owning 190,000 acres of land on King's river, and because 
 of a diversion of the water above this land last year, he lost 5,003 head of 
 cattle, and Miller & Lux lost 10,000 hea3." The statement is absolutely 
 false. We do not believe that Senator Cox had 5,000 head of cuttle depend- 
 ent on King's river for water, and we know that Miller & Lux did not have 
 any that were so dependant. Cox & Clark drove all their cattle out of Tu- 
 lare and Fresno counties after the passage of the no fence laws, while Miller 
 & Lux have their cattle on their ranches on Kern Island and the San Joaquin. 
 More, neither of these parties lost a single animal last year because the 
 waters of King's River were diverted. Water ran in the river the entire sea- 
 son, and the swamps were overflowed much of the season. Bat, admitting 
 that all the water had been turned out of the river, and there was a scarcity 
 in consequence, what must the Legislative Committee think of men who 
 would let fifteen thousand head of cattle perish with thirst when a few hun- 
 dred dollars would have bored wells from which an abundance of water 
 could be obtained. The cause of the riparianists must indeed be weak when 
 it has to be bolstered up by such absurdities. This riparian struggle is the 
 dying kick of the cattle kings. 
 
 The facts are, and it can be shown to the world, that nine-tenths of the 
 owners of land along the King's and San Joaquin rivers are in favor of the 
 appropriation of water for irrigation. 
 
 The Sacramento Bee has taken the side of the riparianists in the present 
 contest before the Legislature, and is working with might and main to pre- 
 vent just laws from being enacted. Whether it will have any influence or 
 not, we cannot say, but certainly in a course so unholy its efforts should 
 fall flat. The people of southern California and the San Joaquin and Sacra- 
 mento Valleys must have laws passed that will protect them in their rights, 
 and stop the hampering of the riparianists; and right here I will say that 
 any member of the Legislature who fails to stand up square on this vital 
 issue will be marked, and few and far between will be the votes he will get in 
 the southern counties should he ever come before the people asking for office. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 Slovr to Grasp It. 
 
 Never before in the history of our newspaper experience have we felt so 
 entirely powerless to do justice to a subject as we feel in the presence of the 
 great irrigation problem in California. We have thought of it much, and 
 have given it all the investigation that opportunity aflforded, but as we pro- 
 gress, "hills peep o'er hills and Alps on Alps arise." There are only about a 
 million of people in California now, but when we have added a million to 
 our irrigated or irrigable districts, a commencement will only have begun! 
 
37 
 
 We have blamed the men in charge of the big newspapers of the State for 
 not having grasped the situation; for devoting page after page, telling how 
 Miss Smith, who visited Mrs. Jones, was dressed, and begrudging the occa- 
 sional eighth column notice of some grand irrigation system; but it is so 
 grand, so magnificent in its proportions, as to deter the ordinary thinkerfrom 
 approaching it at all. — Colusa Sun. 
 
 The Republican has not so much wondered that the country press of the 
 State in localities where irrigation is an undemonstrated possibility, has been 
 slow in realizing its importance to the State, for the first and principal duty 
 of the local journal is to look after the interests of its own county and com- 
 munity, and in many cases the country journalist has not the opportunity to 
 learn by observation, and comparison of his own with other localities, what 
 is most needed to advance and develop the resources that may exist; but dur- 
 ing the several years past that irrigation has been a demonstrated success in 
 several portions of California, the lack of interest manifested by the metro- 
 politan press has been a constant source of surprise to us, and this feeling has 
 been shared by the people of all the irrigated portions of the State and all oth- 
 •ers who have observed the results of irrigation. All the encouragements given 
 to irrigation by the daily papers has been exceeded by the attention they 
 have devoted to other subjects of not one-bundreth part the importance. 
 Although it has been for a number of years past shown beyond all question 
 in the irrigated districts of Fresno, Riverside and those of lesser importance, 
 that by the use of water for irrigation, many of the vast and comparatively 
 unproductive valleys of California can be made perfect garden spots, marvel- 
 ously productive of fruit, wine, raisins and all agricultural products, and 
 capable of supporting a population of millions inste'ad of hundreds as now, 
 when the irrigators of the State have gone before the Legislature asking that 
 the laws be so amended that they will encourage and not prohibit irrigation, 
 the leading papers of the Coast have either been non-committal or given the 
 cause of irrigation a very conservative support. 
 
 It is amazing that among the prominent metropolitan journalists of this 
 coast, with all their facilities for gathering facts concerning the existing con- 
 ditions, there has not been one possessed of the necessary comprehension to 
 discover that irrigation is to be the paramount factor in the development of 
 this State from its present uncertain and unsatisfactory system of agricul- 
 ture to one of the richest and most densely populated agricultural regions of 
 the world. 
 
 Very recently, since the session of the State Irrigation Convention at 
 Fresno, some of these papers, notably the Alta, Chronicle and Fosi, seem to 
 have partially awakened to a sense of the gravity and importance of the 
 question. Whether they have come to a sufficient realization of its impor- 
 tance to use their influence in securing the necessary legislation at the ap- 
 proaching session of the Legislature, remains to be seen. We are inclined to 
 ■believe they will, for public sentiment has been so educated in regard to this 
 matter without the assistance of the press, that we believe that power will 
 now find it necelftsary to champion the long neglected cause of irrigation. 
 
38 
 
 The necessity of legislation must be apparent to all. Under the ruling of 
 the Courts, the present law prohibits inigation, and would not only raise an 
 impassable barrier to the reclamation of thousands of acres from their present 
 condition of barrenness or unprofitable cultivation to the highest possible 
 state of productiveness, but would destroy all that has been accomplished in 
 building up the most prosperous, densely populated and altogether most de- 
 sirable portions of the State of California. 
 
 Los Angeles Daily Herald. 
 
 So far the irrigation bill has made good progress in the Assembly. It will 
 be remembered by readers of the Herald that two bills of this kind bad been 
 introduced, but the one now referred to is that which was prepared by the 
 Fresno Convention. On the introduction of this bill, the great advantages it 
 possesses over the others were so manifest, that it was determined to let these 
 two lie on the table. One of the main features of the bill is the doctrine that 
 the common law of England and the United States concerning riparian rights 
 should not be applicable in this State, and common sense would lead one giv- 
 ing sane attention to the matter to the same conclusion. On Thursday last, 
 and again on Friday, Assemblyman Walrath moved that the bill, which had 
 been reported on favorably by the committee, be taken up out of order and 
 read for the first time. His second motion was carried, and the bill was made 
 a special o^der for to-day. The proceedings of the State Irrigation Conven- 
 tion held at Fresno, whi§h were reported at the time in these columns, are so 
 well known to the readers of this journal, that it is lict necessary now to do 
 more than refer to them. That Con\ention was composed not of mere theo- 
 rists, as some of those who went as delegates to the Riverside Convention 
 were, but in the main of gentlemen who discussed the question from a stand- 
 point they have taken after many years of thorough practical acquaintance 
 "with irrigation in California, aud wLat it can and should be made. Just as 
 the meteorological phenomena of California, its climate and its various soils 
 differ from those of other lands where irrigation is practiced, just so the law 
 of riparian rights of other countries may very well be inapplicable to our 
 State. At Fresno the subject received full consideration, and it is very rea- 
 sonable to suppose that the bill under discussion as these lines are being 
 •written will become a law. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 A Burnlnjif Qaestion. 
 
 One of the objects of the proposed legislation upon the subject of irrigation 
 is to establish the doctrine that the water of streams can be used for the pur- 
 pose of irrigation. The "riparianists," so called, claim the right to have the 
 waters of natural streams flow in their natural channels without diminution. 
 
39 
 
 The irrigators, or appropriators, assert that the first who appropriates and 
 applies water from a stream to a useful purpose, has the better right. 
 
 The former class is composed, chiefly, of a few cattle-raisers, who pretend 
 that the waters of natural streams should be devoted to watering cattle, and 
 that what is not so used should flow untouched to the sea. 
 
 The irrigators comprise the thousands of people, many of them with fami- 
 lies, who, learning of tbe great fertility of the soil ot Southern California 
 and of the marvelous variety of products which will flourish there by means 
 of irrigation, have purchased lands, constructed ditches and canals, and 
 appropriated the waters of streams for irrigation purposes; also other thou- 
 sands who have followed the increase of population with the various busi- 
 ness enterprises and employments necessary to the existence of civilized 
 communities. 
 
 Passing by the legal propositions involved, among the questions to deter- 
 mine are: What are the relative necessities of the people of that section? To 
 whom will the greatest benefit inure, or evil result, by the giving to the peo- 
 ple the right to irrigate their lands? 
 
 On the one hand, if the farmers and fruit-raisers of the San Joaquin Valley 
 and the southern portion of the State are to be deprived of the privilege of 
 diverting water for irrigation, their property becomes valueless. Crops cannot 
 be raised nor fruit cultivated there without irrigation. All of the land now 
 cultivated must be abandoned. 
 
 Valuable products, which might have been raised in immense quantities, 
 will never enrich the State. The vineyards and orchards will perish of thirsts 
 The parched lands will no longer exchange its fruits for water. The property 
 which has hitherto added so Urgely to the wealth of the State and the pros- 
 perity of this city will no longer exist. The populous towns which have been 
 built along the line of the railroad, in the center of thriving communities of 
 farmers, will become "deserted villages." 
 
 The well-to-do will become poor, and the poor, paupers. 
 
 But the roving cattle-owner .will water his cattle in the streams. The for- 
 tunate owner of land upon the banks of natural water-courses will be enabled 
 to obtain river water with which to wash his dishes, and indulge in the pleas- 
 ure of gazing upon the waters rushing to the ocean through millions of acres 
 of desert and wilderness, which need but irrigation to smile into gardens, 
 vineyards and orchards, bringing forth every known variety of flowers, fruits 
 and grains. 
 
 On the other hand, if the right of diversion of water for irrigation be given 
 to those who have heretofore appropriated, and to such as may hereafter 
 desire to appropriate it, the labor and industry of years will be saved to 
 those who have well earned the right, and the millions of acres yet unoc- 
 cupied and unimproved will be taken up, irrigated, and made fruitful by 
 hundreds of thousands, even millions yet to come. 
 
 And, compared to the injury sustained from want of water by the farmers 
 and others directly and indirectly intei'ested in irrigation, the loss to cattle-^ 
 
40 
 
 owners from the abolition of the riparian doctrine would be trivial and 
 easily compensated. 
 
 The entire basin of the San Joaquin Valley carries water near the surface. 
 Wells can be sunk at slight expense almost anywhere, through which good 
 water for cattle can be obtained at a depth of from ten to thirty feet. 
 
 The expense of pumping enough water for thousands of cattle through a 
 single well is insignificant. Good flows from artesian wells can be obtained 
 at depths varying from three hundred to six hundred feet. There are twenty 
 such wells now flowing in Kern county, and numbers in Tulare and Fresno 
 counties. 
 
 Well water is much purer and more healthful for cattle. Less disease is 
 found-among cattle watered from wells, and well water is used everywhere 
 in preference to river water. 
 
 Indeed, it would perhaps be an advisable sanitary measure, and for the 
 good of consumers, as well as cattle-raisers, if it were made compulsory by 
 law to water cattle with well instead of river water. The warm, unhealthy 
 and frequently stagnant water of rivers and streams is a well-known cause 
 of the fevers from which so many cattle die in the San Joaquin Valley. It 
 is not the lack of water, but its quality, which sickens and kills them in 
 Buch ^lumbers. These facts show that riparianism means disaster and de- 
 population to the southern half of the State, and brings no substantial benefit 
 to the cattle-owner or riparianist. Every business man should take an 
 especial interest in this great question, and join actively in giving aid and 
 <5omfort to the efforts now being made before the Legislature to strengthen 
 the rights of the people who are irrigating their lands. The necessity for 
 immediate remedy is pressing. 
 
 Nevada Transcript. 
 
 The Irrigation Q^aestion. 
 
 The Speaker of the Assembly did a good thing when he appointed Walrath 
 Chairman of the Irrigation Committee, because he secured an able and intel- 
 ligent man for the peiformance of the most important duty. Any one who 
 has noticed the conflict going on between the men who claim to have the 
 water of any stream passing the property flow on to the ocean unmolested 
 and undiverted, and those who claim the right to divert the streams of the 
 State upon the arid plains, will appreciate the importance of the Irrigation 
 Committee, which is to report a policy, if possible, consistent with private 
 rights and the interests of the State. 
 
 In the mountains, at an early day, the miners rejected the doctrine of 
 *• riparion rights," as unadapted to their wants and circumstani^es, and the 
 Courts of the State sustained them, the common law of England to the con- 
 trary notwithstanding. The diversion of water was a necessity, and the 
 necessity prevailed over legal refinements. The rapid development of gold 
 production evinced the wisdom of disregarding the common law, which 
 
41 
 
 would have confined the waters of the mountains to the canyons instead fo 
 allowing their distribution to the numerous places where they were needed. 
 Had Judge Murray been as hidebound in the olden time as Judge Sharp- 
 stein now is, the gold would have remained in the foothills, and the water 
 run waste to the sea. But that eminent jurist saw that the rule ceased with 
 the cessation of the reason for it; that new conditions required new 
 treatment, and he gave full effect to the policy of the appropriation and di- 
 version of water. 
 
 In the whole south of the State, and much of the middle portion, a sim- 
 iliar question is now pending. It has been found by experiment that the 
 arid plains can be made fabulously productive by water. Large communities 
 have grown up, supported by the agricultural products of a region hereto- 
 fore sterile. Thousands of people find profitable employment on irrigated 
 land. Water is the great civilizer. Its magic touch causes the desert to 
 bloom like the rose. Withdraw the water and the bloom fades, the fertility 
 changes at once to sterility, the ashes of desolation cover again the rescued 
 domains. A more deadly stab at the general prosperity of the State could 
 not be inflicted. 
 
 Why should not a system that has redeemed so much of the State from 
 barrenness be continued and extended, as it may be infinitely? Judge 
 Sharpstein and three other judges answer: " Because in England a man has 
 a right to have the waters flowing by his land continue to flow there that he 
 may water his cattle." But England is a wet country, with a minimum of 
 thirty inches rainfall. California is a dry country, and the San Joaquin and 
 Tulare valleys have a maximum of four inches rainfall, and other parts of 
 the State have varying degrees of aridity. To the mind of a layman it is 
 not obvious what English customs have to do with the matter. But it would 
 seem that the body of the common law was not intended to apply where its 
 application is incongruous; where the conditions are so diflferent that the 
 interests involved are injured rather than fostered. So Judge Murray held; 
 and so it has been held in Colorado, upon this very irrigation question, viz: 
 that the policy of the State is opposed to the common law rule, and that the 
 riparian proprietor who makes no beneficial use of flowing water by his land 
 has no right to complain of one who diverts the water to useful purposes. 
 We need the doctrine in California. 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 The Irrigation Business. 
 
 It will take more statesmanship tnan has yet been manifest at Sacramento 
 to accomplish anything for agriculture in Southern California. The bull 
 should be taken by the horns and men forced to vote for or against some one 
 set of measures, with the clear understanding that their votes will hereafter 
 class them either as enemies or as friends of irrigation. It is impossible to 
 draw hills whidR shall please everybody. To accomplish results for the gen- 
 
42 
 
 eral good, individual predilections must be made to give away. Gentlemen 
 must remember that they have three enemies to fight. First, the riparian 
 owners object to interference with their dog-in-the-manger business. Next, 
 the promoters of such schemes as the plan for securing payment of the drain- 
 age claims will log-roll to make the passage of irrigation measures contingent 
 upon the success of their projects. And finally, the great landowners of the 
 south, who thoroughly understand that if things are allowed to drift along 
 as they are doing for a few years more they will acquire a monopoly oi water 
 in the southern portions of the State, are insidiously throwing obstacles in 
 the way of legislation. These three classes of enemies are not to be de- 
 spised. They may be expected to appear in the disguise of friends of 
 irrigation. They will do everything that can be done to kill all bills, except 
 to put themselves squarely on record against irrigation. 
 
 That is precisely the ground upon which the irrigators should force them.. 
 Few members will dare to put themselves on record as men who postponed 
 for two years the development of Southern California. Compel them to do 
 80, or to vote with the true men. And remember that there only remain 
 twenty-three working days for the Legislature of 1885. 
 
 San Francisco Alta. 
 
 Pass the Bill. 
 
 The entire press has for months voiced the demand of the people for the 
 enactment of irrigation laws. The subject has been universally discussed in 
 all its phases. The necessity and wisdom of a broad public policy in behalf 
 of irrigation is generally conceded. The bills prepared with a view to an, 
 equitable settlement of the question have been widely published and circu- 
 lated. There is no excuse for a member of the Legislature being ignorant of 
 their contents. Those who have investigated the facts and the law compre- 
 hensively and thoroughly, are convinced that irrigation cannot survive the 
 adoption of English riparian law. At the same time they have recognized 
 as a factor in the water problem, the possibility that there are existing vested 
 riparian rights heretofore acquired by virtue of the common law. It has been 
 found that this common-law right confers no privilege upon the riparian owner 
 to use water for the irrigation of his land nor to sell to another such a privi- 
 lege. The water is locked within the river banks by common law. The 
 obvious remedy for such a state of affairs seems to be a legislative declaration 
 that the common law of riparian rights shall not govern this State, at the 
 same time providing means for the taking of water for irrigation, and 
 compensatiug for injury resulting to any person by reason of such taking. 
 One of the bills now claiming the attention of the Legislature was framed to 
 embody these ideas. It has the merit of brevity and directness. Under the 
 operation of its simple provisions irrigation can be practiced in the State. If 
 ^t becomes a law the riparian owner, to whom the common law forbids irri- 
 gation, may appropriate water and irrigate his lands, upon properly compen- 
 
43 
 
 -sating any one who may suffer injury. It is astounding that a member of 
 the Legislature, representing a large and populous county, had the hardi- 
 hood to inform his constituency, from the floor of the Assemblj, that he had 
 not read the bill. If any other member has not had the time to real this 
 bill, he had best hasten to do so, for he will there fiad expressed the wish of 
 the people. 
 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 The Legislature has but twenty-one days yet to serve, and it is not likely to 
 accomplish much beyond passing the appropriation bills. Perhaps, taking it 
 all in all, this may be taken as a matter for congratulation rather than regret. 
 There are many vicious bills pending before it, and few that there is any 
 pressing necessity for passing. The irrigation bill is the most important 
 one pending, and it should receive the first attention in the short time yet 
 remaining. 
 
 f 
 
 Daily Humboldt Standard. 
 
 Irrig^aiion. 
 
 In Humboldt we are not interested in the subject of irrigation. The humid 
 atmosphere relieves us from the necessity of devising artificial means of pro- 
 curing water for the fields. But the question of irrigation is agitating a large 
 portion of the people of the State, is puzzling the Legislature, and has 
 presented its intricate problems to the courts. The riparian owners, thai is, 
 those who own the land through which the water flows, are unwilling that 
 the flow shall be diminished by any person appropriating it for the purposes 
 of irrigation at a point further up the stream. Such men have bought laud 
 at an increased price on account of its contiguity to bodies of water, and a 
 dimunition of the water depreciates the value of the property. On the other 
 hand, thers are thousands of acres of parched and barren plains which, by 
 irrigation, might be made to bloom and give homes to thousands of families. 
 The owners of these unprofitable wastes are asking for a general distribution 
 of the — what has been called God's free gift to man — water. Out of the con- 
 flicting demands of these two classes, the Legislature is endeavoring to frame 
 some law that will meet the equities of the case. Probably nothing can be 
 accomplished at this session of the Legislature, but the question is of para- 
 mount importance, and will continually come up until it is definitely settled. 
 In the end, private interests of the riparian owners must be made subservient 
 to the general good. Better that a large portion of the people should prosper 
 than that a few should be allowed to selfishly deprive them of every oppor- 
 tunity. But, in the stimulated prosperity which would result from irrigation, 
 -even the riparian owners would reap an advantage in the increase of values. 
 
44 
 
 San Luis Obispo Tribune. 
 
 Riparian and Irrififation. 
 
 One of the chief questions agitating the California Legislature, is that of the- 
 •Qse of the water of the mountain streams . The question is between riparian 
 owners and irrigators. The owners of land bordering the rivers object to- 
 the diversion of the water, and the owners of land on the dry plains object to 
 the water going to waste in evaporation, or sinking in the beds ol streams, or 
 lost in the ocean. The early laws and customs of California permitted the 
 diversion of streams, the water being designed for mining purposes, and 
 taken along the high ridges in ditches, flumes and canals. The water can be 
 nsed for mining, manufactures and irrigating. These privileges have become 
 vested rights, and recognized as such by the Commissioner of the General 
 Land Office, and by the Federal and State Courts. The system has worked 
 well in the past, appears to be just, and we think should be continued, as the 
 only system adapted to the climate and typography of California. The com- 
 mon law of England confines the use of waters of streams to those owning 
 the banks, and that law has been adopted in this State when not inconsistent 
 with the laws and Constitution. As that part of the common law is inconsis- 
 tent with the best interests of the State, and as customs and decisions have 
 changed the rule, the question should be considered settled. To forbid the 
 diversion of the waters in the canyons of the Sierra Nevada on the claims of 
 the riparian owners, would bo an absurdity. 
 
 The Merced Express. 
 
 Irrig^ation. 
 
 The Legislature, which convenes next Monday week, will no doubt be 
 called upon to give considerable attention to the question of irrigation and 
 riparian rights. The law as it now stands is very complicated and perplexing, 
 if the courts decide in favor of the riparianist — which they are inclined to do. 
 It will be a blow to irrigation, and kill any method of irrigation that is {now 
 successfully in use. Under the existing laws the riparianists have some 
 rights which the courts feel in duty bound to recognize, but these laws should 
 be so modified as to favor irrigation; for, without a thorough system of irriga- 
 tion, our valley lands are to a certain extent worthless. If the time is not at 
 hand now, it will come soon when these riparian rights must be surrendered 
 to irrigation, as it will be for the public good. We must have a system of 
 irrigation, and the sooner these riparian rights are relinquished the better it 
 will be for the whole State. 
 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 Mark Where He Stands. 
 
 When old burdens have grown past endurance, or new evils have threatened 
 the welfare of the people, the Kepublican party has never failed to be fore- 
 most in finding and applying the remedy^ 
 
45 
 
 The body politic is now sorely afflicted with a disease called "riparianism.'*' 
 The germ of the disease was brought into the State with the common law of 
 England. It was supposed until lately that after treatment for a generation 
 by our doctors of the law, the affliction had been eradicated from our political 
 system, never to re-appear. But the present Supreme Court has brought it 
 to the surface, and now the malady has taken such form that nothing short 
 of radical treatment will be efficacious. 
 
 The diagnosis of the case in a nutshell is this: When we organized as on© 
 of the federal union, we adopted the common law as the general system 
 which should be the rule of decision in our courts. The people began the 
 development of the two great industries of the State, mining and farming. 
 They early found that mines and farms in many portions of the State must 
 be located more or less remote from the streams. Water was a necessity for 
 both, and not being able to move either farm or mine to the stream, the water 
 was taken out in ditches and canals to wash the gold-bearing earth and irri- 
 gate the fertile soil. It never occurred to the hardy miner or the toiling 
 farmer to send over to England for a copy of 1 Sim. and Stuart, where he 
 would have found in the case of Wright vs. Howard, the language of Sir John 
 Leach: **Aqua currit et debit currere ut currere solebat," the riparian law of 
 England. As time passed, farms and farmers multiplied. The farmers trod 
 the path of those before them, and diverted the waters of streams for irri- 
 gation wherever necessary. No one needs to be told to what magnitude the 
 irrigation interests have grown. It is enough to say that nearly every man, 
 woman and child in the State is more or less interested in irrigation directly 
 or indirectly. However, after irrigating for thirty-five years, the farmers 
 awoke one day to the fact that the Supreme Court, which they had helped to 
 choose, bad procured a copy of 1 Sim. and Stuart, and translated the Latin 
 of the common law, and that the plain English of it is that irrigation is 
 against the law, and the irrigator is a wrongdoer. • 
 
 Then the farmers went to the Legislature and prayed that it be made law- 
 ful for them to irrigate, as they have been irrigating ever since the State was 
 born. They found in that Legislature an Assembly overwhelmingly Repub- 
 lican, and a Senate equally divided between the two parties, but controlled 
 politically by the casting vote of a Democratic Lieutenant-Governor. A bill 
 known in the Assembly as BiU No. 410, and in the Senate as Bill No. 210, 
 was introduced in both houses, intended to legalize irrigation, and to provide 
 that water ought to flow where it will do the most good. The Republican 
 Assembly, having the good of the people at heart, has passed the bill with 
 only a corporal's guard against it. The Senate is still talking over it. The 
 farmers think that one vote is better than fifty speeches. If the bill fails in 
 the Senate, it is to be hoped that the defeat will not be due to the vote or 
 filibustering of any Republican. The party will suffer greatly by it. No 
 Republican Senator can contribute to its defeat without injury to himself 
 and the party. We give below a list of the friends and foes of the people in. 
 the Assembly: 
 
46 
 
 For in-igation — Ash, Banbury, Barnes, Barnett. Bublert, Carter of Contra 
 CJo-ita, Clark, Cook, Corcoran, Daley, Deveney, DeWitt, Dooling, Franklin, 
 French, Goucher, Gregory, Hazard, Henley, Hunt, Hussey, Johnson, Kal- 
 ben, Laflferty, Long, Loud, Lovell, May, McDonald, McGlashan, McMurray, 
 Mears, Moffat, Munday, Patterson, Pellet, Pyle, Keeves, Roseberry, Euss, 
 Sullivan, Swayne, Torrey, Van Voorhies, Watson of El Dorado, Ward of San 
 Francisco, Weaver, Woodward, Yule and Parks — 50. 
 
 Against irrigation — Allen, Colby, Coleman, Davis, Ellison, Firebaugh, 
 Jordaa, Heath, Henry, Heywood, Hollister, Jones, McJunkin, Walrath, 
 Watson of Alameda, Ward of Butte and Wood— 17. 
 
 A similar list will be given of the Senate when the roll-call is taken, in 
 order that the people may know ^Vhom to reward as their faithful servants, 
 «nd whom to consign to political graves. 
 
 S. F. Bulletin. 
 
 An Appeal to tlie Baginess Men and Properfy-Ovrners of San Francisco. 
 Another Disaster to Our Business Interests. Irrigation in California 
 Virtually Prohibited by Law. What Should be Done— Immediate 
 Action Necessary. 
 
 Editor Bulletin: The business community of San Francisco (as is well 
 known) has within a few months experienced a loss of trade consequent 
 upon the opening of the Northern and Southern Pacific Kailways. Thrown 
 back upon our immediate neighborhood for a market for our goods, we have 
 indulged the hope that having in the State of California a large extent of 
 territory of varied resources and wonderful fertility, we might, by attracting 
 immigration to our shores, create a trade very much greater than that we 
 have lost. Those who are familiar with the peculiar climatic conditions of a 
 very large portion of the State, know that such a result is impossible of at- 
 tainment without a sound system of irrigation. The subject of irrigation in 
 California is one of the most important that can engage the attention of the 
 business men and property-owners of this city. The practice of irrigation 
 on a large scale means small farms producing high-priced commodities, a 
 prosperous and dense population where now only the wheat-grower and 
 stock- raiser are to be found, and a market for our merchants at our very 
 doors, that may be developed into enormous proportions, and that never can 
 be taken from us. 
 
 The great value of irrigation as a m'eans of producing wealth is but little 
 understood by most people, but is soon recognized by all who give any 
 thought to the subject. The history of irrigation is as old as the history of 
 the world, and forms an important part of it, in ancient as well as in modern 
 times, in all countries where the climate is similar to that of California. 
 The richest portions of Italy and Spain to-day are those supplied, through 
 the wisdom and financial aid of their Governments, with a thorough system 
 of irrigation. Those districts support a dense population, and the enor- 
 
47 
 
 mous valuation given to them by irrigation is shown in the prices at which 
 agricultural lands are sold at there— ranging from $500 to $3,000 per acre. 
 The value of the annual overflow of the Nile in Egypt (which is the crudest 
 form of irrigation) is well known, and in China and India more than half 
 the population of those countries would die of starvation if deprived of 
 their facilities for irrigation. In the latter country the English Government 
 has expended in the last thirty years millions of pounds sterling in the con- 
 struction of irrigating canals and reservoirs. An element of wealth which 
 has been recognized in all ages and by all progressive peoples as of such 
 paramount value, surely ought not to be overlooked by us in these days. 
 In our own State we have an abundant evidence of the enriching effects 
 of the use of the water in irrigation. In Los Angeles and San Barnadino 
 counties many instances may be found where lands that ten years ago were 
 used as sheep' ranges, and were worth but $5 per acre, have since then been 
 supplied with water for irrigation and planted with fruit trees and grape- 
 vines, and have been sold at $500 to $1,000 per acre. Even the lands left 
 unimproved, except by facilities for irrigation, sell readily in some districts 
 at from $200 to $500 per acre. The reason why these properties bring such 
 prices is because they produce crops which pay a good interest on several 
 thousand dollars an acre. Without irrigation, there can be no doubt what- 
 ever that owing to periodical dry years, these same properties would return 
 to their former valuation. 
 
 RAPID SETTLEMENT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. 
 
 As a result of this wise use of the waters of our streams that portion of our 
 State is settling up very rapidly. The population of Los Angeles county has 
 increased from 31,000 in 1880 to over 55,000 in 1884, and in the city of Los 
 Angeles the increase has been from 11,000 in 1880 to 30,000 in 1884. In 
 Fresno county many thousands of acres of what were once considered desert 
 lands, have been, in the last four years, converted into colony tracts contain- 
 ing thousands of happy and contented families, each prospering in the culti- 
 vation of twenty acres of irrigated land. It is known that the Sacram-nto 
 Valley has nearly (and that the San Joaquin Valley has quite) reached its 
 ultimate capacity as a farming district, dependent upon rain, in its present 
 area of wheat farms. Let those large wheat ranches in those great valleys be 
 supplied with water for irrigation from the millions of cubic feet of water 
 daily running to waste in the Sacremento and San Joaquin rivers and they 
 would soon be cut up into small farms supporting millions of population 
 where now there are only thousands. 
 
 Irrigation in California already represents a valuation of over fifty million 
 dollars, and yet only a commencement has been made. In this connection, 
 the following extract from the Colusa Sun, written by the editor, W. S Green 
 after a visit to the Fresno colonies, and speaking of the San Joaquin Valley, 
 will give an idea of the future field opening up to our merchants through the 
 agency of irrigation. He says: "Going over the country, one can see that 
 4 
 
48 
 
 but a small beginning has been made. The possibilities of the future almost 
 stagger the comprehension. When one looks at this vast valley, embracing 
 more than one hundred thousand square miles, all capable of the same de- 
 gree of productiveness, and contemplates it all so in cultivation, the feeling 
 is akin to the contemplation of the vastuess of space or an endless eternity. 
 One hundred thousand square miles gives 1,600,000 forty-acre farms, and 
 forty acres is larger than the average family will want ! Each forty acres, 
 cultivated as the land is now cultivated here, will give employment to five 
 laborers, besides a family of say five. This gives a rural population of 
 16,000,000 ! Then what will the towns and cities be?" 
 
 The question is now asked, shall this development be encouraged and 
 assisted, or shall it be stopped? There can be but one answer to that ques- 
 tion by the people of San Francisco, who have so great and direct an interest 
 in this matter. The issue is made and the order has gone forth that it shall 
 stop. The Supreme Court of this State has recently rendered a decision 
 which affirms and sets up the English doctrine of "riparian rights," and pro- 
 claims that doctrine to be the law in this State. Under that law all the 
 wealth in water flowing from nature's great reservoirs, the snows of the Sierra 
 Nevada, must be permitted to flow "undiminished in quantity and unim- 
 paired in quality " to the sea. Nor has even the riparian claimant a right to 
 take any part of that water from the stream for purposes of irrigation if a 
 man owning a single acre on the stream below him objects. It is evident 
 that such a law, if enforced, would prove disastrous to the best interests of 
 this State. Take away the facilities for irrigation now existing (and that is 
 what this decision has done), and such action when completed would utterly 
 destroy many prosperous communities representing millions of property in 
 Southern California; would wholly put a stop to further development, and 
 would remand what is now fast becoming the richest and most prosperous 
 portion of our State to the condition it was in twenty years ago — the grazing 
 ground for cattle and sheep that die of starvation in dry years. 
 
 The law as interpreted by the Supreme Court must be obeyed. Thousands 
 of our industrious farmers, who by the use of water are producing wealth for 
 themselves and us, must shut off that water and let it run to waste, even if 
 such action causes their ruin and drives them penniless from the State. Is 
 there no remedy? Yes. These farmers are before the present Legislature 
 asking that a law be passed without delay to enable them to use the State's 
 right of eminent domain and condemn water rights and pay for them. This 
 the riparian claimants oppose. In this emergency it is our impei-ative duty 
 to come promptly to the assistance of the farmers and with our utmost power 
 help them to have this and any other just and equitable laws passed which 
 may be found necessary to save them from ruin. 
 
 The necessity for the passage of laws to promote and encourage irrigation 
 in this State has been urged upon succeeding Legislatures for the past six 
 years, but without avail. Our powerful "cattle lords," who have always 
 been opposed to the development of this State by farming, have always ap- 
 
49 
 
 peared at Sacramento in force on such occasions, and with "convincing" 
 Arguments have made it appear to the majority of the wisdom of those Leg- 
 islatures that the golden flood of water from our mountains, that might be 
 made to add thousands of millions to the wealth of California, should flow 
 in its natural channels so that their long-horned cattle might be provided 
 with water to drink. It has been suggestedi to them that a well and a pump 
 <;ould be made equally as effective in supplying their cattle with water, but 
 their only reply is: "The law gives us the water in the streams." It is 
 time the people awoke to a realization of this condition of things, and that 
 they see to it that no more " convincing" arguments shall be allowed to per- 
 petuate this gross outrage upon the individual interests of every citizen of 
 the State except our "cattle lords." 
 
 It has been said in opposition to irrigation laws that there are many con- 
 flicting interests, and that the members of the Legislature did not and could 
 not in the short time they had to consider the matter, understand the ques- 
 tion, and that, therefore, a committee should be appointed to investigate the 
 subject and report to the next Legislature. The same tactics are being 
 followed out now and the correspondents of our newspapers say that there 
 is eveiy probability that again legislation will be defeated. 
 
 These reasons for delay are now utterly without force. State Engineer W. 
 Hammond Hall, and a corps of assistants, have for nearly six years, at great 
 expense to the State, been thoroughly investigating this matter. Mr. Hall 
 has mastered thiaf subject and has given us such minute and valuable infor- 
 mation concerning irrigation in all its branches, that his report is sure to 
 become the text-book of irrigation for the world. In addition to that, a 
 convention of all interested in irrigation was held recently in Fresno. By 
 this convention a committee of eighteen, composed of prominent citizens, 
 having a practical knowledge of the subject, was appointed, who, with the 
 valuable aid of Engineer Hall, have prepared a number of bills covering the 
 subject of irrigation in California. These bills are now before the Legisla- 
 ture; the committee of eighteen from the Fresno Convention are now in 
 Sacramento urging the passage of these bills, but there is too much reason 
 to fear that the delegation in the Legislature from San Francisco understands 
 the vital importance of these measures so little, or they are so indifferent to 
 it, that through their votes, or neglect to vote, the passage of these bills will 
 again be defeated and incalculable harm result before any remedy can be 
 applied two years hence. 
 
 The unquestionable duty of every business man, and the owner of a foot 
 of real estate in this city, at this time, is to make a personal matter of this 
 subject and use all his influence, singly and jointly with others, to see that 
 all our representatives in the Senate and Assembly vote in favor of the pas- 
 sage of bills which will foster irrigation in California, and that these hills he 
 •passed at this session of the Legislature. M. T. K. 
 
 San Francisco, Feb. 4, 1885. 
 
50 
 
 Pacific Rural Press. 
 
 Irriffation Liaws. 
 
 The Senate and Assembly are now devoting stated portions of their time^ 
 each day to irrigation subjects, but it is impossible to foresee the result. 
 There is the most determined and organized opposition to the system em- 
 bodied in the Fresno bills, and if they cannot be killed outright, as the oppo- 
 sition intends, there will be a strong effort to win some of those now holding 
 with the irrigators by a compromise measure to appoint a commission to sit 
 during the next two years, and report to the next Legislature; this move be- 
 ing advanced upon the plea that the present Legislature cannot inform itself 
 fully enough during the few days remaining to demonstrate the truth in the 
 opposing claims which are set up. It would be rather an expensive compro- 
 mise, it is true, and we do not see that such a commission would enlighten 
 the next Legislature, or that that coming body would be content to draw wis- 
 dom from such a source. It is a fact that the irrigation problem has been 
 before the people for many years, and has been discussed in the public prints 
 by public meetings, and in private conversation during all that time, and yet 
 many men aspiring to the intelligence of legislators claim that they do not 
 know anything about it. How will the next Legislature know more? How 
 can we be sure that the next Legislature will not contain men who will not be 
 ready to accept the testimony of the proposed commission, or men perhaps 
 who will not know that such a body has an existence untij they hear of it 
 when they arrive at the State capital and irrigation bills are placed under 
 their noses. 
 
 It seems to us that this Legislature is as well prepared as any Legislature 
 is likely to be to take some action on this subject and to do something at 
 least to advance the problem some degrees towards its solution, in such a 
 way that the development of the State, which is now progressing so favora- 
 bly, may not be checked. 
 
 San Joaquin Valley Argus. 
 
 Tlie State Irrigfation Convention. 
 
 By far, the most important meeting of citizens that has been held for 
 years past in the San Joaquin valley, took place in Fresno, the first week in 
 this month, resulting in a declaration of principles that we regard as sound 
 in a business point of view, and strictly just and equitable to all parties 
 concerned, and equally sound and just as legal propositions. The perma- 
 nent prosperity and rapid development of the San Joaquin valley depends 
 upon the utilizing of the waters flowing down the watersheds bounding the 
 valley, and finding their way to the ocean through the many channels that 
 are, in their natural condition, of little use for navigation, and as means of 
 furnishing water supply for other purposes, answer such purposes to a 
 limited extent only. The turning of the streams from their natural chan- 
 nels, by means of canals and ditches, and conveying the water over the high. 
 
51 
 
 lands so as to make it available for irrrigating the soil is the only mode 
 known by which relief can be economically afforded. The people who have 
 settled upon farms on the great plains of the valley, and who, when prices 
 for the principal staple ruled higher in the markets of the world than at the 
 present time, were barely able to reap a living profit by the cultivation of 
 their lands, and whose condition 'at the present time, when depression in 
 prices render their condition desperate, makes the cultivation of a variety of 
 crops imperative, if we hope to keep up with the progress of the times, 
 even keep from retrogarding in wealth and prosperity as a people. 
 
 The object of the convention was to adopt measures that would provide 
 safety for investments in labor and capital in building canals and ditches, and 
 bring about the inauguration of a system of constructing irrigation works 
 that would be just to all interests in the State, and at the same time enable 
 the people on the arid plains to have the use of the water at reasonable cost 
 and in ways that will produce the best results to all the varied interests of 
 the people. 
 
 With the legislation asked for, and united action by the people of the 
 valley and foot-hill regions of the State, men of capital will be induced to 
 make investments with fair prospects of profit. But where a few holders of 
 lands along the lines of projected canals, who have bought the property 
 with a view to gaining the greatest possible profit by reason of the irriga- 
 tion facilities to be provided enhancing the value of lands affected, to unite 
 and form stumbling blocks in the way of improvement, by making extrava- 
 gant demands for right of way through their property, instead of giving 
 accordingly as their lands may be enhanced in value by reason of being 
 made available for irrigation. Such land-holders are purblind and often 
 retard many needed improvements through their greed of gain, and yet 
 accomplish nothing further than the deferring the day of general prosperity 
 of themselves and neighbors. When such enterprises as the building of 
 irrigation canals are conceived, the people, with united voice, invite the 
 investment of capital; but, as a rule, no sooner than an association is organ- 
 ized under the incorporation laws of the State, than those who called the 
 loudest and most persistently for the help of capital to aid them to obtain 
 the means of cultivating their lands profitably, raise the cry of " Monopoly,'' 
 and seek by every possible device to check progress and render the invest- 
 ments they had prayed for unprofitable. It is this kind of policy that has 
 time and again retarded, and sometimes defeated, much needed improve- 
 ments, to the great injury of the people immediately concerned. 
 
 San Francisco Alta. 
 
 Mot a. Party Question. 
 
 One cause of gratification to the people in the pending conflict between 
 irrigation and riparianism in the Legislature is the entire absence of any 
 ■effort to make any issue upon the subject between the political parties. The 
 
52 
 
 great irrigation interests, inseparably interwoven with the powerful commer- 
 cial interests of the city and State, include people of all shades of political 
 opinion. They comprise the entire southern half of California, large portions 
 of many northern counties, a great part of the commercial community of the 
 city, together with the great body of the people who supported, in the new 
 Constitution, the provision making the lise of water a public use. No indi- 
 vidual can afford to make this a party question, nor can any party. But 
 while irrigation is not a party question, it is a political one. And it is polit- 
 ical to the extent that it is destined to cut a leading figure at coming elec- 
 tions. The people of Southern California are at the present time expecting 
 cohfidently that the majority in both Houses are about to yield to their 
 prayers. The votes in each House have encouraged this confidence. Ex- 
 cluding the vote of Senator Cox, who admits himself to be directly and 
 pecuniarily interested against irrigation, or counting his vote on the riparian 
 side, the Republicans, if united, could control action upon the subject in 
 either House; or the Democrats can, joined with a few riparianists in the 
 Senate, effectually block legislation. These great interests before enumerated 
 will exercise unmeasurable influence in the politics of the future. They ara 
 now observing, with watchful eyes, the course of parties as well as indi- 
 viduals. Common political prudence dictates that party leaders shall not 
 interfere to draw party lines and make party warfare against the cause of 
 irrigation. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 No Excuse for Delay. 
 
 The riparianists have already exposed their plan of action in the fight 
 against irrigation legislation. A member from San Francisco fathers a bill 
 providing for a commission to investigate the subject of irrigation for two 
 years more. This is simply a transparent scheme for delay. The riparian- 
 ists dare not meet the issue squarely upon its merits, hence the resort to the 
 tactics of delay. In the early days of the agitation of this question there 
 were some grounds for deferring action on this question for the , purpose of 
 investigation, but at this time there is no longer any excuse for delay. 
 
 The question of irrigation has been undergoing careful investigation by 
 men competent for the important duty for several years, and especially for 
 the two years last past. State Engineer Hall has been at work assiduously 
 upon it, and has made a most thorough investigation. His report not only 
 comprises a statement of the condition of the irrigation districts of the State^ 
 an accurate estimate of the natural water supply, the adaptability of different 
 portions of the State to irrigation, but also an exhaustive history of irrigation 
 in E:^ypt, Italy, Spain and Mexico. It embraces most of the essential infor- 
 mation necessary for intelligent action in the matter. Whatever knowledge 
 may be lacking from other reliable sources is furnished in the proceedings of 
 the State Irrigation Convention recently assemb led in Fresno. If there were 
 
63 
 
 no other information avail ble, the action ot that important and representa- 
 tive body furnishes enough to show conclusively that farther delay is the last 
 thing that should be thought of. The vast interests now depending upon ir- 
 rigation in California are confronted with a decision from the Supreme Court 
 which ilenies their right to exist, and as the present law is so construed, the 
 supreme necessity of an immediate change of that law must be evident to any 
 sane and unprejudiced mind. 
 
 The litigation of this question of the right to use the water of natural streams 
 for irrigation has already too long blocked the wheels of progress and pros- 
 perity in this State, and the people are looking to their representatives in 
 this Legislature for relief that can only come from intelligent legislative ac- 
 tion. The people have long and but too patiently struggled against the evils 
 inflicted by the rulings of courts which recognize the supremacy of the old 
 English common law, and now in behalf of 'the thousands of homes they 
 have builded upon the desert made to blossom as the rose, of the millions 
 of capital invested, and in behalf pf the best material interests of the State, 
 they ask the Legislature now assembled to take this burden from them and 
 give them protection instead of destruction under the law. A postponement 
 of the settlement of this question for two years longer is suicidal to the best 
 interests of California. Should such a course be pursued it can only be 
 attributed to the gross ignorance or venality of the Legislature. This ques- 
 tion is the paramount one before the Legislature. That body must settle 
 it in the interests of the people or suffer the disgrace of an ignominious and 
 inexcusable failure t® perform a plain duty. We believe the Legislature will 
 perform its duty. 
 
 Record-Union. 
 
 A Shamefal Story. 
 
 Editors Recobd- Union: Under the above caption, the Bee of yesterday has 
 the following: 
 
 "It is said that a corrupt combination has been made by the hydraulio 
 miners and the supporters of the Fresno irrigation bills, by which each party 
 to the bargain agrees to help the other's bill or bills through the Legislature* 
 The hydraulic miners want the Cross dam bill passed, and the water appro- 
 priators are willing to co-operate if the hydraulicers will help the Fresno 
 bills. This is a report which we hear on good authority. We trust, however, 
 that it is not true. It \^ould be an infamous bargain — a burning shame and 
 disgrace to those agricultural communities in the southern part of the State, 
 whose representatives should strike hands with the hydraulicers over the 
 wicked bill introduced by Senator Cross. We warn the representatives of the 
 irrigation interests that any such bargain must result in disaster. It is incon- 
 ceivable that legislators elected from agricultural communities could support 
 the Cross bill as the result of a bargain and sale." 
 
 Yes, this is a shameful story — so shameful that it is a shame that any news- 
 paper could be found shameless enough to print it. I would ask for the Bee^s 
 
54 
 
 "good authority;" but as craven cowardice and mendacious falsehood always 
 walk hand in hand, no man will step forward and say: "I originated the 
 lie." 
 
 Now, Messrs. Editors, I feel somewhat deeply on this subject, because I 
 was all through the anti-slickens fight, and have been in the innermost coun- 
 cils of the irrigators since the Ist of December last. No man in this State 
 spent more time and money in behalf of the valley interests, in proportion to 
 mtans, than I; and being now in the full and complete confidence of theirri" 
 gators, such a story as the above amounts to a charge against me of treason 
 and bad faith to the cause of the valley interests in opposition to hydraulic 
 mining. 
 
 The Bee says that this would be an infamous bargain; that it would be a 
 burning shame and disgrace for the representatives of agricultural communi- 
 ties to shake hands with the hydraulicers. And so it would be, but why? 
 Because it would be for gain, giving over the lovely portion of the Sacramento 
 Valley to destruction, to desolation. It would not otherwise be an infamous 
 bargain, would it? 
 
 But let us cast our eyes in another direction. These representatives thus 
 denounced and defamed represent a people made happy and prosperous by 
 means of the diversion of water. The desert has been turned into vast orange 
 groves, vineyards, orchards, meadows and grain fields; cities have been built 
 up; the industry thus developed and the wealth thus created amounts to hun- 
 dreds of millions of dollars: but a crisis comes when legislation must be had 
 or all this must perish, and beggary and want come to tens of thousands of 
 people, and California set back in the march of time a score or more of years. 
 When the representatives of these people come asking for just and equitable 
 legislation, asking for the preservation of their homes and their firesides, we 
 find the representatives of Sacramento "filibustering" on the floor of the 
 legislative halls against the passage of any measure for their relief, and one 
 of the principal papers of the city denouncing them as lunatics, and giving 
 credence and circulation to infamous falsehood. What "bargain*' brought 
 about such actions as these? 
 
 Even to save their homes the irrigators have made no bargains with the 
 enemies of the valley interests; they would prefer to defend their rights with 
 their own good strong arms, as the people of Mussel Slough once did, to such 
 a bargain. 
 
 1 am in this contest to stay, and am willing to register an oath to oppose, 
 as long as I can wield a pen, any man for any office, who through corruption 
 or stupidity opposes all legislation for the relief of these people. Mere party 
 politics tiuk into utter insignificance alongside such a question as this. 
 Men try to get out of responsibility in this matter by saying that it is too 
 complicated, and they must have more time. The question is very simple, 
 and he who confesses that he cannot understand it ought never to seek 
 public office. It is: Shall the desert be a desert, or shall the desert be an 
 earthly paradise? Twist it and turn it as you may, and that is all there is 
 to it. 
 
55 
 
 The Bee says it is inconceivable how legislators elected from agricultural 
 counties could support the Cross bill without a bargain. It should have 
 -waited until they did so before denouncing them. But did it never strike 
 the Bee that it was inconceivable how a newspaper asking these irrigators to 
 save it and its constituency from ruin, could seek to ruin them, and how leg- 
 islators representing a constituency begging to be saved from ruin, could join 
 in a filibustering scheme to ruin others. 
 
 But without any bargains the Assembly has done nobly, and there can be 
 no doubt but that the Senate will do likewise, and California will receive such 
 an impetus in her onward march that the Legislature of 1885 will ever be held 
 in grateful remembrance. W. S. Green. 
 
 Sacramento Capital. 
 
 A Dangferous Amendment. 
 
 An effort is being made to amend ^nate Bill 210, declaring against riparian 
 rights, or the English common law, our Supreme Court has shown a disposi- 
 tion to sustain, confining the water of the flowing streams to the natural 
 channels and preventing its use in this State for the most necessary pur- 
 poses, by a proviso giving to riparian proprietors the right to flow past their 
 premises of sufficient water for stock and domestic purposes. This seems so 
 fair and reasonable on its face that it has inclined many legislators, unac- 
 quainted through personal knowledge and experience with the questions 
 involved in this momentous subject of irrigation, to look upon it with favor. 
 But we assert that this apparently fair and reasonable provision, in its practi- 
 cal effect would nullify all irrigation legislation, effectually check the pros- 
 perity of the southern part of the State, and cause it to retrograde in the 
 path of progress as fast as it has hitherto advanced. To make this clear, we 
 set out by stating a fact familiar to every resident of that section, or of any 
 other arid country, that the largest end of every stream is upward, and the 
 little end downwards; or, in other words, while the streams issue from the 
 mountains bold and strong, they grow rapidly smaller as they advance into 
 dry plains until, except in flood times, by evaporation and absorption, they 
 sink and disappear altogether. A few miles beyond these points of disap- 
 pearance, where the floods reach, spread over extensive tracts and make 
 swamps, are the lands of the riparians — swamp lands so called, for which 
 they have obtained title from the State by the construction of drainage works 
 or levees to prevent overflow — the men who are opposing the irrigation bills 
 now before the Legislature. They hope, through the absurd law referred to, 
 to practically own all the^e streams and hold all the vast interests above them 
 at their mercy. This they now see they cannot hope to accomplish on the 
 bare monstrous proposition involved in the common law, and hence this 
 amendment giving them more than they could have if never a drop of water 
 had been diverted above them. It was only in flood time, in the unchanged 
 natural conditions, that water reached them at all, and then came a super- 
 abundance, forming lakes and ponds lasting all the season, while iu the 
 
56 
 
 normal stages of the streams they disappeared miles before they reached the- 
 lands that in flood time they submerged. 
 
 What is the effect then of this amendment? Is it not to give these alleged 
 riparians all they could get under the broadest construction of the common 
 law? To give them water for stock and domestic purposes when the streams 
 are not in flood and water is most needed for irrigation, would be to compel 
 every drop to remain in the channels to sink in the sands long before it 
 reached their lands, giving them power to levy tribute upon the agricultural 
 interests above them in millions of dollars annually. Besides all these ripa- 
 rians, cattle men have long since found that the stagnant alkaline water fes- 
 tering in ponds, sloughs and tule swamps, under the burning sun of the dry 
 season, is injurious to their stock, and have substituted with infinite pecuni- 
 ary advantage, the cold, pure water of artesian and other wells, which are 
 found in abundance near the surface. The irrigation bills provide for the 
 payment to them of all damage that may result from the diversion of water 
 above them, which must in time again ||ach them more permanently by per- 
 colation, as we have elsewhere shown; but with this, which would satisfy all 
 men in every other walk of life actuated by the ordinary consideration of 
 interest and business, they are not satisfied. All this being so, in the light 
 of the plain, truthful relation of facts given above, what are we to think? It 
 is impossible to view it in any other light than that they are striving (to 
 put it in the mildest form) to efl'ect a huge speculation, in violation of jus- 
 tice, right and public policy. More plainly speaking, they are using an imag- 
 inary advantage, as Shy lock did. The payment of their bond is not enough, 
 a dozen men at most insist on being given the power to draw the life-blood 
 from the fairest agricultural region of the State. They scorn the money- 
 value of their claims. They want the blood and life of those over whom 
 they imagine the law gives them an advantage. Hopeless of having this 
 openly confirmed, they have resorted to insidious methods, trusting that they 
 may thus grasp the prize they cannot gain openly. It should be borne in 
 mind that in taking away and paying these men for their alleged riparian 
 rights, the same rights still remain to them that are common to all. They 
 may become appropriators of water connecting with the irrigating systems 
 above them so as to convey water with as little waste as possible, and in the 
 seasons of overflow they will still have, the only time they have ever had it^ 
 more water than they want. 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 Irriijfatlon lAttwa Must be Passed. 
 
 Every member of the California Legislature should feel it a duty incum- 
 bent on him to see that suitable laws are passed at the present session for 
 the protection of the irrigation interests of this State. The southern half 
 of this great State is almost entirely dependent on irrigation for the success- 
 of its agricultural and horticultural interests. The average annual rainfall 
 
57 
 
 is not sufficient to produce crops or maintain the thrifty growth of vegeta- 
 tion, and without irrigation the land would remain forever uncultivated. But 
 since water has been turned out over the thirsty plains, orchards, vineyards, 
 fields of alfalfa, and waving corn have sprung up as if by magic, and the 
 hot, brown, desolate waste transformed into shady groves, green, cool and 
 comfortable retreats, the cosy and comfortable houses of the intelligent and 
 industrious tillers of the soil. Before this change, in seasons when the 
 rainfall was sufficient to produce crops of grass, great herds of long-horned 
 cattle roamed over the country at will, and when they were fat enough for 
 meat, they were gathered up by a few Mexican vaqueros, and driven to 
 market, where they were sold by their o-v^^ners, the California cattle kings, 
 and the money stowed away in their coffers at San Francisco, or invested in 
 the purchase of swamp land along the rivers and streams, that they might 
 secure summer grazing when the overflow subsided. The whole population 
 of the southern counties was then but a few thousand people, more than 
 half of whom were Mexicans. The diversion of the waters of the rivers and 
 streams, however, caused the plains to be settled up, and the long-horned 
 cattle were driven from their free ranges, and their owners were compelled to 
 fence their swamp lands so as to keep their stock off the farmers' fields. Of 
 course, the stock-raiser's profit was materially reduced by these circumstances, 
 and avarice has caused them to seek some plan to check the progress of 
 the country, and, if possible, drive the farmers from their fields that they 
 might again hold dominion over the broad acres of Southern California. 
 
 The doctrine of riparianism was dropped on, and, notwithstanding that 
 these men had purchased what was known as swamp lands, which extended 
 only to the banks of the streams, and had subsequently secured the return 
 of their moneys from the public treasury by swearing that they had so re- 
 claimed these lands from the overflow of the rivers as to render them capable 
 of producing crops, they went into the courts and swore that the. water was 
 appurtenant to the land; that the land was worthless and unproductive without 
 the water, and asked to have those who had diverted the water and put it to 
 a useful purpose enjoined from reaping the fruits of their labor and intelli- 
 gence, and that the water be permitted to flow on and ever past their swamp- 
 land farms. The prayers of these petitioners were granted by the courts, 
 and, so far as their judgments are concerned, the farmers of California are 
 perpetually stopped from the use of water from the rivers and streams for 
 irrigation. This great injustice the California Legislature is now called on to 
 rectify, and it must not falter in its duty. If it does not come to the rescue 
 of the irrigators now they will rue it. Woe to the members who oppose this 
 interest, should any of them ever aspire to office and come to this part of th©^ 
 State seeking votes. A mark will be put on them, and their political doom., 
 forever sealed. 
 
58 
 
 Resources of California. 
 
 ^eceagity of Irrigfation— A Terse Revie^v of the Subject— The Conflict 
 Between Riparianism and Irrigfation. 
 
 Of the tide of immigration which has poured into California during many 
 years past, a large current has turned into the southern part of the State, at- 
 tracted by the great promise of wealth that section bids fair to yield. 
 
 The mildness of the climate during the winter season, united to the varied 
 Agricultural possibilities of the soil, and the immense area of land purchasable 
 ■at cheap, almost nominal rates, have proved the powerful lodestone which 
 has drawn population and capital to it. 
 
 The leading inducement, however, to this current lay in the fact, that 
 while the dryness of the climate and the aridity of the land rendered it 
 impracticable to cultivate with success when depending solely upon the 
 scanty rainfall for water, yet by means of artificial irrigation products which, 
 in more northern climes, are planted beneath the snow, flourish there side 
 by side with the luxuriant vegetation requiring the burning sun of the trop- 
 ics, and perennial crops are produced without danger or loss from dry years. 
 There were to be found lands which, appearing as dreary and sterile as the 
 Great Desert of Sahara, needed but water to transform them into green 
 waving fields of wheat, or shady orange groves. 
 
 Scarcely a single stream of the thousand and one of this fertile region 
 but whose waters directed by human agency are, through irrigation, furnish- 
 ing daily means of subsistence to the people and making solid additions to 
 the permanent wealth of the State. Large portions of the Southern counties 
 are networked with irrigating canals and ditches, furnishing water to farms 
 of from fifty to thousands of acres. 
 
 The water which is used for irrigating purposes is diverted from streams 
 under the supposed authority of what is known as the law of appropriation. 
 Without this law such diversion would be unlawful and impossible. If our 
 laws and our courts had not, in time past, indeed, ever since the conquest of 
 the territory from Mexico, authorized the appropriation of water for irriga- 
 tion, nearly a million acres of land now cultivated would still be virgin soil, 
 and of the 150,000 people who form the population of Southern California^ 
 the greater proportion would be strangers to our State. 
 
 Three months ago, while the people, resting in the fancied security of 
 their water rights acquired by appropriation, were harvesting their crops, 
 gathering the fruits of the year, or preparing for the coming season, like 
 a thunderbolt out of a clear sky, came a decision of the Supreme Court blast- 
 ing and destroying the cherished popular belief of years past. This decision 
 of the court is to the effect that the common law of England is the law of 
 California so far as it relates to the water of streams, and that, as against a 
 riparian owner, that is to say, the owner of land upon the river bank, an ap- 
 propriator has no rights. Afterwards the court recalled the decision and or- 
 dered a rehearing of the question. It is, of course, impossible to foretell 
 what the final conclusion will be. It is even possible that the court may 
 
59 
 
 not feel called upon to determine the question in the particular case pend- 
 ing. The decision may not be reached for many months. Whatever be the- 
 result, it is enough that the irrigating industry of the State is paralyzed for 
 the time. Until a certainty is established one way or the other, irrigation is 
 at a standstill. With every knock at the door, the irrigator will quake, lest 
 he be confronted with a sheriff, injunction in hand, issued at the suit of the 
 riparian owner, forbidding him from diverting water for his withering vines 
 and fruit trees or burning grain. The irrigators recognize the practical result 
 which will follow the reassertion of the decision. They know that it will ex- 
 terminate the irrigation interests of the State beyond revival, except by legis- 
 lation. 
 
 Under the common law of England it is well settled that an action will 
 lie for every disturbance of riparian rights, without evidence of appropria- 
 tion of the water for any purpose of utility, and without even proof of 
 any special damage, hut simply on the ground that a legal right is injured by 
 the disturbance, and that this is sufficient damage to support the action; appro- 
 priation of the water of flowing streams for purposes of utility is deemed of 
 no importance whatever as a mode of gaining a right or of acquiring a right to 
 sue for a disturbance. 
 
 It is equally well settled by the same law that a riparian owner cannot, 
 except as against himself, confer on one who is not a riparian owner, any^right 
 to use the water of the stream; and any use of the stream by a non-riparian 
 proprietor, even under a grant from the riparian proprietor, is wrongful, 
 if it sensibly affects the flow of water by the lands of other riparian, pro- 
 prietors. 
 
 The first proposition above stated forbids irrigation by the riparian 
 owner; the second closes the door upon the non-riparian owner entirely, and 
 precludes him from acquiring any right whatever to the waters of a stream, 
 even for ordinary domestic purposes, much less for irrigation. It matters 
 not how near his land may be to the river, so that it does not form part of 
 the bank; it is of no consequence what his necessities are; he shall not so 
 much as dip a bucket of water from the stream, without the deed in writing, 
 signed, sealed and delivered to him, of every riparian owner below to the 
 mouth of the stream. 
 
 Governed by this law, if A, who owns a section of land one side of which 
 borders upon a stream, sells to B one-half of his section away from the 
 stream, B does not become a riparian owner. He cannot use the water, 
 nor can he buy the right from A. He must first seek and satisfy every other 
 owner on the stream. 
 
 The very large majority of riparian owners, however, are appropriators- 
 Never relying upon or caring for, perhaps ignorant of, their riparian right, 
 they have availed themselves of the usages and customs of the State, and 
 the decisions and laws under which appropriations are sanctioned and. 
 authorized, by the actual diversion and use of water for irrigation. 
 
60 
 
 15uoh owners will be enabled, wheQ they so desire, to subdivide their 
 lands, and sell portions not adjacent to the river, together with an interest 
 in their water right, unless the common law of riparian rights is adopted. 
 
 Suppose for the moment that we should so modify the common law as 
 to authorize the irrigation of -riparian lands. The rule above stated would 
 still prevent the riparian owner from granting any privilege to irrigate any 
 land away from the stream, or from conveying, with a water right attached, 
 any of his land not adjacent to the stream. 
 
 The whole system operates to restrain the alienation of land in localities 
 where irrigation is a necessity, and to prohibit the irrigation of non-ripariau 
 lands. 
 
 From every standpoint taken in the discussion of the relative merits of the 
 <5ontroversy between riparianism and appropriation, the conclusion is irre- 
 sistible that one or the other must fall. Life to riparianism is death to irri- 
 .^ation. The union of the two is legal miscegenation. 
 
 This is the state of affairs from which the people of Southern California 
 are crying to be extricated. That interests of the people of the entire State 
 must be closely allied to irrigation cannot be doubted. Irrigation cannot 
 proceed without the right of appropriation. Appropriations cannot be made 
 tinder the riparian law of England. 
 
 The Legislature is called upon to apply the remedy without delay. The 
 right of appropriation should be so fortified by law as to make it operative 
 even against ripafian owners. If such owners have vested rights of property 
 of which they will be deprived by firmly establishing the right of irrigation, 
 let them be properly compensated, but do not yield to them the right to stand 
 in the pathway of the State to wealth and prosperity. 
 
 S. F. Examiner. 
 
 Irri£fation. 
 
 The people of Southern California, a quarter of the population of the State, 
 are watching the fate of the irrigation bills before the Legislature with intense 
 anxiety. The entire State is in sympathy with the efforts of the irrigators to 
 obtain legislative relief. When the recent decision of the Supreme Court, 
 sustaining the ancient doctrine of riparian rights, was made public, those 
 dependent upon irrigation were appalled. They saw instantly the frightful 
 consequences certain to follow the practical enforcement of the principle of the 
 decision. It was apparent that irrigation must cease. The laws of the State, 
 adopted solely for the purpose of furthering the progress of its people, have 
 been found by the Courts to contain an element fatal to the advancement of 
 half the State. The irrigators assembled in convention, and, after lengthy 
 deliberation, appointed an energetic committee to prepare bills for present- 
 ation to the Legislature, the passage of which might afford relief. These 
 bills have been carefully formulated and revised by this committee, and by 
 the Irrigation Committees of the Senate and Assembly, aided by suggestions 
 
61 
 
 from others interested in the subject, until they are now believed to meet the 
 necessities of the situation as nearly as possible. The irrigators of the State, 
 almost without dissent, are satisfied that if these bills become laws, they 
 will establish the right to use of water for irrigation, and will lay the found- 
 ation of a wise system of regulating such use, which can be perfected in the 
 light of experience. 
 
 Very few in the Legislature will have the courage to openly oppose these 
 bills in the face of the universal demand for their passage by the people, 
 irrespective of party. The policy of the small opposition is delay. The bills 
 have been made the special order for to-morrow in both houses, when the 
 effort to obstruct this important and much needed legislation will probably 
 be renewed. 
 
 The people will not be satisfied with the passive votes of their representa- 
 tives upon the bills themselves. They look for active support, which shall 
 push these measures to the front, suppress delay, and bring each bill to a 
 vote on its passage before adjournment. If they fail, Southern California 
 will have no politics but irrigation. In the time coming, the highest recom- 
 mendation to the people of that section will be a record of faithful and active 
 support of the measures proposed by the irrigators. They will deal political 
 death to those who fail them on this question. 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 The Irrififation Bills. 
 
 When we in this country speak of the common law of England, we mean 
 the great body of law which grew up by degrees out of the varying wants and 
 conditions of the British people, and was rather a compendium of established 
 customs than a body of statutes. Bracton entitles his great work on the com- 
 mon law, "Of the Laws and Customs of England." And all writers point 
 out as the chief merit of the common law its flexibility and adaptability to 
 different conditions and necessities. It was in effect a judicial and not a leg- 
 islative expression of what was fair and reasonable in view of all the circum. 
 stances of the case. Applying this definition of the common law to section 
 4468 of the Political Code, the meaning of that section would seem to be that 
 judges in this State were to pursue the course which judges in England pur- 
 sued when new cases, involving new wants and new clashings of interests 
 came before them ; that is to say, they were to decide on broad general prin- 
 ciples of equity and the public good. If England had been a rainless coun- 
 try, like Southern California, the wants of farmers would have led to "cus- 
 toms" of irrigation, and the courts would by their decisions have given to 
 these customs the force of law. They would have constituted part of the 
 ''common law." 
 
62 
 
 Los Gatos Mail. 
 
 The Irrigation Q,nestion. 
 
 The bountiful rains in this part of the State save us from the troublesome 
 necessity of irrigation. Ir, however, we had but four inches of rain scattered 
 through the season, so that scarce a grain of wheat would sprout, the matter 
 ■would be of great importance to us. This is the condition of San Joaquin 
 Valley, south of Stockton, embracing a country three hundred miles long and 
 from one to two hundred miles wide, containing one-fifth of the area of the 
 State. The most of this land, with rains or irrigation, is capable of produc- 
 ing large crops. The Fresno Colony is an instance to this point. Water 
 enough falls on the mountains above, if it were impounded and utilized, to 
 irrigate this whole tract. If settled as thickly as many countries in Europe 
 and cultivated as highly, 10,000,000 people would live in comfort on it. Ac- 
 cording to the decisions of the courts, some one, or any one, who lives on the 
 streams may demand that no water shall be taken from the channel; that all 
 shall run to the sea. 
 
 Grass Valley Tidings. 
 
 Burning' Question. 
 
 The Colusa Sun says of irrigation that it is the "Burning Question." The 
 Sun is perhaps right. It is a question whether the policy should be to con- 
 tinue to let onr vast plains burn every summer season, or whether by the 
 proper distribution of water those plains shall be made fresh and green and 
 beating all kinds of crops. There is plenty of water for the purpose of mak- 
 ing all these dry plains into gardens, and never was water in any land better 
 situated for easy and cheap distribution. But there are a few men who live 
 by the side of natural streams, and those men want the water to run along 
 by their lands and not turn a wheel or give life to the germ of a single 
 seed. And these few men seem to have the advantage of the contest. They 
 are backed by an old law made for another and a different country, and in 
 an age when machinery was not used, and when irrigation was but little un- 
 derstood. 
 
 Watsonville Pajaronian. 
 
 The Legislature has at last taken up the consideration of the irrigation 
 question. The decision of the Supreme Court, reversing Judge Brundage's 
 decision in the case of Miller & Lux vs. Haggin & Carr, has created a feel- 
 ing of uncertainty among the settlers in the San Joaquin, Los Angeles and 
 San Bernardino valleys, and through their representatives they are appeal- 
 ing to the Legi8lature to set at rest this vexed question of water rights. For 
 years the settlers in the San Joaquin and southern sections have been, by 
 canals, diverting the waters of their sections from their usual channels, and 
 thereby have cultivated extensive tracts of land, and have increased the 
 
63 
 
 resources and productions of the State. The settlers are known as 
 appropriationists, and they have made the desert part of this State produc- 
 tive. Prior to them were the stockmen. They did not molest the flow of 
 Tivers. They did not want the laud tilled. They used the land for pastur- 
 age, and the rivers were the drinking resorts of cattle. With the adveut of 
 the farmer the bounds of the stockmen were narrowed, land became more 
 yaluable, and the herdsmen had to show title for what he claimed. The 
 two interests clashed, and trumping up the water question the stockmen 
 have attempted to cripple the farmers. The colonists of the San Joaquin 
 and southern valleys, after years of untiring labor and expense, have com- 
 pleted a vast irrigating spstem, and have made the desert lauds of the Joa- 
 quin and southern sections bear bounteously in fruit, grain, etc. They have 
 organized thriving colouies. They have built up towns and counties. They 
 have increased the wealth of the State. Their towns show an air of pros- 
 perity. They have converted the cattle ranges into cultivated land. They 
 have their homes, churches and school houses. They are thriving and pros- 
 perous. The cattle king did nothing but raise cattle. He added not to the 
 wealth of the State. He kept out immigration. He made neither towns 
 nor homes. He allowed the rivers fed by the snows of the Sierras to run 
 to waste year after year. He claimed the land along the rivers and 
 claims the water. Against him is the appropriatiug farmer, who believes 
 that the water should moisten the soil and cause it to bear as nature intended 
 it should. The Legislature is now discussing this water question, and in its 
 treatment should consider the relative worth and importance of the farming 
 and stock interests. A victory for Miller & Lux means stoppage of the 
 development of the San Joaquin Valley and ruin to thousands of now pros- 
 perous settlers in that section. A victory for the farmers means increased 
 development of every part of the State, increased immigration and increased 
 prosperity. The irrigation question should be settled this session. 
 
 There is water enough for all here if properly utilized, and it is not right 
 to make a desert of thousands of square miles of fertile land in order to 
 allow a few men to tie up large streams of water that may be made to convert 
 small area in to a garden. 
 
 Pacific Rural Press. 
 
 Irriffation Legislation. 
 
 It is probably clear by this time, if it was not before, that the problems 
 are affected by an unmeasured multitude of conditions. No doubt the 
 committee of the Fresno Convention realized this while they were drafting 
 their proposed enxctmen s, and subsequent discussion has doubtless con- 
 vinced them that there are still other conditions to be met with which they 
 have not dreamed of. We infer this much from the fact that they have 
 already modified the bills which they had prepared, and they seem to be 
 actuated by a desire to secure what is necessary for their success, with as 
 little as possible of injury to others. In the bills which they prepared they 
 5 
 
64 
 
 aimed to set forth, not new theories and doctrines, but rather to embody the 
 ■wisdom which has been gained from experience in other States which have 
 preceded our own in the progress toward a systematic arrangement of mat- 
 ters affecting irrigation. Colorado is such a State. She has advanced far 
 beyond us, we understand, in the area irrigated and the capital directly in- 
 vested in such enterprises, and her law-making bodies have struck upon 
 pioneer ground in irrigation legislation. The results of this experience are^ 
 of course, of much value as data in settling our own problems. It is fortu- 
 nate that a body of men like the Fresno Convention have been found to give 
 their time and insight to the work of preparing bills for the discussion of 
 the whole State. We trust that the wisdom which has come in large 
 measure from other quarters may be of avail in supplementing work which 
 they did, and in giving us laws which shall be fit to secure the grand result 
 which is being labored for, to wit: the development of our irrigation enter- 
 prises, the rescue of still greater areas from wild worthlessness to rich pro- 
 duction, the multiplication of homes on waste lands and the consequent 
 duplication of the vested wealth of the commonwealth. 
 
 The Gait Weekly Gazette. 
 
 A proper system of irrigation, by which the broad and fertile acres of the 
 Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys could be irrigated, would prove invalu- 
 able and of paramount importance to this State. The subject deserves atten- 
 tion, and it is to be hoped our able statesmen in the present Legislature will 
 devise some means by which the State can provide for and perfect a system 
 of irrigation sufficient to procure an abundance of water for this purpose. 
 
 Modesto Herald. 
 
 The irrigation question seems to be the heavy problem of the present 
 session of the Legislature. It is one of vast importance to a large portion of 
 the State, and many of the members are pledged to use their influence to have 
 a law passed practically condemning all the water-rights now in existence, 
 thus abolishing the old common law and appropriating all the streams to the 
 use of those who wish to divert it to productive uses. Riparian owners are 
 fighting the measure. 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 The newspapers of the State outside the districts where irrigation is prac- 
 ticed seem slow, says the Colusa Sun, to grasp the problem of irrigation. 
 We must exempt from this remark the Alia, Chronicle, and Examiner, of San 
 Francisco. We print to-day an article from the latter paper which shows a 
 broad comprehension of the whole situation. We also print a very excellent 
 article from the Sacramento Sunday Capital. The Bee has assumed a par- 
 
65 
 
 tisan attitude against the irrigators, and the Record-Union is mum. Now is 
 the time for men to show their hands. No man need stick his head up in the 
 politics of the State who now arrays himself against this great interest. 
 The man whose brain is too small to see and to comprehend the vastness of 
 this subject — to see the wealth that must follow good laws and the poverty 
 which must come of not acting — must expect no recognition at the hands of 
 the people. We warn ambitious men in the Legislature that against each 
 name a "lasting record stands for glory or for shame!" 
 
 Kern"Co. Californian. 
 
 In another place we give a well-considered article from the Alta, entitled 
 ** Importance of Irrigation," which ought to awaken the people of San Fran- 
 cisco to the necessity of bringing their influence to bear upon the Legislature 
 in the way of enacting laws to protect and promote the irrigation interests of 
 the State, now seriously threatened, to the serious injury of that city, as will 
 be seen by those directly interested in its growth and prosperity, if they will 
 but consider the subject. The views taken in the article in question should 
 be strenuously and persistently urged by every journal in the city. The 
 Alta has always enunciated correct views on this great subject of irrigation, 
 which it has been the first of the city papers to see is of paramount import- 
 ance, and we expect with coufidence that it will be an advocate as strenuous 
 as it is powerful of the measures that will be introduced into the Legislature 
 ■with the endorsement of the Executive Committee of the State Irrigation 
 Convention. 
 
 San Francisco Alta. 
 
 Importance of Irrigfation. 
 
 It is well known that the business of Sm Francisco has been very much 
 depressed for the last six months. Trade has been more nearly in a condition 
 of stagnation than for a long time past, and our manufactories have had diffi- 
 culty in finding work for their usual number of operatives and paying them 
 the accustomed rate of wages. Those who have goods have^been unable to sell 
 them, and those who have money have been unable to loan it. The banks 
 are overrun with idle capital, for enterprise is paralyzed and confidence de- 
 stroyed. This was the condition of things during the greater part of 1884, 
 and though with the coming of the new year a few rifts through the clouds 
 appear, the state of trade is very unsatisfactory. Our commercial bodies 
 have been conducting investigations into the causes of the depression and in- 
 quiring what can be done to hasten a revival. As San Francisco's prosperity 
 is dependent on the prosperity of the country regions in which she finds a 
 market for her goods, it is evident that no remedy for the trade depression 
 will be effective which is not sufficiently far reaching to touch and revive the 
 drooping industries of the interior of this State, as well as the contiguous 
 States and Territories. 
 
66 
 
 As one amoog the ways in which prosperity in the farming regions can be 
 stimnlated, the importance of settling the irrigation difficulties that have 
 hung like a cloud over the progress of half (he State, cannot be overrated. 
 Capital is waiting to take up the work of improvement as soon as it is given 
 the protection of the law's, to the extent that capital in other enterprises is 
 protected, but until that is done it will not move hand or foot. The projjec- 
 tion which capital asks is merely a sound title to what it creates, which it 
 cannot obtain in the present anomalous condition of the laws, Fresno county 
 and Tulare county have each invested $1,000,000 in irrigation ditches; Kern 
 county has invested $2,000,000, and other counties proportionate sums, and 
 at least 1,500,000 acres of land are now cultivated by irrigation. These are 
 the most prosperous districts in the State; the lands are divided into small 
 farms, and the owners are making money. The success of the operation is 
 demonstrated, and the work of irrigation will commence on a far larger scale 
 as soon as the legal difficulties that have been gradually thickening around 
 the irrigators, and which have finally culminated in the riparian rights de- 
 cision of the Supreme Court, are definitely settled. Not only is there a cer- 
 tainty that without legislation the progress of turning deserts into oases will 
 stop, but there is danger that what has been accomplished will be undone, if 
 this fatal decision stands and its sweeping effects are not evaded by some 
 flank movement of legislation. The irrigators have powerful enemies to 
 contend with, and among the most powerful are procrastination and petti- 
 fogging. Legislatures kill by indirection measures which they dislike to 
 openly oppose, unless a strong public demand -for the passage of the irriga- 
 tion law is made, and there is danger that it may share the fate of many other 
 meritorious bills that have been "nibbled to death by pissmires and kicked 
 to death by grasshoppers." It is the duty as much as the interest of San 
 Francisco to assist in creating this public demand. 
 
 S. F. Examiner. 
 
 Be^rare of Delay. ' 
 
 Two important irrigation bills now before the Legislature will come up in 
 the Assembly this evening as a special order. The importance of the subject 
 to a large proportion of the people of the State cannot be over-estimated, 
 and the representatives of the people should bring them to a speedy passage. 
 It will not do for any mentber who favors continued postponement to say 
 that he is in favor of the bills and will vote for them when reached. Who- 
 ever advocates such action is no better than the most malignant foe. The 
 late decision of the Supreme Court has stabbed Southern California near to 
 the heart, and her people are calling upon this Legislature to stanch the 
 gaping wound. It will soon be too late. Nothing but instant action will 
 avail. The few selfish riparianists counsel delay. They know that further 
 delay is their only hope for success. Their argument is, that the subject 
 should receive long consideration, and that sixty days is too short a time in. 
 
67 
 
 which to reacli a conclusion ; and that will be their argument at the next 
 session, and yet the next, provided they carry out their plans now. There 
 will never come a time when the Legislature will be better informed than 
 now. The necessity of this legislation will never be greater than at this 
 moment. The irrigators, large and small, may reasonably anticipate a 
 cyclone of injunctions against the use of water, after adjournment, without 
 legislation. In another two years, without water, every leaf and stalk of 
 vegetation now thriving from irrigation will have shriveled and withered to 
 the dust from which it came. The just wrath of a ruined community can- 
 not be appeased if, in answer to its demand why nothing was done, their 
 representatives reply that the time was too short for careful consideration. 
 The history of the American people shows that they have endured great 
 wrongs with patient submission rather than resist oppressive laws other than 
 by authorized methods. But the instinct of self-preservation is strong in 
 communities as well as in individuals. If the wisdom and good will of this 
 Legislature do not unite to save the State from the evils of riparianism, the 
 people will condemn at the ballot-box all who openly oppose the irrigation 
 bills, and all who hypocritically pretend to favor them, but counsel or assist 
 in delay, which is tantamount to defeat. 
 
 S. F. Alta. 
 
 Move tliem^Up. 
 
 The overwhelming majorities by which the irrigation bills have been made 
 the special order for Monday afternoon in both houses, gives gratifying evi- 
 dence that the Legislature realizes the great necessity of the hour. To-day 
 the irrigation interests of the State are in a condition of paralysis, due to the 
 uncertainty of the law of water rights, and to the possibility that the law as 
 it stands may be construed to their destruction. If this condition of things 
 continues the ruin of property in Southern California, and the consequent 
 decimation of the population of that section, will soon have its natural effect 
 on the commercial pulse of the State. 
 
 The merchants and manufacturers of San Francisco are accustomed to 
 tracing the causes of activity or stagnation of business. They know that the 
 development of Southern California is greatly to their interest, and that the 
 arrest of irrigation and the resulting destruction of property can only be 
 productive of loss to the business of this city. It is not to be denied that 
 such a state of affairs is the inevitable consequence of a failure by this Legis- 
 lature to come to the rescue. 
 
 The irrigators know what they need. They assembled in convention at 
 Riverside and Fresno, and agreed upon the outlines of a plan for their salva- 
 tion. This plan was crystallized into the form of several bills, which, after 
 having received thoughtful consideration by men of practical experience and 
 learning, and modified so as to avoid objections made from time to time, are 
 now being urged in the Legislature. The loss to San Francisco by the failure 
 
to pass these bills cannot be estimated. No business man can aflford to risk 
 the experiment of trying to get along two years more without this legislation. 
 This Legislature is about to make history of it>elf upon this subject. 
 
 The journals of the Senate and Assembly will become interesting reading 
 to this mercantile community when Southern California shall have become 
 a burden to the State by the failure of these measures. The San Francisco 
 delegation should not be dilatory in their support. Immediate action is 
 what is wanted. The session is nearly ended, and the bills should be ad- 
 vanced to the place to which their importance entitles them —second to none. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 The Riparian Sack. 
 
 The Sacramento Capital of February 8th, says: 
 
 " The Irrigation Committeemen have been hard at work all the week, but it 
 is very much feared that the riparian men have captured the Legislature, as it 
 is known they are spending a great deal of money to defeat the most import- 
 ant measures that have come before the body during this session. It is a 
 well known fact that the appropriators have but little or no money to spend 
 on the fight, as they represent the bone and vim of the southern part of the 
 State, while the large landholders are backed by some of the wealthiest cor- 
 porations in tbe State. If the bill does not pass, the people may rest assured 
 that money defeated it. 
 
 We do not believe that the riparian sack has done the work which our con- 
 temporary apprehends it has. The members of this Legislature can better 
 aflford to defeat the will of the people on any other question than that of irri- 
 gation. The legislator who now puts himself on record as opposed to irriga- 
 tion in California will have hanged a millstone about his neck, which will 
 grow heavier as time and experience prove that he either had not the brains 
 or the honesty to support measures upon which the material welfare of the 
 State depends as upon no other issue that has ever been submitted to a legis- 
 lative body in this State. There are undoubtedly men in the Legislature who 
 would sell anything they have on earth for coin, but we are not yet prepared 
 to believe that a majority of this legislative body will deliberately sell the 
 interests of the people to a few land-grabbing monopolists and cattle kings, 
 who will, if this Legislature sells them the power, own the waters of natural 
 streams in California, and at their pleasure can change the fruitful and bloom- 
 ing valleys back into desert stock ranges or exact tribute from the humble 
 tillers of the soil whose farms and homes depend for existence upon the right 
 to use the surplus waters that under the common law belong to the last man 
 on the stream. It is no idle threat when we say that every man in this Leg- 
 islature who falls down before the golden calf of the riparian monopolists 
 will be a marked man in politics in this State. He who^betrays the cause of 
 the people in this fight is essentially either a fool or a knave, and the chances 
 are a hundred to one he is the latter. The situation is so keenly defined 
 
69 
 
 that a legislator, thoiigh lie be a fool, need not err therein. It is simply a 
 question of right, justice and the State's welfare against the corrupting power 
 of wealth and greed. 
 
 The Fresno Expositor. 
 
 The Great Issue. 
 
 The San Francisco industries languish. Her merchants complain of hard 
 times. The Chamber of Commerce and Board of Trade have appointed com- 
 mittees to examine into and report on the causes of the present depression. 
 The committees have not reported, and when they do we doubt whether they 
 will arrive at the actual facts. But to one who does not belong to the com- 
 mittee, and is not a member of either of the great city's Commercial Boards, 
 the causes of the dullness of trade are very apparent. The stoppage of the 
 mines under the debris decisions and the natural and gradual decline of that 
 business has done much to reduce business in San Francisco, as all of the 
 supplies of the miners are purchased there. The completion of the several 
 trans-continental railroads is another cause. The Northern Pacific has taken 
 away the Oregon and Washington Territory trade, while the Southern Pacific 
 has changed that of the southern counties to the East. These are the main 
 causes of the stagnation in business at the Bay. But these depressions will 
 be only temporary if San Franciscans are true to their interests. Let them 
 rally to the aid of the farmers in San Joaquin Valley, and urge the passage of 
 needed irrigation laws, and they will soon see an empire built up that will 
 cause San Francisco to flourish as it never has before. The San Francisco 
 *'Alta"h*is a true conception of the situation. In a late editorial it says to 
 its readers: "Every business interest that San Francisco possesses, whether 
 commercial or manufacturing, will be benefited by the removal of the obsta- 
 cles to the cultivation of the great interior valleys and their increase of wealth 
 and population. San Francisco is now suffering from lack of markets, and 
 those noble valleys, the Sacramento and San Joaquin, are the. places where 
 they may be built up — markets at our own door — markets which Chicago and 
 St. Louis can never take away from us. Combined, the Sacramento and San 
 Joaquin vallejs have an area as large as Ireland, or about 32,000 square miles. 
 No similar area in the world is capable of supporting a denser population than 
 these valleys, and if they were to-day peopled as closely as the nation of 
 Belgium, they would contain 15,000,000 souls. This is sufficient to show 
 what a commercial empire we have right here at our doors if we develop it 
 rightly. It would be preposterous folly for San Francisco to fail to do any- 
 thing that lies in her power to aid in the multiplication of small farms in 
 the valleys and the bringing of them to a high state of cultivation; while to 
 offer direct opposition to anything that tends in this direction is simply- 
 suicidal." 
 
70 
 
 Sunday Morning Capital CSacramento). 
 
 The Same Old Opposition. 
 
 The opposition to irrigation and to the pending measures concerning it 
 before the Legislature, comes from the same source as the opposition to the 
 "No Fence Laws" when under discussion some years since by the same 
 body. The owners of the great cattle ranches of the upper San Joaquin 
 valley all fought the "No Fence Laws" just as they are to-day fighting the 
 proposed "Irrigation Legislation." They are using the same general argu- 
 ment they used then, namely, the damage they assert would result to the 
 cattle business. Aud as a final parallelism in the contest the same argument 
 of a sound and true public policy, that which is the object of law to secure 
 and conserve, the greatest good to the greatest number, overcame this one 
 interest claim, and the "No Fence Law" was enacted just as a favoring 
 "Irrigation Law" should now be enacted. The three things which make a 
 State powerful, prosperous and enlightened are a great population, a great 
 aggregation of wealth, and the nearest practicable equable distribution of the 
 latter among the individuals of the population so that the extremes of material 
 condition shall not be the rule. It is the object of a true public policy to 
 secure these ends. California can never make either commerce or manu- 
 facture the leading interest of the State, for in these respects, great as are 
 our natural advantages, other countries and other States have far greater, and 
 in the race for supremacy have a lead which cannot be overcome. Agricul- 
 ture must then be the source from which must come the elements of our 
 greatness and prosperity, and our laws must be such as shall favor it in every 
 way possible. The amount of land available for agriculture is fixed so that- 
 the smaller individual holdings the greater the population that will occupy it, 
 is a truth which it requires no argument to demonstrate. The greater the net 
 yield of each acre the greater becomes the aggregation of wealth which is the 
 portion of the net yield not consumed. Small land holdings favor the greatest 
 possible net yield per acre, and from this, of course, the greatest possible accu- 
 mulation of wealth and directly the equable distribution of it. Therefore 
 should those branches of the agricultural industry be favored which conduce 
 to our small land holdings. The cattle-raising industry, as carried on in this- 
 State, requires large land holdings, and, of all agricultural industries, re- 
 quires the least manual labor and produces the smallest net return per acre. 
 The net return, of course, fixes the value of the land, and in the cattle in- 
 dustry fixes it necessarily very low. Cereal culture employs the labor of 
 several families, where only one man was required for stock-raising, and 
 multiplies many times the net return per acre, and of course makes the land 
 much more valuable. The "No Fence" law made cereal culture practicable 
 in localities where before it was only possible to engage in the stock-raising 
 ' industry, and to that extent has increased the material resources of the State. 
 Horticulture, or a diversified agricultural industry, will employ ten or even 
 more families where one is employed producing the cereals, and will give ten 
 and even twenty-five times the net return per acre, making the land propor- 
 
71 
 
 tionately more valuable. To express this argument roughly in a land formula, 
 a laud holding of 100 acres, cultivated horticulturally, will be the equivalent 
 in the population it will of necessity utilize, in its net return, and its abso- 
 lute monetary value, of 1000 acres cultivated in the cereals, or of 10,000 acres 
 employed in stock-raising. Can anyone gainsay but that the material condi- 
 tion of the people under the first-named condition is better than under either 
 of the last two? nor that there is in material condition any vast gulf in social 
 and intellectual life between individuals engaged in horticulture as exists 
 between the non-resident so-called " Cattle King " and the serf who tends 
 the flocks by night. Now, if these premises be true, it is incumbent on the 
 State to foster horticulture and a diversified agriculture, even if thereby the 
 interests of the stock-raisers and cereal farmers are affected injuriously. No 
 measure is more calculated to serve this end than favoring irrigation legisla- 
 tion, which is even more desirable in that it will be a positive benefit to 
 cereal culture and to the stock business. So far as wheat is concerned, the 
 experiment has been tried, and land that would return only ten to fifteen, 
 bushels an acre, with uncertainty even as to that much from year to year, 
 irrigated yields sixty with certainty of the maturing every crop, For the 
 stock business with irrigation it will be possible to grow alfalfa, which can* 
 not under our natural conditions be done except in a few favored localities, 
 thus securing the greatest practicable economy of land in that branch. But 
 it is in horticulture and the diversified agriculture we find the greatest rela- 
 tive and absolute gain with irrigation. Its possibilities can be seen within 
 thirty miles of Sacramento, in the vicinity of Newcastle, where land that 
 ten years ago was considered valueless, or nominally held at $2.50 per acre, is 
 now worth from $100 and upwards an acre, is producing a net annual income 
 of from $100 to $300 an acre. 
 
 The Issue of the Hour— Lucid Letter of J. Campbell Shorb— Law of Ri- 
 parian Ownership vs. the Doctrine of Appropriation. 
 
 Arfifniuent in Favor of the Appropriation Theory — The Tito Systemg of 
 Usin£^ Water Contrasted— Reasons and Rhetoric. 
 
 [The following letter from a well-known public man was written to a 
 State Senator. It was not intended for publication. It was printed in the 
 Sacramento Eecord- Union, from which the Times copies it, as an intelligent, 
 though somewhat ^florid, discussion of a subject of vital interest to the 
 people of Southern California. As we understand it, the views here ex- 
 pressed are substantially those also entertained by J. De Barth Shorb, who 
 is now at Sacramento, laboring to procure legislation in this liue on the ir- 
 rigation subject. — Ed. Times.] 
 
 San Francisco, February 2, 1885. 
 
 My Dear Friend — For your kind and very prompt favor of Saturday, 
 please accept my sincere thanks. Your letter struck a very high key note^ 
 which it sustained to the end. * * * » 
 
72 
 
 The ■wisdom which consigned the shoemaker to his last has never been 
 questioned, never will be, and the doctor who sticks to his pills may attain 
 spheres of eminence and success denied to his versatile but not less honest 
 and sensible brother. Condemned by painful and long-continued illness to 
 abandon the active duties and labors of my professional life, my search for 
 health was mostly spent in the northern portion of this great State, and last 
 March I had the luck and pleasure of attending the opening of the first formal 
 convention of the State Irrigation Society, which met at Kiverside, in San 
 Bernardino county, in March last. 
 
 I don't know if business or pleasure ever took you to Riverside; if not 
 I trust the latter soon may, for business might hurry you away without giv- 
 ing you leisure to realize what Riverside really means, the beauty it com- 
 prehends, the wealth it represents, the homes it has furnished, the comfort 
 and happiness it suggests, its future— but here I halt! The sword of Dam- 
 ocles hangs over its head and its hilt is in the hands of a riparian owner. 
 
 But let me return to the convention! I met men there from the East 
 -and West, from the North, and, of course, from the South, and a more 
 thoroughly practical, devoted, intelligent, honest and unselfish body of men 
 I never saw congregated in my life. 
 
 Knowing there were antagonistic elements and interests there, I marveled 
 at the harmony which prevailed from the beginning to the end of the chap- 
 ter. The evidence of combustion that friction is almost sure to develop 
 was nowhere present. 
 
 Now long anterior to this time, years ago I had the honor on invitation, 
 of delivering the opening address of "The Southern Horticultural Society" 
 in Los Angeles. 
 
 I called attention even then to the absolute necessity of irrigation and the 
 enactment of wise and satisfactory legislation as vital elements of the pros- 
 perity of the State of California, particularly the southern portion of it, 
 where mighty tracts of noble land only waited the advent of owners and 
 water to far surpass the wildest dreams of the enthusiasts in the marvelous 
 returns they would make to the planters. I demonstrated that but for the 
 wisdon: which inspired, and the patriotism and industry which built the 
 stupendous aqueducts which carried the fertilizing waters through all the 
 diameter of the historic plain to the north of the Persian Gulf, the countless 
 millions which filled the territory between the Tigris and Euphrates could 
 never have been supported for a day. The pioneers found here, in the 
 farthest West in Califoruia, conditions which prevailed in the farthest East 
 "when the world was young," conditions which forced primeval man to do 
 -exactly what we are doing to-day, conditions which inspired the building of 
 those canals whose melancholy ruins the traveler finds even now on the 
 desert waste between the rivers, once the radiant center of a polished race 
 and brilliant civilization! 
 
 My study of irrigation commenced thus years ago, and has never been 
 interrupted. You see now, my dear friend, I'm no babbling neophyte in the 
 
73 
 
 department of science, and that when, in that dogmatic way I said, the 
 other day, "the riparian law won't do," I had reason for the faith that was 
 within me! Besides, I know of no law, human or divine, which forbids the 
 cultivated physician from prosecuting the study and investigation of a 
 science like philanthropy, a science, anyhow, that lies so close to his own, a 
 science of which medicine is but a single rung in the ladder, a rung which 
 does not mean a rest, but an invitation and inspiration to climb, which the 
 physician must accept if he would reach that height and distinction attained 
 by Abou Ben Adhem, when, disappointed with the angel's answer, he won 
 the goal at last when he told Him, " Write me, then, as one that loved his 
 fellow-men." 
 
 I repeat, when I spoke so boldly, so presumptuously, of the riparian law, 
 it was not the fluffy assertion of a superficial enthusiast, the vain utterance 
 of a selfish and empty mind, or the dogmatic expression of ignorance, preju- 
 dice or injustice. 
 
 The Supreme Court of the State of California is an august body of learned 
 and just men. This Court has enunciated its views on the question of 
 water rights. They are in absolute antagonism to my own views, and yet I 
 claim and know that I reached my conclusions as honestly and conscien- 
 tiously as they did, and yet with a consciousness of demerit which does not 
 preclude hope. I calmly wait the relentless arbitration of the future to de- 
 clare whose conclusions are right at last. 
 
 This Court expounds, explains, and declares the law for us. Now, law is 
 or ought to be, in its sharpest and most crystallized expression, the system- 
 atic recorded decrees of common sense and exact justice; and when I find 
 a law, no matter how high its origin, no matter how learned Uie man or men 
 who enunciate it, no matter how fair it seems, how sweet it reads, no matter 
 how buttressed by precedent and reverenced by age, if this law is a violation 
 of common sense and an outrage on justice, it is no law, and sooner or later 
 it will be wiped out of existence. 
 
 Let us quietly contemplate these two problems that now seem enveloped in 
 such dense obscurity, dividing ideas and opinions in reference to the subject 
 of irrigation. 
 
 I know not if you run a mine, own an orchard or vineyard, or own a flock 
 of sheep or cattle, and I'm quite sure that such would not be found in the in- 
 ventory of my realty. My home is where I hang my hat, and this refreshing 
 freedom from every possession that might embarass temperate, careful and 
 unselfish investigation, is an excellent condition and preparation for wise 
 judgment and just conclusions. 
 
 In the first place, the two interests now opposed are the riparian or English 
 idea, and the appropriation or the American idea and interest. The first, pure 
 and simple, ordains that as legislator, judge or citizen, we must accept or 
 adopt the laws in this direction, and that ownership of waters in a natural 
 stream is vested in the man who owns the land on one or both sides, and that 
 this partial occupancy makes him the unqualified owner of all the water. 
 
74 
 
 which must be kept in the natural channel and not diverted from it for th^ 
 good of his neighbor below, no matter how much he wastes and the other 
 wants. 
 
 All right! That he has some interest and property in the water, no one 
 will deoy, but how much? That is the vital question. Now we will stop just 
 here for a moment and ask to what end and purpose does the riparian owner 
 devote his water? To his cattle and sheep, horses, mules and pigs — in a 
 word, to his stock. 
 
 He came upon the stream when there was no other man in sight, aud 
 bought largely in land on either side of the stream and built himself a home. 
 He came or went there in the spring. The stream was running bank high. 
 The spring wanes, the summer comes and drags its slow length along, and 
 autumn, hot and dry and dusty, arrives. The stream is running, but it is 
 low and brackish, evidently unhealthy, for his cattle, drinking it, sicken and 
 die. 
 
 But let us suppose that it is running still full. He needs other water for 
 himself and family. He bores a well,* and up from subterranean reservoirs 
 comes water in endless quantities, cold, clear and healthy. It runs to waste 
 on the ground; millions of gallons sink back into the earth and disappear for- 
 ever! Not a blade of new grass marks its advent or disappearance. 
 
 Now comes another man below his lines of possession on the streanck 
 and buys a large tract of land. He takes water where it is running to wasta 
 — of no benefit to anybody— and carries it out on the land, and further and 
 further he carries it as long as it will run or flow. The laud, before sterile 
 or unproductive for want of water, manifests its real strength a ad vigor, and 
 the fields grow green with plentiful promise — orchards aud vineyards spring 
 up like magic, homes multiply, towns, aye., almost cities, grow up like Alad» 
 din's palace, in a single night; temples, dedicated to the worship of the ever- 
 lasting God, appear; school houses are built; streets and roads are completed; 
 stores and warehouses are being rapidly pushed to completion, and the 
 gloomy, uninviting, unproductive desert blossoms with life and vigor, prom- 
 ise and plenty ! 
 
 But we will go back for a moment to the spot where the appropriation man 
 began his lonely enterprise. He was working to feed men, women and chil- 
 dren, and not cattle ! He was working for humanity, and not for droves of 
 horses and mules. The cattle are still there, roaming upon a thousand hills, 
 sleek, fat and healthy. But where is our appropriation man, the pioneer? 
 Out on the little green knoll, surrounded by a white picket fence, sleeps hi& 
 last sleep, the pioneer who began this work of progress and civilization, and 
 his monument is seen-and his epitaph is read in the cities, on the plain, in 
 the homes and hearts of the people who swarm over this once lonesome and 
 desolate desert. He had worked early and late in the mists of the morning 
 and beneaih the merciless rays of an almost tropical sun; he had worked in 
 the mud aud filth to dig his ditch and build his home, living on the coarsest 
 fare and drinking deadly water, with the fatal malaria rising like a foul steam. 
 
76 
 
 all around him from the earth he had removed, and the end had come at last! 
 Why, a bronze man, with heart of steel, lungs of brass and ribs of iron could 
 not have delved and slaved and starved without wrecking his strength and 
 health and life at last! ^ * * * * 
 
 And now comes the riparian owner, when all this scheme of progress is on 
 its march to marvelous consummation, with a shotgun in one hand and the 
 judgment of the Supreme Court of California in the other, and tells the suc- 
 cessors of the pioneer dead and gone: "Close up that ditch, and turn the water 
 back into its natural channel." 
 
 Aye! turn it back, and let the homes built upon it perish from the earth. 
 Let the cities fall to ruin, the towns disappear; and let the weeds grow again 
 in the streets and roads. Let bankrupt and broken-hearted men, and swarms 
 of women and children, once so prosperous and happy in their homes, join 
 their beggar husbands and seek other homes and places for the future! 
 
 Aye! turn it back, and let the magnificent illustration of peace and pro- 
 gress and plenty be transformed once more into a howling wilderness, whose 
 silence and solitude shall be broken only by the lowing of the herds upon 
 the hills, the scream of the coyote ranging for food, and the sullen maledic- 
 tions of desperate men who had a right to justice. ** * * In the 
 name of Almighty God, shall this fearful wrong be done? In the awful 
 name of Justice, shall this nameless sacrifice be consummated in her very 
 temple, hard by the blazing lights and amid the perfumed censers of her 
 holiest tabernacle? In the name of Humanity, shall this modern illustra- 
 tration of the " Slaughter of the Innocents " be allowed to blur and blot and 
 foul the fair record of this State forever? It cannot, it must not, it shall not 
 be done, for the people will not allow it to be done! 
 
 Have I overdrawn the picture my dear friend? Have I painted in too 
 tragical colors the truth of this portentious crisis? 
 
 I make no attempt to direct your views or bias your judgment, for I know 
 it would be useless; but I am your friend and want to remain your friend, 
 and will believe whatever is done by you will be done as your conscience 
 directs. But I beg you now solemnly, as I would beg my brother, make no 
 mistake here! 
 
 Eight on this problem, your future cannot be assailed. You will stand 
 before this people by far the most powerful man in the State. You will be 
 honored, loved and respected by thousands whose names you will perhaps 
 never know, and when that hour comes, that awful hour that comes soon or 
 late to all men born of woman, the hour of death, it will be full of perfect 
 assurance to you, full of honor and glory, full of the perfect assurance of 
 speedy and eternal reward, of which none is higher than ^that exhaled from 
 the record of one '* who loved his felloe-men." 
 
 Your friend faithfully, J. Campbell Shoes. 
 
76 
 
 The Colusa Sun. 
 
 Irrigation Ijegislation. 
 
 We print several articles on the first page on the subject of the proposed irri- 
 gation laws; but what subject can be of greater importance? We have been 
 bending all our efforts for the last two months towards tr3uug to get some 
 laws by which it may become possible for the people to take water from the 
 streams to be used for irrigation. This would seem at first blush to be an 
 easy job, but it is an Herculean task. Many conflicting interests were to 
 be comprised, and some could not be. There are men interested in having 
 thousands of square miles of land remain a range for cattle; then there are 
 others who hold lands at the sinks of certain rivers, who will consent to the 
 passage of no law on the subject. The common law of England gives the 
 whole volume of the stream to the man the lowest down, and that man is in 
 a position to blackmail all above him at will. Then " low down " claims are 
 millions, nay billions of money, if the owners are allowed to dictate their 
 own terms. The Fresno Convention tried to compromise with these owners, 
 but could not. Then the "sack " came. Men who had favored irrigation 
 became impressed with the idea that the qtiestion was so complicated that 
 nothing could be done. Newspapers that professed to believe in irrigation 
 could find nothing but lunacy in any section of the bill proposed by those 
 who had experience with the question. Some progress has been made; the 
 committee of the assembly on Wednesday evening unanimously recom- 
 mended the following bill for passage: 
 
 Section 1. Section 1422 of the Civil Code of this State is hereby repealed. 
 
 Section 2. Section 1422, that part of the common law of England, which 
 relates to riparian rights, is hereby declared to be repugnant and inconsistent 
 with the climate, topography, physical condition, and necessities of the peo- 
 ple of this State, and the laws thereof, concerning the appropriation of water 
 for purposes of irrigation, and to that extent forms no part of such laws; and 
 the use of water for said purposes of irrigation is a public use. 
 
 Section 3. Section 1423: Any person who deems himself damnified by the 
 exercise of the right of appropriation of water, may bring suit to recover dam- 
 ages for the injury sustained. 
 
 Section 4. Section 1424: Any person contemplating the appropriation of 
 water for irrigation purposes may acquire, in advance or at any other time, 
 property necessary or proper for such appropriation, and for the full and 
 complete execution and enjoyment of such appropriation, by proceedings 
 under Title VII of Part III of the Code of Civil Procedure of this State, en- 
 titled "Eminent Domain." 
 
 Sections. Section 1425: All exigting rights of appropriators are hereby 
 confirmed. 
 
 This is the only bill that has any reference whatever to persons otitside of 
 those who appropriate and use water. The two bills which are to follow, 
 and which are longer than this, refer exclusively tQ the regulation of matters 
 
77 
 
 between irrigators. There must be either a right to appropriate water or no 
 right. If given, it must be in plain, unmistakable language. 
 
 Sacramento Sunday Capital. 
 
 A F«w^ Reasons— Some Untold Facts About Irrig^ation, Etc.— How Irriga- 
 tion Acts on Desert Land— Not Necessary to Keep up a Flow. 
 
 The discussion of irrigation in its relation to the industrial interests of the 
 State, has been generally with reference to the artificial application of water 
 to the surface soil as taking the place of the natural precipitation of rain ta 
 the extent of giving both surety and increase of production. It has been deal- 
 ing with direct results overlooking certain indirect ones as being either of rela- 
 tively little importance, or as in the case of influence on the navigable streams, 
 assuming that irrigation may be carried on to that extent that an injury re- 
 sults in part at least counter-balancing some of the direct benefit. It is the 
 purpose of this to show that the indirect results are as desirable as the direct, 
 that they are of great importance, aud that no injury can result to the naviga- 
 ble rivers no matter how extensively irrigation may be carried on. Going 
 into the foot-hills and examining the old mining canals and ditches now util- 
 ized for irrigation, it will be generally noticed that a very large proportion of 
 the water taken in at the head, in some Ciises as much as one-half disappears 
 by precolation into the ground through which the ditch passes. That this 
 water is not lost is evidenced by the large number of springs, the flow of 
 which is entirely from this water; for let no water be running in the ditch for 
 a few days and these springs either run dry entirely, or flow very much 
 Bmaller streams. Wells under the line of the ditches become dry under simi- 
 lar circumstances. It is from springs and wells under these conditions that 
 
 A LARGE PORTION 
 
 Of the water used for household purposes in the foot-hills is obtained, so 
 should the taking of water into tbese ditches be stopped it would not alone 
 take away almost the entire productive capacity of the soil, but would strike 
 at life itself, making necessary the abandonment of many homes through the 
 impossibility of great difficulty of obtaining water. This is no fanciful pic- 
 ture of imagination but a realizible fact under the conditions given. Passing 
 from the consideration of irrigation in the foot-hills to it on the plains of the 
 great valleys, similar indirect results are observable. On the higher edge of 
 these plains, extending from the hills several miles out into the valley, the 
 soil is more often than otherwise underlied with porous strata. The soil of the 
 rest of these great valley plains seems to rest on a hard pan impervious to 
 water. This in some places is only a few inches below the surface, in others 
 is a hundred feet, and in slope is toward the main river channel depression, 
 making the flow of the underground waters take that direction. All of the 
 mountain streams in crossing tbat part of the valley underlied with porous 
 strata, lose a fixed amount of water, different with different streams, of which 
 
78 
 
 the greater portion most get under the hard pan referred to and find its way 
 to the ocean through subterranean channels. This loss is independent of 
 the season of the year, being as great in winter as in summer, and in some 
 streams takes the entire flow except in the times of the 
 
 HEAVIEST FKESHETS. 
 
 Another loss of flow ensues after this belt of percolation is passed, through 
 evaporation, which is very large during the dry season, and between both 
 these losses it is safe to say that not ovc r one-half of the water in the streams 
 when they come into the valley, reaches the main navigable river channels 
 during that portion of the year between May 1st and January 1st. This, too, 
 is their only source of supply under conditions of no irrigation, as the drain- 
 age from the arid plains whose only water supply is from a light rainfall, is 
 practically nothing. Consider now the results of the most effective and com- 
 plete irrigation in this same section of country. The water of the streams is 
 diverted where they leave the hills, into ditches and canals from which direct 
 percolation and evaporation are at a minimum, and distributed over the sur- 
 face through smaller channels. A comparatively small portion of the water 
 is lost by percolation into the porous belt at the edge of the foot-hills, and 
 the flow can practically be considered as divided into three portions, the 
 relatfve ratio of which is inconsequential, the first is evaporated directly 
 from the surface, the second supplies the needs of vegetation, and the third 
 remains in the soil above the impervious strata referred to till what is 
 termed the point of saturation is reached when this third portion drains into 
 the main river channel. This third portion and its effects are of very great 
 importance, and should not be overlooked in considering the problem of 
 irrigation. In Kern county under the line of, and several miles distant from 
 what is known as the Galloway canal in the formerly 
 
 ARID PLAINS, 
 
 Where it was necessary to sink wells from eighty to one hundred feet to get 
 water, it is now obtainable at depths from ten to twenty-five feet. Alfalfa 
 once well rooted can be grown under these conditions without direct irrigation. 
 In Fresno county a like condition is observable, water is found at twenty feet 
 where it was necessary to dig one hundred formerly, and in some localities so 
 saturated has the soil become as to almost convert the barren desert into a 
 Bwamp, tules growing on the uplands. This saturation is not dependent on a 
 continuous flow of water in the irrigation canals, as it will continue during the 
 months of the dry season in which there is no water in these channels. The 
 drainage from these saturated soils directly into the main river channels has 
 already been referred to. This in positive benefit to the navigability of the 
 rivers is much more than the equivalent of the water withdrawn from the 
 tributaries, even if the quantity thus returned is not fully equal or in excess. 
 The water is diverted from the tributaries in the season of the year when most 
 loaded with sediment, and when it takes only a surplus flow from the main 
 rivers; it returns cleared of sediment, and during that part of the year when 
 the rivers are at the 
 
79 
 
 LOW WATER STAGES. 
 
 Another practical point has also been determined that should have some 
 effect at least in determining the sincerity of the existing opposition to irri- 
 gation, namely, that the natural average of the dry season flow of any of the 
 tributary streams in the lower reaches of their channels can be diverted far 
 above and delivered at the highest point of the riparian lands of these lower 
 channels, the water that would be lost in the natural flow of the streams be- 
 tween the hills and the aforesaid lower portion of their channels, serving to 
 irrigate and render fruitful the uplands. Can any riparianist claiming dam- 
 age on account of the taking away of water from his land, honestly assert 
 that the same water is more valuable to him at the lowest point of his land 
 than at the highest? 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 Fail Not At Your Peril, 
 
 Information reaches ua that the riparianists have opened their batteries 
 with full force against irrigation legislation. Emissaries of the land and 
 water grabbers are at Sacramento doing their best to obstruct legislation on 
 this important subject, and are continually endeavoring to burlesque the 
 efforts of the Irrigation Committee. Mercenary newspapers have also been 
 secured to devote their efforts to deride the great issue of Southern California. 
 The friends of irrigation must, therefore, be on the alert. They must write 
 and battle for the common good of the people. It is true that the demands 
 of the irrigators are so square, honest, necessary and just, that the Legislature 
 ought not to hesitate a moment about the matter, but pass the necessary laws 
 without delay. The sentiment throughout Southern California in favor of 
 just irrigation laws is too strong, too united and too determined to be misun- 
 derstood by the Solons at Sacramento. They want laws that will enable them 
 to divert the waters of the various streams for irrigation, and which will pro- 
 tect them in the enjoyment of these rights. Certainly the representatives 
 of the people are not going to lay back and say that they cannot do anything 
 for the fostering of this great interest, nor do we think they will be foolish 
 enough to put themselves on record as being in favor of letting those who 
 chance to own lands along a stream to say that the water of that stream must 
 continue to flow for all time past their lands, undiminished in quantity and 
 undisturbed in quality. This is the English riparian law, which the Supreme 
 Court has recently decided, applies to this State. We call upon the Legisla- 
 ture to be true to the people, and to work for the best interests of their State. 
 Pass the irrigation laws suggested by the committee, and thus restore confi- 
 dence throughout Southern California. If you would aid the prosperity of 
 your State, do not hesitate — act promptly and earnestly in behalf of the 
 irrigators. It is the paramount issue of the southern half of the State — all 
 other matters pale into insignificance when compared with this great ques- 
 tion. Gentlemen of the Legislature, falter not in your duty in this matter, 
 6 
 
80 
 
 Colusa Maxwell Star. 
 
 A Prosperous Country, 
 
 Our trip to Fresno as a delegate to the State Irrigation Convention, was- 
 attended by scenes and incidents well calculated to inspire new courage in the 
 fight which we have made from the beginning, namely: For the overthrow 
 of old ideas, usages and customs, and place in their stead the progressive 
 system, of which irrigation is at the basis, and which has become a rule of 
 the great local commonwealth of Southern California. The trip was one of 
 which it may be truly said one passes from an old civilization into the new — 
 from a dull, languid monotony into thriving, prosperous, and happy com- 
 munities. Prosperity, as it always does, has drawn from other and less 
 profitable fields, talent, capital, and energy. Indeed, the array of local taU 
 ent which found expression in the Convention is as brilliant as may be found 
 in the councils of the State. 
 
 The social conditions of that section are healthy, while the physical, in all 
 respects, are of the most perfect order. The products find a ready market at 
 figures always ranging far above the cost of production. Great wineries have 
 sprung up which send out hundreds of thousands of gallons of wine annu- 
 ally, while thousands of tons of grapes and raisins are put on the market every 
 fall. Here, too, we find the home of the wealthy. Oakland has no attrac- 
 tions for the wealthy citizen of Fresno. The extraordinary healthfulness of 
 that section is a stern rebuke to those of this section who oppose irrigation 
 on the grounds of it being the cause of malaria or sickness. We have always 
 looked upon that theory as absurd, but now, we brand it as the theory of 
 those who never search for causes. If it is true that irrigation produces 
 malaria, then every section where irrigation prevails is malarious. In the 
 southern counties, in a warm climate, where irrigation is universal, we find 
 the general health of the people is much better than on the dry Colusa 
 plains. Hence, the theory is groundless. 
 
 But there is an important feature of irrigation to which we wish to call 
 attention, and that is that the surface water in the irrigation districts of 
 Fresno has, in some places, raised to the surface, and as unreasonable as it 
 may seem, in places where prior to irrigation it was twenty feet to surface 
 water, now a system of drainage is becoming necessary. It is a demon- 
 strated fact that each year less water is required for irrigation purposes, a 
 fact that figures largely in the size of the proposed canal through this coun- 
 try, necessary to irrigate our lands for all time. We believe that a much 
 smaller canal than has been proposed would furnish all the water that will be 
 required. 
 
 In conclusion, we tender our thanks to the citizens of Fresno for the very 
 warm reception and kind treatment which we received at their hands. A 
 more public-spirited, courteous and open-handed people we have never met, 
 and we tender our congratulations to them on their good fortune of being 
 citizens of a county that is among the most progressive in the State. 
 
81 
 
 Resources of California. 
 
 Few understand clearly the necessary result of the application of the 
 English doctrine of riparian ownership. It is, that no person, not even 
 a riparian owner, can remove one drop of the water of a stream /or irrigfa- 
 iion. The common law did not sanction irrigation — nothing but domestic 
 use. It follows that all water must run to waste, under this law. When a 
 man advocates riparianism, he advocates the absolute non-use of water for 
 irrigation*. 
 
 If it should come to pass that this pernicious and fatal principle shall come 
 to be enforced in this State to its full extent, the voice of the people will be 
 heard at the doors of this Capitol in tones of stern command. They will deny 
 to the tribunals which they have constituted the power to maim or destroy 
 their resources. They will crush the accursed doctrine, and with it those who 
 stand under it. 
 
 But we believe that the intelligence and honesty of this legislature will 
 repudiate every principle of the English common law which conflicts with the 
 right of appropriation. If the water is to be utilized for irrigation, there is no 
 reason for hesitation in determining by whom. By the owner of the banks 
 of the stream? Why? What has he done, that he should have it? Let jus- 
 tice be done to the appropriator. To quote from Justice Field's decision in a 
 leading water case, in which the riparian doctrine is rejected and the right of 
 appropriation maintained: "He who first connects his own labor with prop- 
 erty thus situated and open to general exploration does, in natural justice, 
 acquire a better right to its use and enjoyment than others who have not given 
 such labor." 
 
 Who are the riparianists who are raising the hue and cry of "stop thief" 
 through their organ at Sacramento? So far as heard from, although they are 
 making themselves very active, the roll-call of their noble army carries but 
 two names, one from Tulare and one from Kern, both of which have been 
 represented before the irrigation committees by attorneys. A distinction 
 must be made between the terms "riparianist " and "riparian owner." An 
 * ' riparian owner ' ' may be defined as one who owns land by or through 
 which flows a natural stream or water-course. A " riparianist " is one who 
 wishes to make it the law of the land that a riparian owner is entitled to the 
 undiminished flow of the water-course by or through his land — as under the 
 common law of England. There are several riparianists who are not riparian 
 owners. There are two riparian owners who are not riparianists. Hundreds 
 of riparian owners, farming by irrigation, obtain their water by virtue of the 
 laws authorizing its appropriation. They are in favor of recognizing the 
 validity of those laws, because, being now satisfied with the rights acquired 
 by their appropriations, they believe, and truly, too, that under the common 
 law theory, the privilege of taking water for irrigation will be lost to them. 
 
 There is not a riparian owner who irrigates south of Lathrop who is not 
 an appropriator. Many of them are actually represented by the committee 
 from the Fresno and Riverside Irrigation Conventions, and all are anti- 
 riparianists. 
 
82 
 
 They set a much greater valuation upon their vested rights as appropria- 
 tors than as riparian owners. 
 
 The riparianists beseech the Legislature to " go slow " on the irrigation 
 question. 
 
 This recalls Joe Jeflferson's Jiip Van Winkle. While under the encouraging 
 influence ot " Schnapps," Hip was asked what he would do if Mrs. Van Win- 
 kle were drowning, and should cry out to him, " Come and save me, Eip!" 
 To which he replied, "If Mrs. Van Winkle were drowning, and she said to 
 me, 'Rip, come and save me!' I would say to her, 'Mrs. Van Winkle, I will 
 yust go home and tink about dat.' " 
 
 The people from Stockton to San Diego are crying to this Legislature to 
 save them from riparianism. 
 
 Will the Legislature " go home and tink about it?" 
 
 It is well to consider well before legislating, but it is to be hoped that this 
 will be done before going home. 
 
 San Francisco Call. 
 
 Passed the Assembly. 
 
 The Assembly has passed bill No. 171, repealing the common law of Eng- 
 land in as far as it guarantees riparian owners any rights in this State, and 
 bill No. 170, providing for the diversion of water and the adjudication of 
 water rights. If the Senate passes these bills the problem of irrigation will 
 be placed before the people for practical solution. The Legislative Committee 
 on Irrigation, to whose steady and intelligent work the passage of the bills 
 in the Assembly is largely due, does not claim to have devised a perfect sys- 
 tem of irrigation. They have presented the system which seems the best, 
 and which may be perfected as practical use exposes imperfections. Of the 
 ultimate success of these measures there can be no doubt. The question is 
 whether the present Legislature will act or whether it will throw the decis- 
 ion into the next State campaign. The Republicans and Democrats are 
 evenly divided in the Senate, but as yet the issue has not become partisan. 
 If either party in the Senate throws its weight against irrigation it will be 
 held in the next campaign as having taken that side of the question. The 
 Legislative Irrigation Committee states that the cost of irrigation work now 
 constructed and in progress of construction is not less than $100,000,000. 
 The figures seem extravagant; but the works now approaching availability 
 will, no doubt, furnish means of irrigation for many hundred thousand acres, 
 and it is estimated that the water in one river, economically distributed, will 
 suffice to extend irrigation to millions of acres as yet untouched. Next to 
 the prohibition of Chinese immigration, this is the dominant issue in this 
 State. The Senate may put the work off two years, but in the end a measure 
 of such vital necessity will be carried. 
 
83 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 Act at Once. 
 
 It is understood that Senator McClure disclaims the paternity of the Irri- 
 gation Commission bill, the object of which is to postpone action upon irri- 
 gation for two years longer, and that he is a warm advocate of the bills 
 already passed the Assembly. In this coarse he is joined by other Republi- 
 can Senators. This is an emphatic contradiction of the absurd assertion 
 wKJch has been made that Republicans are making a party fight against 
 irrigation. 
 
 The destruction to speedy passage of these' measures comes mainly from 
 Democratic Senators, led by Cox, Cross and Spencer of Napa. It is simply 
 a criminal disregard of the public good for any Senator to prevent a vote on 
 these bills, even though he may be in good faith, opposed to their passage. 
 To press the Commission bill will involve the defeat of the Fresno bills. 
 The member who shall obstruct their immediate consideration and passage, 
 upon the ground that further investigation is necessary, will sooner or later 
 find himself cast into a political purgatory, where, apart from the din and 
 turmoil of contending parties, he may occupy his leisure with the study of 
 irrigation. This week must not pass without such action as will make the 
 final passage of the bill before adjournment a certainty. Take them up to- 
 morrow, and every succeeding day, until all are read a third time and passed. 
 Their importance outweighs all other proposed legislation. Imperative duty 
 to the people forbids another moment of delay. 
 
 The Colusa Sun. 
 
 Irrij^ation. 
 
 It is but fair to say that the -Sun, insists that the Sacramento River is in 
 no danger from any possible diversion of water for irrigation. — Sac. Bee. 
 
 Yes, that is just what we do say — that the Sacramento River is not in 
 danger in the least from the passage of the Irrigation bill. The fact is, there 
 are only two or three times during a winter that water cati be taken out of 
 the river for purposes of irrigation, and then only when the river is bank 
 full. We do say that if every drop of water in the river could be used on the 
 soil of this great valley for agricultural, horticultural and vinicultural pur- 
 poses, the State would be the richer for it. We are not fighting Sacramento 
 City, the Hog's Back, nor any interest of vital moment to the welfare of the 
 people, but we do want to see the thousands of poor men, who have small 
 farms, but no water, have a chance to use the very element that makes soil 
 productive. The Bee also says: 
 
 The question of drainage, we take it, must be, for all time to come, of 
 even more importance to this valley than navigation. 
 
 The italics are ours. We say irrigation is more important than naviga- 
 tion; you say — drainage. Think of the difference. Irrigation means pro- 
 ductiveness, wealth, happy homes, support of Sacramento, San Francisco, 
 
84 
 
 and a prosperous civilization. Drainage means — please tell us? For the 
 life of us we cannot see the logic of j'our reasoning. 
 
 Say this river is worth, annually, two million dollars to the counties 
 through which it flows, what would it be worth were its waters used freely 
 in every part of these counties where it is needed? Two millions? Three 
 times that much, and no paper knows that better than the Bee. But all the 
 water needed for irrigation purposes can be obtained at a time or times when 
 navigation is not affected in the least by it. 
 
 We have great respect lor vested rights, prescriptive rights, etc., but when 
 we see vast districts of rich soil valueless because of a lack of moisture, then 
 we go for a change. 
 
 Sacramento Bee. 
 
 The Doctrine of Riparian Rigfhts. 
 
 Sacramento, Feb. 7, 1885. 
 Editors Bee — Last night I was before the Senate Committee on Irrigation, 
 and I was surprised to find men in attendance there who were opposed to 
 the diversion of water from streams for irrigating or any other purpose, in- 
 sisting on riparian rights, as defined in the decision of the Supreme Court, 
 simply, I suppose, because they happen to have a bit of land upon the mar- 
 gin of some stream. It does seem strange that a man could be so selfish* 
 and have so little public spirit. Let us look at the practical working of said 
 decision, to-wit, that the water must run in its natural channel through (or 
 alongside of) plaintiff's land — undiminished. According to that decision, no 
 one has even riparian rights except the last man on the stream. That man, 
 though he might own but 40 acres, could cause hundreds of families and 
 millions of acres to suffer, while he, like the dog in the manger, could not 
 use the water, nor would allow any one else to do so without buying the 
 right of him at whatever he might choose to assess. VVith this state of 
 affairs, large communities, large interests, even the districts of large cities, 
 would be in the hands of and completely at the mercy of one contrary or 
 mercenary individual. I do hope that the Legislature will wipe out this 
 horrid doctrine by the enactment of good laws for the equal distribution of 
 the waters of the State among the citizens of the State. W. 
 
 Stockton Daily Independent. 
 
 Angry Irrinfators— Bogus Petition Agfainst Passingf Irrigfation Bills. 
 
 Mebced, February 21. — A letter from Senator Spencer was received to- 
 night by W. L. Ashe, in which the writer states that a petition has been re- 
 ceived by Assemblyman Goucher, from Merced, the signers thereof request- 
 ing that the irrigation bill now pending in the Assembly be opposed. The 
 news of the existence of such a petition created quite a commotion among 
 the citizens, to whom it was a genuine surprise. No one can be found who 
 
85 
 
 knows anything concerning it. Handbills have been posted, calling a mass 
 meeting to be held at ten o'clock Monday, to frame resolutions and a coun- 
 ter-petition. The sentiment among all classes is strongly tending to promote 
 the interests of the irrigators. 
 
 THE CULPEITS FOUND. 
 
 Mebced, Fe*bruary 21. — Since writing the above a number who signed the 
 anti-irrigation petition have been seen and several stated that they did not 
 understand the motive of the document. None, so far as known, are prop- 
 erty-holders. 
 
 Examiner. 
 
 The Irrig'ation Measures. 
 
 The snap of the party whip by the Republican State Central Committee is 
 not as effective as was anticipated, against the Fresno irrigation measures. 
 There are Republican Senators who will refuse to submit tamely to the or- 
 ders issued from Republican headquarters commanding them to sacrifice the 
 people's welfare. Even so strict a party man as Senator McClure, generally- 
 holding himself amenable to party discipline, will not, it; is said, forego his 
 views in favor of the prompt adoption of the Fresno Convention bills, even 
 at the mandate of the governing organization. Such independence, for the 
 common good, is worthy of praise. It is to be hoped that the untimely at- 
 tempt to make a party fight against these bills will be resented by other Sen- 
 ators with no less independence and good judgment. There is nothing in 
 any of the bills to make a party question of, nor is there anything in them 
 which a man of sound judgment can refuse to support. Should the proposed 
 measures become laws, running water will hereafter be devoted to irrigation, 
 and any one whose property is taken or injured will be indemnified. The 
 wisely extended and strong public feeling in favor of these bills arises, not 
 from the unreasonable and selfish demand of a fraction of the community, 
 but from a universal belief, pervading all classes and all sections, that they 
 form the best and only relief from the present deplorable condition of the 
 State water system. If the Republican policy shall induce any Senator to 
 antagonize this legislation, he will soon learn that opposition to the wish of a 
 whole people is destructive of political life, and that in some cases obedience 
 to party dictation is not encouraging to political ambition. 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 Irrigfation. 
 
 The Assembly has been spurred to do its duty on the irrigation matter, 
 and the whole series of Fresno bills — the useful ones as well as the orna- 
 mental — have been passed by overwhelming votes. ' They now go to the Sen- 
 ate, where they should consume little time, as the subject has been fully 
 
86 
 
 discussed and every member is or should be prepared to vote. The time is 
 short, but its is enough if Senators will curb their propensity to break out in 
 oratory. There is no call for speecbmaking. Nobody hears Senatorial ora- 
 tions; nobody wants to hear them. What is wanted is action — prompt, clear 
 and decisive. 
 
 If the Senate does its duty, the entire set of Fresno bills can be passed before 
 next Wednesday, and a practical start may be had in the business of supply- 
 ing water to the southern counties before April 1st. Some of the bills are not 
 perhaps all that every one could wish. Objections carrying some weight 
 may be urged to several of their provisions. But they are, on the whole, 
 good bills, framed in the right direction, and calculated to accomplish a use- 
 ful purpose. Their defects will be better discerned after they have been 
 tried in practice than they can be now. Two years' experience of irrigation 
 under State laws will suggest a number of desirable amendments which can 
 be passed at the next session of the Legislature in 1887. But in the mean- 
 time, people who want water will get it, and irrigators will adjust their neces- 
 sities and their action to the laws, such as ihey are. 
 
 It is beyond the power of the Legislature to interpret laws, and the de- 
 cision of the Supreme Court in the case of Miller vs. Haggin will, so long as 
 it is undisturbed, prove somewhat of a stumbling-block to irrigators who are 
 contending against the acquired rights of riparian owners. But it is not 
 unreasonable to expect that the almost unanimous expression of public opin- 
 ion which has been called out by the discussion in the Legislature will have 
 its effect on the minds of the Judges of the Supreme Court, and that, on the 
 rehearing, the practical inconveniences resulting from the late decision may 
 present themselves in so strong a light that it may be reversed. 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 If the statesmen in the State Senate who aspire to higher honors, expect to 
 get any votes in Southern California two years hence, they had better give 
 their hearty influence and support to the irrigation measures now pending 
 before the Legislature. Irrigation will be the politics of the southern 
 counties two years hence, and fealty to the cause will be the leading point 
 by which they will be gauged. There is no such thing as riparian rights ^in 
 California, as defined by the English common law, and the Legislature 
 should hasten to declare the fact. 
 
 Kern County Galifornian- 
 
 Irrlfiration Bills. 
 
 A large portion of our space is this week devoted to the irrigation bills 
 now before the Legislature. These do not constitute all the bills now before 
 that body. Several others have been introduced, but they are not important 
 and are not likely, in the stages to which they have advanced, to come up 
 
87 
 
 for consideration so late in the session. We did not publish these bills be- 
 fore because, until now, they had not reached a stage of perfection satis- 
 factory to the authors and promoters. It is unlikely that any of them, ex- 
 cept the first, will meet with farther amendment, and if they become laws, 
 it is altogether probable that it will be without change. The first in order, 
 consisting of amendments to the Code, needs no explanation. It is designed 
 to complete the title devoted to water rights in the spirit which pervades it 
 down to the last incongruous section for which one is substituted designed 
 to meet the wants and necessities of this State rather than those of Alaska, 
 where floods of rain or heavy falls of snow are characteristic of the seasons 
 at all times. It is self-explanatory, and requires no comment. Following is 
 one providing for establishing and adjudicating water claims, so that the 
 rights of all appropriators of water may be definitely determined and made 
 matter of record and appurtenant to the land, giving to them positive value. 
 The next is a bill providing for the formation of water and irrigation dis- 
 tricts, in order that the distribution and use of water may be regulated on a 
 basis of justice, and its waste prevented. The last in order is an amend- 
 ment to the Constitution, for the purpose of protecting capital invested in 
 irrigation works, and for the purpose of encouraging its further investment 
 in reclaiming the waste places of the State. Should the proposed amend- 
 ment be adopted, we are assured thf.t the requisite capital would be at once 
 forthcoming, to reclaim what is known as the "weed patch " in this county,, 
 by the construction of reservoirs in the mountains and the conveyance of 
 the water, to the points where needed, by means that would prevent absorp- 
 tion and waste. And this great enterprise would be only one of many that 
 would be at once inaugurated in the southern part of the State. 
 
 Los Angeles Daily Herald. 
 
 The tactics resorted to by obstructionists in the Assemby for the purpose 
 of staving off action on the Irrigation Bill, though persistent, serve only to 
 make the friends of the cause more in earnest than ever. Some of the ob- 
 structors clutch at very fragile straws. One ingenious gentleman, when at 
 length the previous question was moved, for the purpose of putting an end 
 to the farcial amendments offered by the opposition, rose to remark that 
 he had nothing to say on the motion, and was reminded promptly by the 
 Speaker that he could not say anything, being out of order: the question 
 was put. It is not probable that the passage of the bill can now be pre- 
 vented by the kind of tactics mentioned. Should the bill become a law, as 
 there is now every reason to hope and believe, our people will have cause to 
 be grateful to the gentlemen who composed the Fresno Convention and to 
 those now aiding in the passage of the bill. 
 
88 
 Colusa Maxwell Star. 
 
 We have been at some expense and trouble to find out whether or not Cali- 
 jfornia is in need of irrigation laws, and have contributed our mite to the 
 end that needed legislation may be had at the present session of the Legisla- 
 ture. At present we are without laws (granting the right to appropriate water 
 from running streams for the purpose of irrigation, and hence those sections 
 that have availed themselves of the use of water for this purpose, and are 
 wholly dependent upon irrigation for sustenance are without legal protec- 
 tion to rights to which the god of nature entitles them. Irrigation will 
 sooner or later be demanded by the great agricultural interests of the State, 
 and sooner or later they must and will have laws that will forever settle the 
 question as to the free use of running water for that purpose. The enact- 
 ment of necessary laws by the present Legislature will save our southern 
 brethren much annoyance, litigation, and possibly violence. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 The Sacramento Capital says truly that the fight against irrigation laws is 
 the sajne old opposition that was made to the "No Fence Laws" some years 
 ago. f It is a struggle on the part of cattJe kings and land monopolists of 
 Southern California to retain their grasp upon vast bodies of public domain, 
 and at the same time hold a monopoly of all the waters of the natural streams. 
 Most of these cattle kings acquired their vast tracts by open and notorious 
 fraud, and with their ill-gotten gains they are now corrupting the law-making 
 power and blocking the wheels of progress in the State^ 
 
 The long delay in commencing active work on the irrigation question in 
 the Legislature endangers the passage of the bills on account of the lack of 
 time. It is hoped the members of the Legislature have given this question 
 the consideration which will enable them to act promptly upon it, for with- 
 out prompt action the fight for irrigation is lost, and another two years of 
 darkness and uncertainty must be gone through with by the farmers and hor- 
 ticulturists of Southern Cali-fornia. It is this feeling of uncertainty that is 
 now holding in check the increase in population necessary to the prosperity 
 and advancement of the State. This Legislature has not yet done anything 
 that is calculated to merit the grateful remembrance of the people, and if it 
 now fails to do its plain duty in a declaration of the right of the people to use 
 the surplus water of flowing streams, and the adoption of laws to regulate 
 such use, it will pass into history as one of the most useless of all California 
 Legislatures, and that is about the worst thing that could be said of it. 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 The Itegrislature and Irrigation. 
 
 The great struggle between the cattle kings and the people is still going on 
 at Sacramento. In the Assembly the appropriators appear to have matters 
 *heir own way. This is largely due to the fact that the Assembly more prop- 
 
89 
 
 erly represents the people, coming as it does from them; but in the Senate the 
 lines are more closely drawn, and the passage of suitable irrigation laws a 
 matter of extreme difficulty. Since the adoption of the new Constitution the 
 Senate has failed to meet the wishes of the people, and in a large measure has 
 ceased to be a representative body. There are too many men in it who aspire 
 to be statesmen, and too many who have not the brains to reach that lofty 
 attitude. Still there are in that body a majority of good men and true, and if 
 they can be brought to study the question of irrigation and wants of the peo- 
 ple there is no question but what that all the irrigation measures proposed by 
 the irrigators will become laws. But the trouble is that the subject is new to 
 m*ny of them, and in the hurry of a sixty-days session they have but little 
 time to spare to study new measures. Reddy is working manfully for the 
 irrigators, and he is ably seconded by Del Valle, of Los Angeles. "Whitney, 
 of Alameda, is with the irrigators in feeling; McClure knows the necessity' of 
 enacting laws on the subject and will vote with the people to repeal the obnox- 
 ious section of the Code pertaining to riparian rights. Cross, of Nevada, ap- 
 preciates our wants, and is in hearty sympathy with the irrigators, though not 
 exactly agreeing with them in reference to all their measures. There is room 
 for much effective work in the Senate, and it should be done at once, as the 
 time for the adjournment of the Legislature is rapidly approaching. 
 
 The irrigators of Southern California will gratefully remember Assemblyman 
 Munday, of Sonoma, who has led the contest in the House on their part. He 
 has championed their cause with marked ability and with great zeal. He is a 
 brilliant young man, and will make his mark in the world. Hon. C. F. Mc- 
 Glashan, of Nevada, made a brilliant speech in behalf of the irrigators, which 
 showed that he understood the situation, and was with the people. Hon. 
 John Yule, of Shasta, Dr, May, of San Francisco, Hon. Mr. Weaver, of Hum- 
 boldt, Hon. R. P. Ashe, of Kern, have done us noble service that our people 
 will remember, should opportunity offer. Of course, Assemblyman Clark, of 
 our own county must not be forgotten. He has worked for the irrigators un- 
 ceasingly. 
 
 The Senate spent another day in talking about the irrigation bills yester- 
 day. The enemies of the measure propose to kill them by talk. It was a bad 
 mistake when the bills were referred to a Committee of the Whole. The 
 friends of irrigation should see that the bills passed by the Assembly take a 
 different course. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 Tlie Live Igaue— Voice of the People on the Irrigfation Question— General 
 Desire Manifested for Leg^islation Upon the Subject of Water Distri- 
 bution. 
 
 To ghow intensely the people of various sections of the State are interested 
 in the question of irrigation, a few extracts are herewith published from a 
 number of letters received by the Examiner during the past few days. They 
 -have been selected at random as samples, and clearly indicate how important 
 
90 
 
 the subject of a water supply for irrigation has become to the people of the 
 
 State. 
 
 In San Bernardino. 
 
 Riverside, (San Bernardino County), Feb. 22,— The principal hope of the 
 people of San Bernardino, is the supply and economical distribution of our 
 water supply. Heretofore we have regarded it as an assured fact that we 
 could control sufficient water to irrigate our lands. This idea seems to have 
 been a delusion, since the advocates of riparian rights have appeared in such 
 force in our State Legislature. Here, where the first State Irrigation Conven- 
 tion was held, where thousands of happy homes are dependent upon irriga- 
 tion, we feel vitally interested in the action of the present Legislature. 
 Will it help us? We hope so; but we are in fear lest we shall be neglected. 
 We feel grateful to the Examiner for casting its influence on our side, and, 
 wHile I am not a Democrat, and never was or expect to be, I repeat that the 
 general expression here in Riverside and Redlauds is that the Examiner's 
 friends are aiding us. Please urge the question, for it is an important one to 
 us. Our reservoir system in San Bernardino county is yet in its infancy, 
 but it will grow. The waters of the Santa Ana and Lytle creek are our main 
 resource. What we want is legal regulations for a proper distribution of the 
 water. I have written to our Assemblyman and Senator to urge the irrigation 
 question. Yours for more water, W. A. S. 
 
 A Voice From Bntte. 
 
 Oboville, February 21. — Oroville is much interested in the solution of 
 the irrigation question now pending in the Legislature. The Examiner, I 
 think, has taken the right stand in this dispute. When I say so, I know 
 that I decide against mysjlf, as I own important riparian rights in Butte 
 county, but I cannot use the water, and am willing that it should be made 
 useful. We have a large quantity of unoccupied lands in Butte county which 
 might be used profitably by the application of water. This is a splendid fruit 
 region, and with the settlement of the riparian rights issue we shall derive 
 great benefit. I feel assured that our legislators will not neglect their duty. 
 
 Lex. 
 A Cry From Kern. 
 
 Bakekspield, February 18. — Kern county, could our people be brought 
 together, would respond as a unit to the sentiments expressed in recent 
 issues of the Examiner. We want something done in the way of legislation 
 on this irrigation question, and we must have it done before the adjourn- 
 ment of the present Legislature. Down here in Kern wejiave had less than 
 our usual rainfall, and the prospect looks gloomy. JNow, Mr. Editor, I 
 am no scribe, and I'm not a man to make threats, but if something is not 
 done to give us homesteaders equal rights with those who have special priv- 
 ileges, there will be a day of reckoning in Kern, and please don't foi:getMtA 
 We are looking for a dry season, for one year ago we were getting lots of wet. 
 We are short now, and if we have a bad year, the riparianists won't have^uy 
 rights that will be worth respecting down this way, I am a 
 
 Deep Ditch Digoee. 
 
91 
 
 Shasta^s Say, 
 
 Anderson, February 20. — Will you please, Mr. Editor, say something for 
 Shasta? It is true we have said or done little in the irrigation struggle, but I 
 assure you, sir, that we, at least we who live in and about Anderson, fully ap- 
 preciate the situation and look with a great degree of interest upon the strug- 
 gle now pending in the State Capitol. We have made every effort during the 
 past two or three years to attract immigration hereto Shasta, and with good 
 results, too. But we are not satisfied. Like Oliver Twist, we call for more. 
 We have plenty of water, and an expanse of fertile lands as large as my old 
 State of Missouri, but what we want is a system of irrigation which will prop- 
 erly distribute the water. Shasta is alive on the irrigation business. Push 
 on the fight and let us have the question settled. B. G. F. 
 
 Near tlie Sierra Madre, 
 
 DuARTE (Los Angeles County), February 17. — The Duarte is one of the 
 
 best improved and most densely populated settlements in Los Angeles county. 
 
 Our people here are wholly dependent upon a stream of water which we have 
 
 brought at a great cost through a cemented flume over a sandy wilderness. 
 
 We do not own the lands over which our water is brought, but if some one 
 
 should enter these worthless lands, which are virtually the bed of the San 
 
 Gabriel river, then, if the idea of "riparian rights " holds good, our Duarte, 
 
 the natural orange-producing section of Southern California, would be at 
 
 once bereft of water. Our representatives, Messrs. Del Valle, Banbury and 
 
 Hazard have done well thus far, and they know the needs of this section. 
 
 What I would suggest would be that Assemblyman Banbury would present 
 
 to the Legislature a few statistics showing what Los Angeles county was 
 
 before we had irrigation, and what we have done since Pasadena, Alhambra, 
 
 the Duarte and Pomona have been blessed with water. Your paper, we know, 
 
 favors the irrigators, and our people rely upon the Examiner to help us. 
 
 J. H. McC. 
 El Dorado. 
 
 Pleasant Valley, February 23. — The irrigation problem is one that we 
 are all interested in here in El Dorado county. Pleasant Valley, my present 
 home, has plenty of water, and with a proper and equitable division a large 
 area of land can be brought under cultivation. It is a mistake to say that 
 our mountain valleys do not require irrigation and are worthless. Give us a 
 good irrigation system, and hundreds of our now almost uninhabited valleys 
 will become the homes of industrious families. I, for one, favor the irriga- 
 tion bills now before the Legislature and published in the Mcaminer. Their 
 passage would be good for the State. 
 
 Yours truly, B. P. 
 
 San Joaquin County, 
 
 Los Bangs, February 16.— Please publish the following from the western 
 portion of Merced. If the Legislature wants to do something useful to this 
 section, let it get down and fix up the irrigation matter. Here, on the west 
 
92 
 
 side, we are poor, but we have some rights, and we want them protected. 
 Los Banoa is in the heart of a fine, fertile section, and while it is partially 
 irrigated and a number of new ditches are in contemplation, we want more. 
 What we ask is a fair share of the water on the west side of the San Joaquin, 
 and if the question as to riparian ownership of the water above us is not 
 settled by legislation now, we are certain to have trouble here before the 
 legislature can give us relief two years hence. We are pleased with the ad- 
 vocacy of our claims by the Examine7\ and are waiting to see who are really 
 our friends in the Legislature. We are on the outside of the great Miller & 
 Lux ditch, but have some rights to water. There are ninety-odd families in 
 this region who are, or expect to become irrigators. We want water and can 
 
 pay for it. D. W. 
 
 In Mussel Slougrh. 
 
 Hanpord, February 19. — About the only topic of discussion here, at Han- 
 ford just now, is irrigation. We are waiting anxiously to see whether we are 
 to be left in the lurch. We know the Examiner is "sound" on the question, 
 as it usually is; but, Mr. Editor, we know that we have little to expect from 
 a Legislature which elected our old enemy Stanford to the Senate. But as to 
 the water question, we are all "solid" on that point. Will you please pub- 
 lish this as my prediction? I am now a pretty old man, but I can write and 
 talk, and I say that if the present Legislature fails to do something on this 
 most important of all other questions now before it, there will be a reckoning 
 at the next election. At least we will have our say down here at Hanford. 
 
 Pioneer. 
 On tine Desert, 
 
 MiNTURN, February 19. — If the Legislature would adjourn and take a trip 
 down to this point, stop off at Minturn, and see what can be done by irriga- 
 tion, it would do more than anything else in the way of argument. Here we 
 are surrounded by a fertile region, but have no water. There is plenty of 
 water above us, but it is not preserved, but is allowed to sink in the sands 
 and is lost. A few miles from this station (Minturn) Kohler k Co. have 
 established a vineyard of some extent as an experiment. It is a success, 
 and within a few years this part of the State will become a well-populated 
 region. Although I am a new settler, I cannot see what objection can be 
 urged against providing for a system of irrigation, which will do so much 
 toward building wp the State. I know that all we want here is water. Give 
 us that and Minturn will become quite a place. Very respectfully, 
 
 E. W. Benson. 
 A Colony's Condition. 
 
 Ontabio (Los Angeles county), February 20. — Our colony is yet in its in- 
 fancy, but has more than doubled its population during the past year. It 
 will receive a new impetus if the Legislature wo uld settle the irrigation ques- 
 tion. Will you please inform us why the irrigation question cannot be set- 
 tled? We are dependent here upon water for our lives. Can the Legislature 
 deprive us of the means of living? Our neighboring colony of Cucamonga is 
 in the same condition. If a body of men would legislate to deprive us of air. 
 
93 
 
 which is absolutely necessary for the perpetuation of life, would we not be- 
 come anxious? Yet, the proper distribution af water here is as important to- 
 ns as the unlimited distribution of the atmosphere. I write at the request of 
 several of my neighbors to put these questions: Has not the State the right 
 to regulate the distribution of water in our streams? Will the Examiner urge 
 the Legislature to give us irrigation laws which will prevent us from having 
 trouble in the future? We don't get too much water in this region, and what 
 we have we want properly used. J. S. M. 
 
 Press and Horticultural. 
 
 Irrig'ation. 
 
 San Bernardino county depends largely on irrigation for its standing in 
 horticultural matters. There are few a localities where can be found moist 
 lands that raise successfully agricultural crops without irrigation, but as a 
 rule moist lands are not so good for fruit, and the orchards and vineyards are 
 therefore mostly confined to the high and dry lands that are irrigated, while 
 the general farming is confined to the low moist lands. 
 
 In the eastern portions of San Bernardino valley near San G^orgonio Pass, 
 there are thousands of acres of land that usually mature a good crop of wheat 
 or barley. This land is naturally dry and has no water for irrigation pur- 
 poses, but the character of the soil, altitude and general surroundings is such 
 that small grain crops are usually a success. 
 
 The sources of water supply for irrigation purposes are many and none of 
 them very large. 
 
 The Santa Ana river where it comes out from the mountains furnishes 
 water for the North and South Fork ditches. The North Fork ditch fur- 
 nishes water for Highlands and the Cram settlement. The South Fork ditch 
 supplies water for Lugonia, Brookside and Eedlands. 
 
 Mill Creek comes down irom the mountains a few miles southeast of the 
 Santa Ana river, and furnishes water for Craften and Old San Bernardino. 
 
 A stream running down from the south slope of San Bernardino mountain 
 furnishes water for Banning. 
 
 City Creek, west of the Santa Ana river, furnishes water for a portion of 
 Highlands. 
 
 The stream from Devil's canyon supplies water for a portion of the Mus- 
 capiabe rancho. 
 
 Ly tie Creek, coming down from Old Baldy, west of Cajon Pass, irrigates 
 Mt. Vernon and Vicinity. 
 
 Etiwanda canyon irrigates the settlement by that name. 
 
 Another small stream furnishes water for Hermosa. 
 
 Cucamonga is irrigated by a stream fed by springs that rise just north of 
 that settlement. 
 
 Cucamonga canyon irrigates the Iowa tract. 
 
 San Antonio canyon on the line between Los Angeles and San Bernardino 
 counties is equally divided between Ontario on the San Bernardino side, and 
 Pomona and other lands on the Los Angeles side. 
 
94 
 
 San Bernardino is situated in the midst of moist lands where artesian wells 
 •can be had anywhere by going to a moderate depth. 
 
 Warm Creek rises from springs in the main valley away from any moun- 
 tains. This creek flows into the Santa Ana river east of Colton, and unites 
 with the waters of that stream that rise within a few miles of the junction. 
 
 The Meeks & Daley ditch is taken from Warm Creek and irrigates a section 
 of country below Colton. 
 
 The Santa Ana river in ordinary seasons is dry for many miles below where 
 all the water is taken out to supply North and South Fork ditches. The 
 waters of Warm Creek g,nd other smaller tributaries, however, furnish a 
 good stream again which is taken out by the two Riverside canals to irrigate 
 Eiverside. In dry seasons these two canals take all the surface water out of 
 the river at these points, leaving the underflow to come to the surface below; 
 but Spring Brook, which rises just northwest of Riverside replenishes the 
 stream again. 
 
 The Jurupa ditch is taken out of the Santa Ana river that irrigates West 
 Eiverside. 
 
 The Yorba settlement, including the property of the South Riverside Vine- 
 yard Company, located on the Santa Anita river sixteen miles below River- 
 side, again takes all the surface water out of the river for that settlement, 
 but other streams coming iu from the north side of the river makes a good 
 stream that goes down to supply irrigation water for settlements in Los 
 Angeles county. 
 
 One of these feeders is a short stream that comes from a single spring that 
 summer and winter furnishes 250 inches of water that runs a gristmill within 
 a mile of the spring. 
 
 There are other small, natural water supplies, but we have enumerated the 
 principal ones in this county. 
 
 A stream of water for irrigation purposes in this valley is considered well 
 ■worth $1000 an inch measured in an ordinary midsummer, and some water 
 rights are selling at a higher figure. Hence every small stream that can be 
 utilized is made valuable. The value of water is of course dependent to a 
 certain extent on its location, for a small stream that will develop a small 
 settlement is not so valuable per inch as a large stream that will make pos- 
 sible a larger settlement. 
 
 ARTIFICIAL WORKS. 
 
 About all the natural supplies of water having been utilized, people have 
 turned their attention to the development of water. This is done in three 
 ways: 
 
 1st — Artesian wells, 
 
 2d— Tunnels, 
 
 3d — Reservoirs. 
 
 There are artesian belts where flowing wells can be readily and cheaply 
 obtained. The artesian belt in this valley is now pretty well defined, and 
 outside of this belt experiments are made at great risk. Usually flowing 
 
95 
 
 ■water is obtained in the moist and semi-moist land and very rarely on the 
 high mesa lands. 
 
 Tunnels are being used now to save the underflow of mountain streams. 
 Two are now in process of construction in this country. 
 
 Judson & Brown have one in the bed of the Santa Ana river below where 
 the water is taken out of the stream to supply the North and South Fork 
 ditches. This tunnel is not as yet completed. It is only in one or two hun- 
 dred feet, and yet forty inches of water has been obtained that seems to be a 
 permanent supply. It is proposed to extend this tunnel until bed rock is 
 reached, when it is confidentially believed that a large supply can be ob- 
 tained. The water already obtained is worth, according to the estimate 
 giveo, $40,000, which is nearly a hundred times what the tunnel cost. 
 
 The Ontario Land Company has driven a tunnel in under San Antonio 
 creek a distance of nearly 1,800 feet, at a cost of about $25,000, and al- 
 though the work is incomplete they have about 250 inches of water, worth a 
 quarter of a million of dollars. 
 
 There are scores of places in the county where tunnels can be run in under 
 the beds of streims where they come out of the canyons upon the plains, 
 and the underflow saved for irrigation purposes. 
 
 The first attempt at a storage reservoir in this county was made by Judson 
 & Brown at Kedlands. This reservoir has never been completed as at first 
 planned, but it is now used as a distributing reservoir only. When com- 
 pleted it will hold winter water enough to irrigate several hundred acres of 
 land. M. H. Crafts next commenced a storage reservoir for Crafton, which, 
 when completed, will be a great aid to the irrigating system of that settle- 
 ment. 
 
 BEAR VALLEY RESERVOIR. 
 
 The largest and most gigantic reservoir work yet inaugurated in Southern 
 California for irrigating purposes was planned in 1883 by F. E. Brown, of 
 Redlands, who is a civil engineer. A company was organized, and during 
 the summer of 1884 the dam, 300 feet long and 60 feet high, of solid ma- 
 sonry, was built. This reservoir has a capacity now to hold water to irrigate 
 2iJ,000 acres of land, and it can be made of a still greater capacity if it is 
 ascertained after trial that the rainfall of the water-shed that drains into 
 this valley is sufficient to fill a larger reservoir. 
 
 The winter of 1883-84 gave a rainfall in this valley of about 100 inches, or 
 four times as much as fell at Riverside. If the annual rainfall is always four 
 times as much as it is at Riverside, there is no doubt but that the present 
 reservoir can always be filled each winter, as it drains a country extending 
 over sixty square miles. 
 7 
 
96 
 
 San Francisco Alta* 
 
 The Inconsistency of It. 
 
 The inconsistency of the riparianists, who are making such a vigorous 
 fight before the Legislature, stands out in bold relief in the fact that most of 
 them are themselves appro priators of water for irrigation, though under the 
 letter of the riparian law they have no more right to do this than land own- 
 ers a dozen miles away from the stream. The common law is that every 
 riparian proprietor is entitled to have the river flow by his land, undimin- 
 ished in quantity and unafi'ected in quality, and this, of course, cannot be if 
 some of the riparianists take the water out and use it for irrigation. All the 
 riparianists below the one who devotes it for irrigation purposes will get less 
 of the stream, and, according to the law, will have a good cause of complaint 
 against the diyertor. But in this State riparianists are unwilling to abide by 
 the law under which they claim all their privileges. They want to use the 
 water for irrigation, and they do not want anybody else to use it. The irri- 
 gators are not proposing to take it without compensation, but to pay the 
 riparianists for all the damages which they can prove they will suffer. But 
 the latter refuse to have it taken even on these terms. They wish to use all 
 they need themselves and to let the remainder run to waste. Such colossal 
 hoggishness is well calculated to make credulity stand aghast, and even to 
 paralyze indignation. 
 
 San Francisco Alta. 
 
 Its First Duty. 
 
 To-day the Legislature in both branches will take up the important subject 
 of irrigation as a special order. Considering that this is the great overshad- 
 owing question before it, the Legislature might, apparently, have reached 
 this point at an earlier day in the session, but there is still time enough to do 
 the work, and do it well, if only the will exists. Irrigation legislation is a 
 great public measure, and it must not be choked off by petty special interests 
 and claim grab bills. In half of the State the passage of irrigation laws is a 
 life and death question, and to the other half its importance is very great, 
 though not so direct. In the southern counties the feeling is so strong that 
 should this Legislature fail to provide the desired relief, an active agitation 
 will be begun for the division of the State, and in a business way the antag- 
 onism will take the form of encouraging Eastern trade at the expense of San 
 Francisco merchants. The Legislature having taken up the subject of irri- 
 gation, should drop other measures until this one is perfected. 
 
 • Daily Expositor. 
 
 The First Gun. 
 
 We congratulate our people on the fact contained in a dispatch from Sac- 
 ramento in another column, informing us of the repeal of the "old English 
 law of riparian rights," by the Assembly last night. This indicates the sue- 
 
97 
 
 cessful termination of the contest between the irrigators and the riparianists. 
 Of course, the bill has now to run the gauntlet in the Senate, where the ene- 
 mies of irrigation, progress and prosperity, together with their cohorts in 
 the lobby, backed with large sums, will concentrate their j&re on this bill, 
 and no effort will be spared to defeat it. Public interest and opinion are no 
 longer as politic moters of action when they are whelmed by the lavish com- 
 pensation for individual interests; hence the necessity of renewed action on 
 the part of the friends of irrigation. It is true, we have no money to pay 
 for legislation — were it required; but we have Right and Justice on our side, 
 and we believe, notwithstanding uncharitable rumors, that a large majority of 
 those occupying positions as members of the Legislature, are above the se- 
 ductive wiles that will be brought to bear upon them to induce their support 
 to measures antagonistic to the best interests of the State. We have, in the 
 passage of this bill, captured the outposts of the riparianists, and a prolonged 
 fight from them is no longer probable after this bill goes through the Senate. 
 But let not the friends of irrigation abate in the least their interest in the 
 matter, but let them rather renew their exertions, and leave no loop-holes 
 whereby our opponents can insert a reasonable hope. 
 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 The Mmmin&r is trying to make the irrigation issue a party question, and 
 falsely asserts that members of the Eepublican State Central Committee are, 
 in their official capacity, lobying for the McClure .Compromise bill. If it 
 thinks it can make any political capital for its party by this means, we beg 
 leave to doubt the soundness of its judgment. The immense majority which 
 the irrigationists have in the Republican Assembly should admonish it against 
 the foolish plea it is making. Only the Democratic Senate stands in the way 
 of the farmer. 
 
 Riverside Press and Horticulturist. 
 
 The Santa Cruz Sentinel thinks the State Irrigation Convention didn't un- 
 derstand its business. People will differ. Some of the ablest lawyers in the 
 State were present and gave in their opinions that the work attempted to be 
 done by that convention was practical from a legal standpoint. It may be 
 that the legal luminary connected with the Sentinel can overturn those ex- 
 pressed opinions. So far as the future of California is concerned in connec- 
 tion with the late decision of the Supreme Court, reform, revolution or ruin 
 must follow. Let us hope that it will be reform, for revolution can not be 
 thought of, and ruin the people will not submit to. 
 
98 
 
 Visalia Delta. 
 
 Irrig'ation. 
 
 The Sacramento Capital, which still continues to work manfully in the in- 
 terest of irrigation, referring to work in the committees, says: 
 
 "The irrigation committeemen have been hard at work all week, but it is 
 very much feared that the riparian men have captured the Legislature, as it 
 is a fact that they are spending a great deal of money to defeat the most im- 
 portant measure that has come before the body during this session. It is a 
 well-known fact that the appropriators have but little or no money to spend 
 on the fight, as they represent the bone aad vim of the southern part of the 
 State, while the large landholders are backed by some of the wealthiest cor- 
 porations in the State. If the bill does not pass the people may rest assured 
 that money defeated it." 
 
 We are not ready to believe that a majority of both houses have fallen into 
 the hands of those men who have combined to defeat the bills, when so great 
 an effort is being made to set the matter before the Legislature in its true 
 light. The question has been so thoroughly discussed of late, and so 
 much information regarding it has been placed in the hands of members of 
 both houses, that we are still hopeful of good b^ing accomplished. 
 
 Grass Valley Daily Tidings. 
 
 Water Monopoly. 
 
 The irrigation problem is one of great diflS.culty. As the matter now 
 stands something like three-score of men, who live close to the banks of 
 streams, want the waters to flow along and forever undiminished in quantity 
 and unimpeachable in quality, and that no one shall have any of it. There 
 is more of it than the bank-dwellers can use, but nevertheless they want it to 
 keep running along. They say they are afraid to let this water be tak^a out 
 of the streams lest monopolists should get hold of it. The bank-dwellers 
 want to keep the water monopolized in idleness for fear monopolizers should 
 get hold of it and make it of use. 
 
 Los Angeles Weekly Herald. 
 
 So far the irrigation bill has made good progress in the Assembly. It will 
 be remembered by readers of the Herald that two bills of this kind had been 
 introduced, but the one now referred to is that which was prepared by the 
 Fresno Convention. On the introduction of this bill, the great advantages 
 it possesses over the others were so manifest, that it was determined to let 
 these two lie on the table. One of the main features of the bill is the doctrine 
 that the common laws of England and of the United States concerning ripa- 
 rian rights should not be applicable in this State, and common sense would 
 lead one giving sane attention to the matter to the same conclusion. On 
 
99 
 
 Thursday la^f, and again on Fri lay, Assemblyman Walrath moved that the 
 bill, which had been reported on favorably by the committee, bo taken up 
 out of order and read for the first time. His second motion was carried, 
 and the bill was made a special order for to-day. The proceedings of the 
 State Irrigation Convention, held at Fresno, which were reported at the 
 time in these columns, are so well known to readers of this journal that it is 
 not necessary now to do more than refer to them. That Convention was 
 composed not of mere theorists, as some of those 'who went as Delegates to 
 the Riverside Convention were, but in the main of gentlemen who discussed 
 the question from a standpoint they have taken after many years of thorough 
 practical acquaintance with irrigation in California, and what it can and 
 should be made. Just as the meteorological phenomena of California, its 
 climate and its various soils dififer from those of other lands where irrigation 
 is practiced, just so the law of riparian rights of other countries may very 
 well be inapplicable to our State. At Fresno the whole subject received full 
 consideration, and it is very reasonable to suppose that the bill under dis- 
 cussion as these lines are being written will become a law. 
 
 Tulare Register. 
 
 Assembly bill No. 410, amending Section 4488 of the Political Code of our 
 State, so that the common law of England will no longer serve to bolster up 
 the infamous riparian doctrine, has passed the Assembly by a vote of 50 to 
 14. It now goes to the Senate, with every prospect of becoming a statute 
 law. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 Unfa.it hfal Representativeg. 
 
 The relation which San Francisco bears to the interior and the importance 
 of the rapid and permanent development of the agricultural resources of the 
 State to the advancement of the commercial interests of San Francisco gave 
 promise that the legislative delegation from this city would yield a hearty 
 support to any measures brought forward in the Legislature intending to en- 
 large the area and increase the value of cultivated land in the farming dis- 
 tricts. It was not believed that members of the Legislature, elected to rep- 
 resent a great city, and expected to be active in support of all propositions 
 calculated to multiply interior production, and correspondingly enlarge the 
 city's trade, would be recreant to their duty. Nevertheless, the people of 
 San Francisco have been disappointed in their anticipations. Wise measures 
 were presented, having as their object the confirmation of the right to use 
 the waters of the State for irrigation purposes. They were intended for the 
 benefit of all. Their enactment could not fail to give a new impetus to the 
 languishing farming interests of Southern California and thereby contribute 
 to the welfare of the city, which is conceded to be chiefly dependent upon 
 
100 
 
 the prospeiity of the country. Two of the chosen representatives of the 
 city in the Assembly, disregarding their duty to their constituency and cast- 
 ing aside all consideration of public interest engaged actively in the bitter 
 ■warfare waged against the proposed irrigation measures. Assemblymen Mc- 
 Junkin and Firebaugh of San Francisco, fought and filibustered against these 
 bills with all their feeble energies. They exercised their lungs and exhausted 
 their ingenuity in their efforts against the interests of those whom they rep- 
 resent. Mr. McJunkin's biography up to the time he was called to represent 
 San Francisco in the Legislature is not written in the annals of the State. 
 Mr. Firebaugh has hitherto never emerged from the obscurity of private life. 
 Mr. McJunkin claims to be a lawyer and in that disguise has shouted him- 
 self hoarse about the unconstitutionality of the irrigation bills, with Mr. 
 Firebaugh as a distant echo of the same views. Their arguments have been 
 so peurile that it is not worth while to answer them. But the people of 
 this city ought not to forget the names of McJunkin and Firebaugh, lest 
 they should some day again emerge from the obscurity to which their oppo- 
 sition to the irrigation bills has already condemned them. San Francisco is 
 to be congratulated that the unfaithful in connection with this important 
 matter hiave been few. 
 
 Marysville Democrat. 
 
 Too Ijate. 
 
 The Sacramento Bee and its sympathizers, after attacking the irrigationists 
 and forcing the'unnatural alliance of that class with the hydraulic miners, 
 now begins to beg of those outraged members not to vote with the hydrau- 
 licers. After making a determined effort to ruin one of the most populous 
 and fertile portions of the State, this same journal turns in the face of all this 
 and asks those very men to vote for the interest of that section which out- 
 raged it. We have seldom seen anything quite so cheeky in the course of our 
 life. We begged, we warned the Bee not to take the course it did, for we knew 
 the Appeal, which cuts its trousers and trims its beard after the style the Bee 
 wears, and its whole kit, would run oflf into this fatal mistake, and cut off all 
 hope for this portion of the valley. There is nothing in common with the 
 irrigationists and the objectionable features of hydrauhc mining; and the al- 
 liance of their forces in the Legislature is all unnatural, and forced by the 
 unmanly fight of those who are continually on the side of monopoly — the Bee, 
 the Appeal, and others. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 A DelnHion. 
 
 The Sacramento Record-Union, in its issue of yesterday, in an edit6rial en- 
 titled "Saddling Irrigation," declared that Assembly Bill No. 410, as amended 
 by the Cpmmittee of the Whole in the Senate, should not become a law, be- 
 
101 
 
 •cause, as thus amended, the bill will reopen the "hydraulic mining question." 
 That this is an entire misapprehension of the effect of the amendment is 
 certain. The amendment proposed consists of the insertion of two words in 
 Section 2 of the bill. This section as amended reads as follows, the amend- 
 ment being given in italics: 
 
 " Section 2, Section 1422. That portion of the common law of England 
 which relates to riparian rights is hereby declared to be repugnant to and in- 
 consistent with the climate, topography, physical condition and necessities of 
 the people of this State, and the laws thereof concerning the appropriation 
 of water for purposes of irrigation [^and mviing'}, and to that extent to have 
 never formed any part of such laws; and the use of water for said purposes 
 of irrigation is a public use»" 
 
 The JRocord- Union says of the amendment; 
 
 "There must be no irrigation bill passed saddled with such a rider as is 
 now being put upon this bill. Whatever virtues the bill may have, the peo- 
 ple of the Sacramento valley will never consent to a reopening of the hy- 
 draulic mining question. Better that the deserts remain unreclaimed and 
 parched lands go unwatered than that the law be blotted out, which is to-day 
 the safeguard of the people against the unnatural descent of mining debris 
 and slickens, and which, if unchecked, would render the fertile regions along 
 the Sacramento River uninhabitable and utterly destroy the navagability of 
 the chief free highway of the State." 
 
 We mast conclude from this that the Record-Union is either an enemy 
 of the bill as it was passed by the Assembly, or is most egregiously 
 mistaken as to the effect of the amendment. The section as amended 
 declares that the right to appropriate water for mining is repugnant to and 
 inconsistent with the common law of England relating to rip'arian rights. 
 This declaration does not give the miners any rights which they have not 
 now got. 
 
 The law of prigr appropriation has always prevailed and now prevails in 
 the mining regions of the State; but this right of appropriation does not, ac- 
 cording to the decisions of the United States Courts, give the miner the right 
 to deposit his debris in the streams to be carried down upon the farming 
 lands below. It was contended before the courts in these cases that, because 
 the miners had the recognized right to appropriate water for mining the right 
 to deposit debris in the streams must follow therefrom, because such deposit 
 resulted from the use of the water in mining. In other words, it was con- 
 tended that the right to deposit debris in the streams followed by implication 
 perhaps, might appropriate water, this did not give him the right to deposit 
 from the right to appropriate the water; but the Courts held that while the 
 miner, his debris in the streams. Judge Sawyer, in the case of Woodruff vs. 
 North Bloomfield Mining Company, held that, even if a law had been passed 
 expressly authorizing the deposit of mining debris into the navigable streams, 
 such law would be invalid and void. Speaking of the power of Congress to 
 pass such a law, Judge Sawyer said: 
 
.^ ; ; -^^ -r: 102 
 
 "But if Congress had attempted to authorize an unlimited discharge of 
 mining debris into the navigable waters of the State, to the destruction of 
 or great injury to their navigability, it had not the power to render it lawful' 
 (1 West Coast Rep. 201.) 
 
 And again, in speaking of the power of the State Legislature upon the sub- 
 ject, Judge Sawyer said : 
 
 "The State had no constitutional power to authorize the acts complained 
 of, and any statute designed to effect that object is void." (1 West Coast 
 Eep. 209.) 
 
 It is obvious that the bill as amended does not expressly nor by implica- 
 tion give the right to deposit mining debris in the streams. It only deals 
 with the right to appropriate the water. 
 
 Now, how does the amendment re-open the hydraulic mining question? 
 What possible foundation is there for any such assertion? Why should any 
 friend of irrigation refuse to vote for the bill because of this amendment? 
 
 The right to appropriate water for irrigation is denied ; and although this 
 bill gives this right, the Record-Union advises the friends ot irrigation to vote 
 against the bill because, as amended, it declares the right to appropriate wa- 
 ter for mining. This is the only reason given, coupled with the assertion 
 that the amendment re-opens "the hydraulic mining question." If the 
 amendment expressly declared the right of miners to flow their debris into 
 the streams, it would not re-open the question, because it would be a void 
 law, as Judge Sawyer has decided, and the friends of irrigation need not be 
 concerned even if the amendment had such an object. The amendment 
 would in that case be void, and confer no rights upon the miners with respect 
 to the debris. 
 
 Senator Cjoss is reputed to be an able lawyer. He knows that the right of 
 prior appropriation of water for mining has been recognized in this State 
 since mining began; that this right has been uniformly, up to this time, 
 upheld by the courts, both State and Federal; that before the United States 
 had disposed of a single acre of mining land this right of prior appropriation 
 was recognized by the ninth section of the Act of Congress of July 22, 1866, 
 which declared: 
 
 "Whenever, by priority of possession, rights to the use of water for min- 
 ing, agricultural, manufacturing or other purposes have vested and accrued, 
 and the same are recognized and acknowledged by the local customs, laws and 
 the decisions of courts, the possessors and owners of such vested rights shall 
 be maintained and protected in the same; and the right of way for the con- 
 struction of ditches and canals for the purposes aforesaid is hereby acknowl- 
 edged and confirmed." 
 
 Senator Cross further knows that Congress, in the amendatory Act of July 
 9, 1870, declared that "all patents granted, or pre-emption, or homesteads 
 allowed, shall be subject to any vested and accrued water-rights or rights to 
 ditches or reservoirs used in connection with such water rights as may have 
 been acquired under or recognized by the ninth section of the Act of which 
 this Act is amendatory." 
 
103 
 
 It seems that Senotor Cross' amendment has succeeded in stampeding the 
 Record- Union, or else that paper is so desirous of defeating the bill in ques- 
 tion that it is willing to raise misleading questions and issues. 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 Irrigation in the Senate. 
 
 It was only on Thursday that we expressed the somewhat confident hope 
 that the Senate might pass the whole set of Fresno bills by Wednesday next. 
 But on that very day the managers ran against another snag, and a backset 
 followed. A vote on the bill, decliring what constitutes the common law in 
 this State, resulted adversely, the irrigators only poling thirteen votes to 
 seventeen for the opposition, while ten Senators refused to vote. There 
 seems once more to have been bad management, and our correspondent re- 
 ports that Green, of the Fresno committee, now despairs of passing the bills 
 without an extra session. 
 
 Nothing can be more pitiable than the littleness of mind shown by the 
 opponents of these measures. Each Senator looks at them only from the 
 point of view of own little bailiwick, and seems unable to comprehend 
 that legislation which will enrich the southern half of the State cannot fail 
 to benefit every section thereof. Cross, of Nevada, for instance, comes from 
 a mining county, and stands in the way of bills to promote agriculture in 
 Fresno and Los Angeles, because Nevada does not seem to get her share. It 
 ought to be plain enough to his mind that if agriculture takes a fresh start 
 in the south and vast tracts of land are reclaimed by irrigation, there will be 
 an increase of wealth, and new capital to develop all kinds of enterprises, 
 including the mines of Nevada. There is not a section of the State, from 
 Del Norte south, that would not share in the prosperity which irrigation will 
 create. Yet, for the sake of some two-penny mining ditches in the Sierra, 
 Cross and his allies stand in the path of the irrigators, and resort to dodge 
 after dodge to defeat legislation — though, by so doing, they are cutting off 
 their own noses. 
 
 After the action of the Senate on the Heath Constitutional amendment, no 
 reasonable person will be surprised at anything that body may do. But there 
 are degrees in public contempt. It has been claimed that a man may be a 
 railway tool, yet otherwise worthy of respect. We confess we cannot see it 
 in that light, but it is easy to understand that a Senator may intensify his 
 unpopularity by following up one improper act by another and yet another. 
 A man who has made himself distrusted by surrendering to the monopoly^ 
 may render himself perfectly odious by resisting the development of the 
 southern counties. That is what the railway men, who are opposing irriga- 
 tion, are now doing. They seem bent oji proving to the public that they 
 cannot be trusted on any subject. 
 
 A rumor has been current for some days that the chief friends of the rail- 
 way are quietly opposing the irrigation bills. This would be curious, for no 
 
104 
 
 one is more interested in the development of the southern counties than the 
 owners of the Southern Pacific. But the railway managers often display so 
 much cussedness and so little tact, that the thing is perhaps not impossible. 
 
 Alta California. 
 
 Strang^ling: the Irxi£fation Bills. 
 
 Senator Cross of Nevada yesterday secured the passage of an amendment to 
 the Wigginton Irrigation bill in the Senate, which, unless reconsidered, effect- 
 ually strangles the bill for this session. The amendment has every appear- 
 ance of being designed by the author to effect this result. The bill is amend- 
 ed so as now to declare that the common law of riparian rights is inconsistent 
 with the appropriation of water for mining purposes, as well as for irrigation. 
 The original bill omitted any mention of water for mining purposes. The 
 people of Nevada county will not be deceived by the false pretense that this 
 amendment is of any benefit to miners or mining. Nor need the people of 
 the Sacramento Valley be alarmed at its possible effect upon their great chan- 
 nel of commerce, the Sacramento river. The legal effect of the amendment is 
 not to extend the rights of miners, nor to authorize the renewal of hydraulic 
 mining. Slickens can find neither encouragement nor protection under this 
 provision. Senator Cross perhaps believed that he could win the miners' 
 affections and drive the anti-debris men from the support of the bill, and thus 
 defeat it. As amended, he favors its passage, but he must know it cannot 
 pass. To become a law, it should pass as it came from the Assembly. To 
 return it to the Assembly in time for passage is almost impossible, because 
 the end of the session is so near. Even if this amendment were intended to 
 revive the system of mining which the courts have enjoined, it could not effect 
 its purpose. The Supreme Court of this State has not only put an end to the 
 deposit of debris over the Sacramento Valley, but declared in the most em- 
 phatic and positive terms that not even legislation, either State or National, 
 can revive it. In the Gold Run debris case, the State Supreme Court says 
 that "neither State nor Federal legislation could by silent acquiscence, or by 
 attempted legislation, take private property for private use, nor divest the 
 people of the State of their rights in the navigable waters of ths State, for the 
 use of private business, however extensive or long continued;" and in speak- 
 ing of the rights of the people to the use of the navig^,ble rivers, says: " It is 
 therefore beyond the power of Legislatures to destroy or abridge such rights, 
 or to authorize their improvement." All but the wilfully blind can see that 
 this decision raises an impregnable fortress against any legislative invasion 
 of the navigability of the Sacramento and San Joaquin by slickens or other- 
 wise. In the Woodruff case, the Federal Court re-enforces the State Court 
 in establishing this unchangeable rule of law. 
 
 Aside from this, it is absurd to attempt to extract from this amendmentany 
 •comfort for the hydraulic miner. As the amended bill reads, it declares the 
 law of appropriation to be paramount to the common law, and that the doc- 
 
105 
 
 trine of riparian rights shall not be applied to the use of water for mining 
 purposes any more than to its use for irrigation. It proposes to give to the 
 miner a right which he already possesses, and which he has always enjoyed 
 in the mining sections of the State, the right to divert the water of natural 
 streams and use the same for mining — a right which the Federal and State 
 Courts have always conceded, in disregard of all riparian rights. The pre- 
 vailing opinion in the latest water case decided drew the distinction between 
 the right of appropriation of water in mining and agricultural districts, which, 
 by necessary inference, admits the right in mining districts while denying the 
 right in the agricultural districts. 
 
 Senator Cross was at one time supposed to be friendly to irrigation meas- 
 ures; but either the supposition was mistaken or he has experienced a change 
 of heart. He is said to be willing to support the bill with his amendment 
 tacked to it. His accurate knowledge of the law cannot but teach him that 
 his amendment has no legal force and will add nothing new to the law of 
 water rights. His amendment is fatal to the passage of the bill, and if it fails 
 he cannot escape the responsibility of its defeat. 
 
 Merced Star. 
 
 Irrij^ation Meetini;. 
 
 Last week a petition, brought here by a West Sider ostensibly in the inter- 
 est of irrigators, was circulated in town and signed by many of our citizens 
 who at the time were under the impression that the petition was as repre- 
 sented "in furtherance of bills pending before the Legislature to promote 
 irrigation interests as enunciated by the Fresno Convention." The petition 
 as delivered at Sacramento proved to be a remonstrance against the passage 
 of the popular irrigation bills and declared the sentiment of the signers to be 
 in favor of Kipariau Rights as it is claimed they exist now. On Saturday, 
 W. L, Ashe received a letter from Senator Spencer inquiring how and why 
 Merced County was directly opposed to any extension of the existing rights of 
 appropriators of water for agricultural purposes, and announcing his surprise 
 at receiving such a petition from Merced. Spencer's letter soon became a 
 subject of general discussion all over the town, and placards were soon posted 
 announcing a public meeting at Leeker's Hall on Monday forenoon for the 
 purpose ot ascertaining the true public sentiment of Merced on the subject of 
 irrigation and rights of individual irrigators. The placards were generally 
 distributed in the vicinity of this town, and on Monday a well-attended repre- 
 sentative meeting was convened at Leeker's Hull. 
 
 On motion of W. L. Ashe, Captain Gray was chosen Chairman and H. H. 
 McCloskey as Secretary. After a discussion of the importance of irrigation 
 facilities to the people of Merced County, and the possible consequences of t|ie 
 unrepresentative petition improvidently signei by our citizens under a posi- 
 tive misapprehension of its meauiug, a committee was apijointed by the Chair 
 to draft resolutions expressive of the true sentiment of the meeting. This 
 
106 
 
 committee consisted of G. H. Fancher, H. N. Racker, R. H. Ward, W. L. 
 Ashe, H. H. McCloskey and W. W. Gray. After adjournment the meeting 
 reconvened at 2 p. m., and the following resolutions were presented by the 
 committee and discussed and approved by the meeting. 
 
 Whereas, It has been brought to the attention of the citizens of Merced 
 Connty that a petition has been presented from this county to the Legislature 
 of California for the avowed purpose of misleading its members as to the 
 wants of the people of this county on the subject of irrigation. Therefore 
 be it 
 
 Besolved, That we, the people of Merced County, in mass meeting assem- 
 bled do hereby declare that any attempt to mislead our Representatives or 
 others into the belief that we, as a county are opposed to irrigation, is unfair 
 and unjust. 
 
 Besolved, That we highly deprecate the unfair manner in which many of 
 our citizens were led to sign the petition referred to and unite with them in 
 saying it was done under misapprehension. 
 
 Besolved, That we heartily indorse Senate Bill 210 and Assembly Bill 410, 
 and ask for their immediate passage. 
 
 Besolved, That a copy of these resolutions be sent to each of our Repre- 
 sentatives, Hon. J. D. Spencer and Hon. G. G. Goucher. 
 
 G. H. Fancher, Chairman, 
 H. H. McClosket, Secretary. 
 
 After a "very intelligent discussion and exposition of the situation and in- 
 terest of Merced County in the general use of the abundant waters of the 
 mountain snowfields unrestricted by the greed and injustice of possible ripa- 
 rian owners, a committee of three were appointed to present the resolutions 
 of the meeting to the Legislature in person, and to urge our representatives 
 to vote and work for such bills as will most fully promote the interests of the 
 irrigators of the San Joaquin Valley in general and the present and possible 
 irrigators of Merced County in particular. W. W. Gray, C. Landrum and W. 
 L. Ashe compose the committee. The resolutions of the meeting were 
 ordered telegraphed to Sacramento. 
 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 Tlie True Inwardness. 
 
 From presentjindications the failure of the irrigation bills seems probable,, 
 unless the session of the Legislature is prolonged. If the Senate would have 
 passed the bills as they came from the Assembly, there was still time for the 
 work. The amendment offered by Senator Cross and adopted in Commit- 
 tejB of the Whole, to make Assembly bill 410 apply to water for the use of min- 
 ing, as well as for irrigation, will necessitate the return of the bill to the As- 
 sembly. The time is too short for this, and the only eflfect of the amendment 
 is to kill the bill. The amendment was never offered in good faith. Senator 
 
107 
 
 Cross lias been conspicuous in his enmity to the irrigation bills. He is an 
 able lawyer, and woU knew that his amendments were useless, except for ob- 
 struction. He knows that his amendment will not change the law as it now 
 stands, nor confer on the northern or mining section of the State any priv- 
 ilege which they cannot now exercise with unrestrained freedom. The people 
 of northern California have to-day the common and unrestricted right to ap- 
 propriate the waters of their streams and divert them for either mining or ag- 
 ricultural purposes. That right has been fully and unreservedly confirmed 
 by the Act of Congress of 1866, and by all the decisions of both State and Fed- 
 eral Courts. The riparian doctrine never has been applied to that section. 
 The very latest cas^ by our Supreme Court recognizas without hesitation the 
 rights of miners and ditch owners in mining regions to appropriate and divert 
 water. "We quote from the case of Lux vs. Haggin: 
 
 "When the law declares that the riparian proprietor is entitled to have the 
 waters of a stream flow in its natural channel, without diminution or altera- 
 tion, it does so because its flow imparts fertility to his land, and because wa- 
 ter in its pure state is indispensable for domestic uses. But this rule is no; 
 applicable to miners and ditch owners, simply because the conditions upon 
 which it is founded do not exist in their case." 
 
 The Court then goes on to say that the conditions upon which the rule is 
 founded do exist in agricultural districts. Here, then, is the law. The Court 
 in the same breath gives Southern California the riparian law and northern 
 California the doctrine of appropriation. And it must not be forgotten that 
 the riparian padlock is taken ofif the northern streams with no limitation. 
 Whether for irrigation or for mining, the water is free for all. Southern Cal- 
 ifornia discovered this state of the law, from the decision quoted, and came 
 begging to the Legislature to be placed on an equality with the north, and is 
 met with refusal at the hands of a northern Senator. What is the use of re- 
 enacting what is already law? 
 
 In itself the amendment of Senator Cross is harmless. It does not touch 
 the debris question. In Judge Sawyer's decision in the Woodruff case there 
 was no question of riparian rights involved. The destruction of property by 
 the deposit of debris, without regard to the locus of the property, whether on 
 or remote from the banks of the river, is there held to be unlawful. The 
 miners are not forbidden to appropriate water. They are enjoined from so 
 using it as to destroy the navigation of the river and cause injury to property 
 wherever it lies. These two propositions that the Cross amendmenf gives no 
 new right, and has no effect upon the debris problem, point to the conclusion 
 that Senator Cross has deliberately enlisted himself under the riparian ban- 
 ner, and that, under his leadership, irrigation in Southern California has re- 
 ceived its death-blow. 
 
108 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 Tbirsty Lands. 
 
 "Wherever water can be elevated, the land [Nile Valley] exhibits wonder- 
 ful fertility; and the amount of labor expended upon merely lifting water to 
 the highest attainable level, by means of the most primitive machines, is ab- 
 solutely prodigious as well as continual, for a few hours' intermission would 
 result in the burning up of the crop. At the line where the irrigating waters 
 halt the desert begins, and its limit is as sharply marked as a gravel walk 
 across a greensward.'' — General Colston, in Century. 
 
 Professor Langley has prophesied great things for those Qesert lands which 
 are merely infertile from being dry, of which the San Joaquin Valley — a 
 region, by the way, about the size of Egypt — is a fine example. The dififer- 
 ence between desert and garden, between a howling wilderness and a populous 
 region, is one of water plus some means of raising it (in countries where the 
 riparianists do not bar the way, as they do in California). This means is to 
 be the solar engine — run by the sun's heat — one of which, the invention of 
 Ericsson, is now at work in New York. This is a vision of the near future" 
 We can imagine the farmer in Southern California, instead of waiting anx- 
 iously for the inch or so of rain which may come or not come, looking at the 
 thermometer while it climbs above the hundred mark, with the comforting 
 thought that his irrigating is .being done by steam that costs nothing, made 
 by a fire that never goes out. Then shall those heated lands having the 
 greatest need have also the greatest water supply. Then shall the desert of 
 Sahara vanish, as did the "great American desert" years ago, and the place 
 thereof shall know it no more, and the melancholy shadoof shall no longer 
 moan for the ceaseless labor of the fellah who dips its bucket in the Nile. 
 Meanwhile, it is just as well to settle this riparian business according to 
 principles of common sense — ^just in anticipation the coming sun engines. 
 The common law has been called "the perfection of common sense " — that 
 is, in England. California should be a law unto herself. 
 
 Watsonville Fajoronian. 
 
 The Assembly has passed the JTresno irrigation bills, three in number. To 
 correct a false impression that is prevailing, we will state that Mr. Heath 
 ▼oted for all of them. Those bills passed the Assembly in good shape, but 
 the Senate is almost equally divided on the irrigation question. 
 
 It seems strange that men who are anxious to make records as anti-monop- 
 olists on the land and railroad questions, should strongly favor riparian 
 riphts, thus acting to the detriment of {thousands of settlers in the San Joa- 
 quin and southern valleys. 
 
109 
 
 Los Angeles Times. 
 
 A Great Irrigation Sclieme. 
 
 The project of bringing out the water of Rock Creek on to "Wild Horse Prai» 
 rie, as suggested in the Herald last summer seems to be in a fair way of ac- 
 complishment. Mr. M. L. Wicks, the most utterly tireless gentleman in Los 
 Angeles, is already at work carrying forward this great work with great and 
 intelligent energy. He is constructing a ditch eight miles in length that will 
 water 4,000 acres of excellent land in summer, while in winter, which is the 
 best time for irrigating vines and trees, there is water enough to irrigate 
 20,000 acres. The project is brave, bold and important and will be crowned 
 with success. 
 
 The land that has been selling at $6 per aore without water privileges in 
 that vicinity will be sold at $10 per acre with water right. This will make 
 about $40 for an inch of water. Since that amount of water at Ontaria, 
 Pomona and Riverside is considered worth $1,000, the difference is largely in 
 favor of Mr. Wicks and his highland prairie, which is nearly 3,000 feet above 
 the city of the Angels. 
 
 This location is admirable for growing cattle and hogs, barley, buckwheat, 
 corn, beans, peas and all kinds of deciduous fruits. That part of Los Angeles 
 county is shooting ahead at a tremendous rate and still with increasing, 
 velocity, 
 
 Modesto News. 
 
 Irrig^ation. 
 
 At Merced, a few days ago, the people of Merced county gave expression to 
 their opinion on the question of irrigation by the adoption of the following 
 resolutions: 
 
 Whereas, It has been brought to the attention of the citizens of Merced 
 county that a petition has been presented from this county to the Legislature 
 of California, for the avowed purpose of misleading its members as to the 
 wants of this county on the subject of irrigation; therefore be it 
 
 Resolved, That we, the people of this county, in mass meeting assembled, 
 do hereby declare that any attempts to mislead our representatives or others 
 into the belief that we as a county are opposed to irrigation, is unfair and 
 unjust. 
 
 Resolved, That we highly deprecate the unfair manner in which many of 
 our citizens were induced to sign the petition referred to and unite with them 
 in saying that it was done under a misapprehension. 
 
 Resolved, That we heartily indorse Senate Bill No. 210, and Assembly Bill 
 No. 410, and ask for their immediate passage. 
 
 Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be sent to each of our represen- 
 tatives — Hon. J. D. Spencer and Hon. G. G. Goucher. 
 
 The above resolutions were unanimously adopted and a committee, con- 
 sisting of W. L. Ashe, W. H. Hartley and C. Landrum was selected to go ta 
 
110 
 
 Sacramento on behalf of the people of Merced county, in the interest of the 
 bill. Senator Spencer, of Stanislaus, and Assembl^'man Goucher, of Mari- 
 posa, presented the resolutions to their respective Houses. The resolutions 
 speak for themselves. 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 If the Senate fails to do its duty relative to the passage of the irrigation 
 bills, it will not be for want of knowledge or light on the subject. The lead- 
 ing San Francisco papers have labored nobly in behalf of the people, and have 
 published column after column, covering the whole subject involved. The 
 Post of last Saturday had an excellent article, full of truth and point. The 
 Chronicle has given the subject repeated attention, and has frequently called 
 the attention of the Legislature to its duty in the premises. The Alta has 
 labored earnestly ever since the meeting of the Fresno Convention, and was 
 the first paper in the city that properly comprehended the situation, while 
 the Examiner has thrown the whole weight of its great influence in behalf 
 of the irrigators. In its issue of yesterday it had an especially able and 
 pointed article on the subject. The irrigators will not forget their friends, 
 who have rallied to their support in this their time of need. 
 
 Petaluma Courier. 
 
 The Irrigation Question. 
 
 The irrigation bill has passed the Assembly by the handsome vote of fifty- 
 one for, and sixteen against it. Legislation upon the irrigation question is 
 the most important, considering the interests involved, of this session. fThe 
 old common law doctrine of riparian rights has to be reversed, and tbe mam 
 principle of all sound law, of the greatest good to the greatest number, con- 
 trol legislation. God Almighty located the waters, not for the exclusive 
 benefit or control of the few right along the banks of the streams, but in- 
 tended them for the use of the great mass of the people, and the large dis- 
 tricts of country between them as well. A few men might as_well claim the 
 air and light where it is possible to control them as the water, jiu fact they 
 might as well claim that being first settlers they have a right to exclude any- 
 body else from the country where they live, because it might interfere with 
 privileges first claimed by them. The necessities of the great mass of the 
 people and the general welfare of the State should be considered in discuss- 
 ing this water question, as well as the rights of the few first riparian locators. 
 
 Los Angeles Express. 
 
 The Sacramento Bee, level-headed upon most subjects, has discuss6d 
 "slickens " so much that it is inclined to fly ofl" the handle whenever any- 
 thing comes to the surface which can in any way be construed to affect it. 
 
Ill 
 
 By some incomprehensible course of reasoning it construes the irrigation 
 measures now before the Legislature to be. in the interest of the hydraulic 
 miners, and is therefore fighting them as hard as it can. We cannot see that 
 there is any justification for this association. The objection has never been 
 made to the hydraulic miners that they consumed too miich water; it has 
 been that they dumped their tailings into the rivers and filled them up. 
 rhey are now prohibited from dumping their tailings in the rivers, and vir- 
 tually from pursuing the business of hydraulic mining at all. Drift miners, 
 however, require water, and so do quartz miners. It is not contended that 
 either drift mining or quartz mining does any damage to the streams. "Why, 
 then, should there be any objection to their obtaining as much water as they 
 require through legal methods, and why should not the legal methods be the 
 same to the miners as to their modest requirements as to other classes of 
 water consumers? In cases where there are no real conflicts of in- 
 terest, it appears to us to be bad policy to construct such conflicts artificially. 
 If the owners of the land along running streams are the exclusive owners of 
 the water, of course the interests of miners and agriculturists in the back 
 countries must all die together. Is that the end to which the Bee is directing 
 its efforts ? 
 
 Modesto Eepublican. 
 
 *»So Say We All of Us." 
 
 " We hope that a roll-call on the irrigation measures will soon be obtained 
 in the State Senate. We want a list of the men who are ready to fall down 
 before the Bull of Basham or Golden Calf of the cattle kings. We want a 
 record of those recreant representatives for future reference. We want to 
 watch them closely, and every time one sticks his head up for office we want 
 to hit it. The people of the State demand the passage of suitable irrigation 
 laws, and those who oppose the bills now pending are defying the will of 
 their masters — the people.- --FVesno Expositor. 
 
 We concur, and we don't want to hit their heads with a stuffed club, either, 
 but with a two-ton pile driver hammer, and drive them so deep into the 
 ground that the sound of Gabriel's trumpet on the resurrection morn will 
 not reach them. 
 
 Lux & Miller are the great riparian claimants in this valley, and according 
 to their own showing are robbing other riparian claimants on the San Joa- 
 quin river. There are older settlers on the banks of the river than Miller & 
 Lux, and their lands are located below the point where they tap the stream. 
 Now, suppose those riparian proprietors should take a notion into their 
 heads to ask Messrs. Miller & Lux to swallow some of their own medicine, 
 what then ? 
 8 
 
112 
 Sacramento Sunday Capital. 
 
 A Dangerous Amendment, 
 
 An eflfort is being made to amend Senate bill 210 declaring against 
 riparian rights, or the English common law. Our Supreme Court has shown 
 a disposition to sustain confining the water of the flowing streams to the 
 natural channels and preventing its use in this State for the most necessary 
 purposes, by a proviso giving to riparian proprietors the right to flow past 
 their premises of sufficient water for stock and domestic purposes. This 
 seems so fair and reasonable on its face that it has inclined many legislators, 
 unacquainted through personal knowledge and experience with the questions 
 involved in this momentous subject of irrigation, to look upon it with 
 favor. But we assert that this apparently fair and reasonable provision in 
 its practical effect would nullify all irrigation legislation, effectually check 
 the prosperity of the southern part of the State and cause it to retrograde in 
 the path of progress as fast as it has hitherto advanced. To make this clear 
 we set out by stating a fact familiar to every resident of that section, or any 
 other arid country, that the largest end of every stream is upward, and the 
 little end downward ; or, in other words, while the streams issue from the 
 mountains bold and strong they grow rapidly smaller as they advance into 
 the dry plains until, except in flood times, by evaporation and absorption, 
 they sink and disappear altogether. A few miles be yond these points of 
 disappearance, where the floods reach, spread over extensive tracts and 
 make swamps, are the lands of the riparians — swamp lands so-called, for 
 which they have obtained title from the State by the construction of drain- 
 age works, or levees to prevent overflow — the men who are opposing the 
 irrigation bills now before the Legislature. They hope, through the absurd 
 law referred to, to practically own all these streams and hold all the vast 
 interests above them at their mercy. This they now see they cannot hope 
 to accomplish on the bare monstrous proposition ^^involved in the common 
 law, and hence this amendment giving them more than they could have if 
 never a drop of water had been diverted above them. It was only in flood 
 time, in the unchanged natural conditions, that water reached them at all, 
 and then came a superabundance forming lakes and ponds lasting all the 
 season, while in the normal stages of the streams they disappeared miles 
 before they reached the lands that in flood time they submerged. What is 
 the effect then of this amendment? Is it not to give these alleged riparians 
 all they could get under the broadest construction of the common law? To 
 give them water for stock and domestic purposes, when the streams are not 
 in flood, and water is most needed for irrigation, would be to compel every 
 drop to remain in the channels to sink in the sands long before it reached 
 their lands, giving them power to levy tribute on the agricultural interests 
 above them in millions of dollars annually. Besides all these riparians — 
 cattle men — have long since found that the stagnant alkaline water festering 
 in ponds, sloughs and tule swamps, under the burning sun of the dry sea- 
 son, is injurious to their stock and have substituted^ with infinite pecuniary 
 
113 
 
 advantage, the cold, pure water of artesian and other wells, which is found 
 in abundance near the surface. The irrigation bills provide for the payment 
 to them of all damage that may result from the diversion of water above 
 them which must in time again reach them more permanently by percolation, 
 as we have elsewhere shown; but with this, which would satisfy all men in 
 every other walk of life actuated by the ordinary considerations of interest 
 and business, they are not satisfied. And this being so, in the light of the 
 plain truthful relation of facts given above, what are we to think? It is 
 impossible to view it in any other light than that they are striving (to put 
 it in the mildest form) to effect a huge speculation, in violation of justice, 
 right and public policy. More plainly speaking, they are using an imaginary 
 advantage as Shy lock did. The payment of their bond is not enough; a 
 dozen men at most insist upon being given the power to draw the life blood 
 from the fairest agricultural region of the State. They scorn the money 
 vdlue of their claims. They want the blood and life of those over whom 
 they imagine the law gives them an advantage. Hopeless of having this 
 openly confirmed they have resorted to insidious methods, trusting that 
 they may thus grasp the prize they cannot gain openly. It should be borne 
 in mind that in taking away and paying these men for their alleged riparian 
 rights, the same rights still remain to them that are common to all. They 
 may become appropriators of water connecting with the irrigating systems 
 above them so as to convey water with as little waste as possible, and in the 
 seasons of overflow they will still have, the only time they ever had it, more 
 water than they want. 
 
 Alta California. 
 
 Tbe Fresno Convention Billg. 
 
 The address of the Legislative Committee of the State Irrigation Con- 
 vention, just issued, has been laid before the Legislature and the people. It 
 is a calm and temperate, but strong appeal in behalf of the proposed irriga- 
 tion legislation now under consideration. In an appendix to the pamphlet 
 containing the printed address is to be found a reprint of articles from the 
 press of every portion of the State, endorsing and advocating the pending 
 irrigation bills. The Committee, comprising J. De Barth Shorb, Chairman, 
 and J. F. Wharton, W. S. Green (of the Colusa Sun), E. Hudnut, H. S. 
 Dixon, L. B. Kuggles, E. H. Tucker, and D. K. Zumwalt, are all gentlemen 
 of ability and intelligence, united to an extensive knowledge, practical and 
 theoretical, of the necessities of the State, the utilization of water for irriga- 
 tion, and the benefits thereby accruing to the people. In concluding their 
 address, the Committee says : 
 
 ' • We submit to your good judgment that the representatives of the people 
 have also good right to declare by statute the fact that the portion of the com- 
 mon law of England, relating to riparian rights, as expounded by the Courts, 
 is repugnant to and inconsistent with the climate, topography and physical 
 
114 
 
 condition of the State and the necessities of the people thereof, and the laws 
 thereof concerning the appropriation of water for purposes of irrigation. In 
 future water litigation the Supreme Court may accept it, or they may reject 
 it, as binding authority, so far as the past is concerned. Or they [may con- 
 sider it as evidence of the fact, although not conclusive. But with the 
 added clause, 'and to what extent form no part of such laws,* it will govern 
 their decisions in controversies arising over rights hereafter to be acquired. 
 "We shall have no new riparian owners to put stumbling blocks in the way of 
 irrigation." 
 
 This answers the objection made to the constitutionality of the second 
 section of the Wigglnton bill, which contains the declaration against the 
 riparian doctrine of the common law. It is maintained by eminent consti- 
 tutional lawyers that all so-called riparian rights can be legislated out of 
 existence without even compensation. There is no doubt but that the Legis- 
 lature should act to the very fullest extent of its constitutional powers *in 
 favor of irrigation. If this second section of the Wigginton bill exceeds 
 those powers, to that extent the Courts will annul it. Whatever benefit may 
 result to the people from its enactment should not be lost. If this section 
 is wholly constitutional, or constitutional only to a limited extent, give the 
 Courts an opportunity to so dfeclare. Following it comes the section pro- 
 viding for condemnation and compensation, which is inserted, not as a 
 legislative recognition that a riparian owner has any rights, but to establish 
 a mode by which such rights may be made subservient to the necessities of 
 irrigation, in the event that the Courts shall hereafter determine that riparian 
 rights have a place in the jurisprudence of the State. The presentation of 
 the address comes opportunely, at a moment when, reduced to a last ex- 
 tremity, the riparianists have engaged in an abortive attempt to enlist the 
 Bepublican party in its cause. The results of the riparian efforts in this 
 direction have not been successful outside of the Republican State Central 
 Committee. Such good friends of irrigation as Senator McClure and others 
 are not to be dragged into deserting the people's cause, and ignoring the 
 necessities and wants of a million people at the instigation of a few moneyed 
 Bwamp-land monopolists, nor even at the solicitation of narrow-minded party 
 managers. 
 
 Daily Post. 
 
 Riparian "Wrongs— Tine TVater of the State Belongrg to the Beneficial 
 Users— A Clear Exposition of the Fallacy of ** Riparian Rijf hts **— 
 The Facts, the Law and Common Justice All in Favor of the Appro- 
 priators . 
 
 Riparian rights are public wrongs. 
 The doctrine of paramount ownership of water in rivers by riparian 
 owners is not founded upon right at all, but was an English expedient 
 for settling a maze of difficulties which do not exist and cannot exist in any 
 part of America. 
 
115 
 
 Riparian ownership of water is not founded upon right. If that can be 
 demonstrated, down falls at once all the gorgeous superstructure of " divinely 
 ordered inheritance," " alienable right," ''vested right," "the God sent 
 law that water should pass untouched from the hills to the ocean," and all 
 the bogus assumption of superior power with which the riparianists have 
 surrounded their position. All this assumption is nothing but the beating 
 to tomtoms the slow music, the solemn mummery with which the bene- 
 ficiaries of a Druidical mystery befog the understanding of their dupes. 
 The trouble is the riparianists have asserted their rights so long that 
 they have got to believe in them. They start out with false premises. Their 
 opponents answer their argument, but fail to cut at the root of the evil 
 and attack the premises. The irrigators argue about expediency, public 
 necessity, and in some sort of shadowy way admit that the riparian owners 
 have rights. It is not so; the irrigators have all the reason on their side, and 
 the riparian owners nothing but a bald assumption of right. 
 
 The theory, doctrine and law of riparian ownership sprang from a state of 
 aflfairs peculiar to England. At a time when there was no law on the subject 
 of ownership in right in running water, disputes arose, which the Courts 
 were called upon to settle. 
 
 THE SITUATION IN ENGLAND. 
 
 The courts looked abroad and took a birdseye view of the situation. 
 They saw a small territory with a surplus of water and a scarcity of means 
 of transportation and motive power. They saw a country with an annual 
 rainfall of 80 inches or more, in which the hay and grain were ruined by rain 
 one season in three. They did not fail to note that the water courses of the 
 country were pre-eminently useful for the purposes. First, as a means to 
 transport the products of the country to the seaboard, and second, to furnish 
 power to grind corn. There were no railways in those days, and the only 
 competitor of the schooner and barge was the huge, clumsy farm wagon. 
 There was no steam in those days, and the only way to grind corn was by 
 windmills, which even now dot the thousand hills of England, or by huge 
 water wheels on the banks of running streams. During many weeks in each 
 year the wind does not blow, and so the water wheel was the only available 
 power. On the other hand, the courts saw a few men who desired to ob- 
 struct navigation by erecting low bridges or monopolizing water power by 
 damming the headwaters of streams, to the injury and exclusion of mill 
 owners below them. The courts did not see any thirsty plains waiting for the 
 coming gladness of irrigation. So they said it is icise and expedient to con- 
 serve our rivers for navigation and for water power. That is the course 
 which will bring the greatest good to the greatest number, and that is the 
 course we will adopt. 
 
 FOE THE PUBLIC GOOD. 
 
 Nothing about "God-given rights," "inalienable inheritance'* or "superior 
 position" in that decision; but simply the plain, homely doctrine — now called 
 
116 
 
 the Americau doctrine — that the interests of the majority must rule unsettled 
 points. The English judges were wise, and had great foresight. They 
 rightly divined where the greatest good lay, and, under the doctrine of ripar- 
 ian rights, streams and water courses have been saved and improved, till to- 
 day there is no single spot in all England more than fifteen miles distant from 
 water communication. But the law they made — for no such law existed be- 
 fore they made it — was a hard, fast and rigid law. It said: "You shall not 
 touch the water if your neighbor below you does not want you to; and your 
 neighbor below is any one on the banks of the stream, down to the very out- 
 let. You shall not diminish the flow of the water. You may run a wheel 
 with it, but the water must be sent back into the river. We have for expe- 
 diency established this doctrine of undiminished flow, and there can be no 
 departure from it. 
 
 This doctrine was carried out to a ridiculous point. A man sued his 
 neighbor for diminishing a watercourse, and asked for damages. The courts 
 ruled that the man who has a homestead or park upon a watercourse can 
 forever condemn that water to idleness and disuse at his own pleasure, no 
 matter at what cost to public convenience, because he has a right to listen to 
 its music as it flows and to delight his eyes with the sight of it as it dances 
 by his land. 
 
 THE SENTIMENTAL HUMBUG. 
 
 There is the effect of the riparian rights in clear, vivid phrasing, that it 
 would be hard to improve upon. The man who owns a foot of land at the 
 mouth of the San Joaquin river can say to every man who needs water from 
 the San Joaquin, the Stanislaus, the Merced river and all tributaries: "Touch 
 not the waters of your streams, for I wish to delight my eyes with a full and 
 complete flow as it dances by and my ears must be tickled with the music of 
 its muddy plash to the uttermost tickle." 
 
 Such a doctrine may please a nation of dilettante — a country of S3lvan 
 sentimentalists; but, even were it good law, and based on right, it would 
 never be allowed to stand before the robust common sense of California and 
 the neeSs of her people. But it is not law. No man has a right to the un- 
 interrupted use of another's property, and the water which rises in the Sierra 
 Nevada is not the property of the man at the mouth of the San Joaquin. 
 That water reaches the mouth of a river is only because of the neglect or 
 inability of the dwellers higher up the river to appropriate it. The man at 
 the mouth takes advantage of his neighbor's neglect, lack of desire, or lack 
 of ability to use their property, but it would be absurd to hold that such neg- 
 lect gives him title. As well might A say that because B has allowed him to 
 ride his horses for years, he has a title to the horses, or an easement in them. 
 
 All water is first the property of the man upon whose land it falls, and if he 
 fails to use it, it vests in the State — is public property and open to public use 
 the same as the public air. How utterly contemptible, how silly, does the 
 riparianist's theory of ownership appear when placed by the side of the only 
 true principle, that the water is primarily the property of the man on whose 
 
117 
 
 land it falls, or, failing him, that it is a public element. Will any one deny- 
 that first title to water rests in the man on whose land it falls? 
 
 A TEST or THE DOCTRINE. 
 
 Perhaps some riparianist may; so we apply the test. A digs a pond on his 
 land into which rainfalls. B complains that the flow of water in the creek 
 on whose banks he owns land is diminished by the pond of A. There is no 
 law which will listen to such a complaint. But if the complaint was that A 
 had obstructed the flow of a stream, the case would be difl'erent, for A not be- 
 ing able to show that the water fell on his land, has to fall tack on his propo- 
 sition as an appropriator of public property. 
 
 If the man upon whose land the water falls fails to use it, then it becomes 
 one of the elements for the use of the general public under regulations for its 
 distribution. 
 
 Blackstone has this to say about the use of the element: " Thus, too, the 
 benefits of the elements, the li>^ht, air and water can only be appropriated by 
 occupancy.'' And in another place the grand old law expounder says: ' *He 
 who first applies the elements to a beneficial use has the right." Nothing in 
 that about sentimental use. No plash of murmuring brooks, or glittering 
 gleams of sunlight on the rippling stream. A man can only own water by 
 using it for a beneficial purpose, and he who lirst connects his labor with the 
 public element has the better title . 
 
 Occupancy alone can constitute ownership in an element. The riparianists 
 are not occupiers. Listening to the plash of the water, or fishing off the end 
 of a wharf, or allowing one's cattle to slake their thirst in the stream or fatten 
 on marsh grass, does not constitute occupancy nor give title, and even if they 
 did, it would only be title in default of a better one, and it would not hold as 
 against a better title. The main point is that the water is the properly of 
 the State, open for beneficial occupancy, under the rule which applies to the 
 public land — "first come, first served, but only a reasonable amount for any 
 one." 
 
 THE CASE IN A NUTSHELL. 
 
 It matters not what rules prevail in England, Spain, or Timbuctoo, or 
 what construction the courts have placed on the law as it now stands. The 
 State owns the water, and after conserving the two navigable rivers will allow 
 the remainder to be appropriated for irrigation or mining ditches. The ri- 
 parian owners cannot even set up the claim of prior right. In 1846 the ap- 
 propriation of water for mining ditches began in a small way and in a year 
 numbers of ditches had been built. The Nevada Water Company located in 
 1850, Bear River 1851, Bicknell Ditch 1851, Todd Valley 1851, Dixon's 1851, 
 Natoma Co. 1852, Grass Valley 1852, Kilham's 1852, Humphrey's 1852, 
 Mokelumne Hill 1852, and so forth. And the rights of all those ditch own- 
 ers have been confirmed by the highest court in the land. To carry out the 
 doctrine of riparian rights means that at the instance of any owner. of a foot 
 of swamp land below them, these ditches, which cost millions, can be de- 
 stroyed. 
 
118 
 
 Not only is the doctrine of riparian rights founded on so flimsy a base as 
 " English expediences," but it is absurd. It is illogical. In efifect, it means 
 that no one shall use the water. Chief Justice Shaw showed this in the fol- 
 lowing terse language: "If the plaintiff could, in a case like the present, 
 have such an action, then every proprietor on the brook, from its source to 
 its outlet, will have the same, and so on to the ocean, and because none 
 might diminish the flow the rights of all would amount to nothing, as none 
 could put the water to any use." 
 
 Having established the State's right to the water, subject to appropriation, 
 the case presents no formidable difficulties to statesmen. It is simply nec- 
 essary to formulate some rule, deciding how much an appropriator may 
 take, and defining the method of legal appropriation. It is of no use wast- 
 ing time discussing the rights of riparianists. They have no rights in this 
 cause. If they want to use water, they must be made to take it on the same 
 terms as other citizens, and not expect to own a river because they live on 
 its banks. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 Irrigfation— Its Importance to the State and San Francisco. 
 
 To the Editor of the Examiner — Sib: More than thirty years have passed 
 since the waters of our streams first began to be appropriated, diverted and 
 applied to the cultivation of the soil by irrigation. The early settlers who 
 abandoned the pick and shovel for the plow watered their few acres of barley 
 and vegetables through small flumes an^ ditches conducting water from 
 neighboring streams. Immigration poured in rapidly, population increased 
 enormously, and after the example of the first comers it came to be the uni- 
 versal custom to take the water of the stream for irrigation. Natural justice 
 led to the adoption, by mutual consent between the appropriators, of the 
 rule that the prior appropriator has the better right to the extent of his act- 
 ual diversion for a useful purpose. This rule became universally recognized, 
 and was adopted and enforced by the Courts. It rested upon that most solid 
 of the foundations of the law — the wish and consent of the governed. It 
 became the common law of California. Under its supposed protection capi- 
 tal and labor, energy and enterprise were embarked in the development of 
 the agricultural resources of the State. Year after year has witnessed the 
 increasing appropriation of water for the irrigation of arable land. Probably 
 one-third of the population of the State is now directly interested in irriga- 
 tion. Very few are there who are not interested either directly or indirectly. 
 All have proceeded upon the theory that the appropriation of water gave an 
 absolute right as against all the world. For over thirty years it never entered 
 into the wildest dreams of the owner of land upon the banks of a stream 
 that he had any rights whatever against an appropriator of water from the 
 same stream, other than what he himself might hav* acquired by actual ap- 
 propriation. And now, after all these years, when the magnitude and in- 
 
119 
 
 creasing importance of irrigation interests and the approaching necessity for- 
 careful and economical distribution of water for irrigation and mining have 
 made the time ripe for legislative regulation, the river-bank owner awakens 
 from his thirty years' sleep and undertakes to tell us that there is nothing to 
 regulate; that appropriators have no rights and never had any; that irrigation 
 is robbery, and irrigators are highwaymen. 
 
 That is the long and short of the riparianists' argument before the irri- 
 gation committees of the Legislature, against legislation. They say that we 
 have adopted the common law of England, that the owner of land through 
 which a stream passes has a right to have the stream flow in its natural 
 state, without diminution or alteration. 
 
 The States of the Union have accepted the common law only so far as it is 
 applicable to our wants, necessities, circumstances and conditions. This 
 principle is established by a unanimous and undisturbed line of authorities, 
 running through the reports of the highest Courts of the United States, and 
 of nearly every State in the Union. The following quotations from able 
 Courts and eminent Judges are the basis for the assertion of this propo- 
 sition : 
 
 In Parker vs. Foote. 19 Wend., N. Y., p. 318, Justice Bronson in de- 
 livering the opinion of the Court (of which Samuel Nelson, afterward ele- 
 vated to the Supreme Court of the United States, concurring) says: *' It 
 cannot be necessary to cite cases to prove that those portions of the common 
 law of England which are hostile to the spirit of our institutions, or which 
 are not adapted to the existing state of things in this country, form no part 
 of our law. " 
 
 In Keats vs. Hugo, 115 Mass., 208, Chief Justice Gray, now on the United 
 States Supreme bench, approved and followed Justices Bronson and Nelson 
 in molding the common law to the existing state of things in the United 
 States and not applying it to our growing cities, were working the most 
 mischievous consequences, and cites decisions in Maine, North Carolina, 
 Maryland, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Alabama and Ohio, based upon similar 
 reasons. 
 
 Justice Lyman" Trumbull, illustrious as a statesman and jurist, held the 
 same views in Seely vs. Peters, 10 Illinois, 142. In Coffin vs. Ditch Com- 
 pany, 6 Colorado, 446, the Court say: *' It is contended that the common 
 law principles of riparian proprietorship prevailed in Colorado until 1876, 
 and that the doctrine of priority of right to water by priority of appropria- 
 tion thereof was first recognized and adopted in the Constitution. But we 
 think the latter doctrine has existed since the date of the earliest appropria- 
 tions of water within the boundaries of the State. The climate is dry, and 
 the soil, when moistened only by the usual rainfall, is arid and unproduc- 
 tive; except in a few favored sections, artificial irrigation for agriculture is an 
 absolute necessity. Water in the various streams thus acquires a value un- 
 known in moister climates. Instead of being a mere incident to the soil, it 
 rises, when appropriated, to the dignity of a distinct usufructuary estate or 
 
120 
 
 •right of property. It has always been the policy of the National, as well as 
 the Territorial and State Governments, to encourage the diversion and use of 
 water for agriculture; and vast expenditures of time and money have been 
 made in reclaiming and fertilizing by irrigation portions of our unproductive 
 territory. Houses have been built, permanent improvements made, the soil 
 has been cultivated, and thousands of acres have been rendered immensely 
 valuable, with the understanding that appropriations of water would be pro- 
 tected. Deny the doctrine of priority or superiority of right by priority of 
 appropriation and a great part of the value of all this property is at once de. 
 etroyed. * * * We conclude, then, that the common law do3trine, giving 
 the riparian owner a right to the flow of water in its natural channel upon 
 and over his lands, even though he makes no beneficial use thereof, is inap- 
 plicable to Colorado. Imperative necessity, unknown to the countries 
 which gave it birth, compels the recognition of another doctrine in conflict 
 therewith. 
 
 In Acheson vs. Peterson, 20 Wallace, 507,' the Supreme Court of the United 
 States say : 
 
 " As respects the use of water for mining purposes, the doctrine of the 
 common law declaratory of the rights of riparian owners were at an early day 
 after the discovery of gold found to be inapplicable, or applicable only in a 
 very limited extent, to the necessity of miners, and inadequate to their pro- 
 duction." 
 
 In Basey vs. Gallagher, 20 Wallace, 670, the same 'Court say that the 
 views expressed and the rulings mide in Acheson vs. Peterson "are 
 equally applicable to the use of water on the public lands for pur- 
 poses of irrigation. No distinction is made in those States and Terri- 
 tories by the customs of miners and settlers or by the Courts in the 
 rights of the first appropriator from the use made of water, if the use be a 
 beneficial one." 
 
 It is safe to say that the highest Courts of the United States, and of 
 nearly every state in the Union, have held it to be their duty to modify, or 
 refuse to apply, the common law of England, where it was unsuited to the 
 necessities and circumstances of the commanity or locality. The Courts of 
 England have modified or cast aside parts of the common law where they 
 have found them unsuited to modern emergencies. 
 
 Are our necessities and conditions such that we should have accepted the 
 riparian doctrine with the rest of the common law? Is it consistent with our 
 climate, the physicial conditions of the State, the necessities of the people, 
 and the customs and usages of more than thirty years, to say that a stream 
 shall flow from its source to its mouth without diminution? Nothing is more 
 certainly established, beyond peradventure, than that irrigation is a neces- 
 sity throughout the southern part of .the State, and in many of the northern 
 portions. In the south the rainfall is so slight, the climate so dry and the 
 heat of the sun so intense that the melting snows of the Sierras bring, in 
 truth, the water of life to vegetation in the valleys. Prior to the introduction 
 
121 
 
 of irrigation many parts of the plains of the San Joaquin were barren wastes. 
 There is no article of food for either man or beast which can be raised with- 
 out irrigation. Orans^es, grapes, almonds, wheat, corn, alfalfa, all live and 
 thrive by the water from streams rising in the mountains. Farms or vineyards 
 without canals or ditches are unknown, impossible. Millions would not have 
 been expended in irrigating canals if they were unnecessary. Deprive that 
 country of the waters of its rivers, and it were as well that the Pacific Ocean 
 covered it a thousand fathoms deep and rolled its breakers against the rugged 
 sides of the Sierras. 
 
 Is it beyond question that irrigation is a necessity? It is shown that in 
 adopting the common law we should cist aside every part of that system 
 which is unsuited to our necessities or inapplicable to our condition. It is 
 claimed that the English riparian principle does not recognize the right to use 
 water for irrigation. This is the very antipodes of the law of appropriation. 
 Under it the very last owner at the mouth of the stream is entitled to have its 
 full flow, less what may be applied to purely domestic uses by owners above 
 him. Each owner on the stream has the same right as against those above 
 him. In a word, riparianism means no irrigation. It may be assumed that 
 in some States this principle has been modified by the Courts, so as to permit 
 irrigation, of riparian lands only, to a limited extent, and should be modified 
 here. To this the reply is twofold : First, that no such modification could ap- 
 proach the satisfaction of our necessities; and secondly, we have already done 
 far better; we have adopted the policy of "first in time first in right," and in- 
 stead of restricting ourselves to the irrigation of lands upon the banks of riv- 
 ers, we Jiave gone back from the banks to wherever water could be most suc- 
 cessfully and profitably utilized, and we have now in view such proper regu- 
 lations of the use of water as shall realize the greatest attainable productive- 
 ness with the least possible waste. 
 
 The customs and usages in regard to water rights were very early adopted 
 by our Courts, and thus became a part of our common law. The law of ap- 
 propriation took its oriqin in necessity. It sprang up regardless of the owner' 
 ship of lands upon river banks. It would have come into existence notwith- 
 standing the opposition of such owners. This necessity, which is now and 
 always has been the foundation of the law of prior appropriation, was not 
 changed by the purchase of the river banks from the Government by private indi- 
 viduals. The law of appropriation has been universally supposed to be the 
 paramount Iftw, and rights acquired under not to be hampered by privileges 
 existing in a riparian owner. For nearly thirty years the decisions of the 
 Supreme Court have been uniform in recognizing and maintaining such rigjits 
 as absolute, and during that time that Court has never decided in favor of a 
 riparian owner against an appropriator. 
 
 The law. of appropriation, as it exists in the unwritten law of custom, 
 usage and judicial decision, should have its place in our statute books in such 
 form and with such unmistakable plainness that no riparian owner can be 
 heard objecting to legislation upon irrigation. 
 
122 
 
 This is not merely a controversy between irrigators and riparianists as to 
 who shall have the water. It is either in-igation or desolation. To sustain 
 riparianism is to abolish irrigation completely. To declare for appropriation 
 is to give the State incalculable benefits which will be derived from the 
 utilization of all our waters for irrigation. 
 
 Where does San Francisco stand with relation to this question? She 
 should be in the foremost rank of the appropriators. The wealth of the 
 agricultural reso^irces of the State are year by year pouring into her lap- 
 Will she sit idly by and be robbed of one-half of her earnings? Is there any 
 future prosperity for a seaport on the margin of a desert? Have railroads 
 been built, steamship lines organized, transportation facilities in every way 
 from this city south and immigration encouraged for nothing? No sane 
 man doubts that but for the population an productiveness of the interior of 
 the State this city would be a village. Allow the riparian wolves to destroy 
 the south and then measure your commerce. Every business interest her© 
 should hasten to speak loud for appropriation and irrigation. X. 
 
 Alta California. 
 
 A Killin£f Amendment. 
 
 Of the irrigation bills under consideration in the Legislature, the first 
 in natural order has been the '* Wigginton bill." This is the bill which, if 
 passed, effectually squelches any further handicapping of irrigation. After 
 adding to the Civil Code the new sections proposed by this bill, and repeal- 
 ing the obnoxious riparian Section 1422, a basis will have been laid for 
 further legislation. Under the false pretense of justice to all, amendments 
 have been offered in the Senate to the effect that "the right of riparian pro- 
 prietors to the use of water in running streams for actual family and domes- 
 tic use, and for the irrigation of land where practicable, and for the watering 
 of cattle and other stock of said proprietor, shall not be impaired by the pro- 
 visions of this Act." 
 
 This would change the whole force and effect of the bill from its orignal 
 purpose, which is to foster and encourage irrigation, into a mere re-enact- 
 ment of the Enghsh riparian law, with the additional privilege to the ripar- 
 ian owner which the common law does not confer, that is, " the irrigation 
 of land where practicable." This is. a barren privilege, however, for under 
 the law of England a riparian owner cannot irrigate, and, according to the 
 loudly-repeated vociferations of the riparianist, we cannot modify the English 
 doctrine. So we must leave out the question of irrigation by a riparian 
 owner entirely in considering the proposed amendment. But it is urged, 
 and may seem just to those who may be ignorant of the physical condition 
 of most of the streams from which water is diverted for irrigation, that the 
 diversion of water for irrigation should not be so great as to deprive the 
 owner of the banks of water for actual family and domestic use, and for the 
 watering of cattle and stock. None know better than the three firms of 
 
123 
 
 -cattle-dealers who comprise the riparian army, that the effect of this amend- 
 ment would be a prohibition against the use of the rivers of the Great 
 Southern Valley for any purpose except the overflowing of their swamps. 
 The rivers in that section derive their waters from the melting snows of the 
 Sierras. Many of them run dry during the lust of the summer, and then, 
 gradually increasing in flow, send down immense volumes of water in the 
 winter and spring. At the higher stages of water there is enough for all. 
 As the streams begin to fall, and the irrigation season sets in, the amount of 
 water diminishes to such an extent that before reaching the swamps upon 
 which they overflow, the water sinks in the beds and totally disappears. A 
 stream which may be a swollen torrent as it leaves the mountains, becomes 
 less by degrees as it advances in its course across the plains, until finally no 
 vestige of moisture remains. 
 
 If this water thus wasted is applied to irrigation, it will be the farmers' 
 salvation. Take a map of the State and look at Kings Kiver, Kern River 
 and others. They course for forty, fifty and sixty miles from the moun- 
 tains before finally sinking. Who is injured if in that course the water is 
 diverted? The water is unfit for domestic purposes. It breeds fever in 
 oattle; it settles in stagnant pools and poisons the atmosphere for man and 
 beast. The natural laws of necessity demand that if there are uses to which 
 this water can be put, not to be supplied by any other means, and other uses 
 which can be satisfied from other sources, the former class of use should 
 have the better right and the latter compelled to resort to other devices. The 
 cattlemen must yield to this necessity and obtain their water supply from 
 the abundant underground resources of the great valley by means of wells. 
 They not only know this, but they have actually availed themselves of the 
 knowledge. They are wilfully false in pleading that river water is necessary 
 for their stock or for their domestic purposes. They have been engaged in 
 a systematic effort to befog, bewilder and deceive the Legislature as to their 
 legal rights, and as to the facts of the controversy between themselves and 
 irrigators. Under the condamnation section of the bill, the irrigators will 
 have to pay for wells enough to give them water for all domestic purposes 
 And for watering cattle. What^can they ask more? This proposed amend- 
 ment is equivalent to striking out the enacting clause. Any Senator who 
 wishes to see irrigation buried fathoms deep will vote for it. No man can 
 befuddle the irrigators into believing the amendment is offered or supported 
 for any purpose than to kill the bill, and they will treat its supporters 
 accordingly. 
 
 Alta California. 
 
 La^v and Irri^ration— Flexibility and Reasonableness of the Common 
 Ija-«v Wben Intelli^^ently Construed. 
 
 Irrigation was not a necessity where the common law had its origin. 
 Flowing water was first used in England for supplying the ordinary wants of 
 men, including the use of water for domestic purposes, and watering stock. 
 
124 
 
 Afterwards, water was used for what was called extraordinary purposes, such 
 as propelliug machinery, for mauufactures and the like. -Where the civil 
 law prevailed the ordinary use of water included irrigation. By the common 
 law, according to the weight of authority, a riparian proprietor might use all 
 the water of the stream for ordinary purposes. But his right to the extraor- 
 dinary use of water was limited by like rights in others. In France, Spain, 
 Italy, Mexico and other countries where irrigation is necessary, systems of 
 laws have been developed for the economical distribution of flowing water, 
 among such landed proprietors as own lands so situated as to be suscepti- 
 ble of irrigation by the diversion of streams. These systems are the result 
 of the experience of ages, moulded into laws by codes, edicts and customs. 
 By means of irrigation, thus regulated by law, more than one-half of the peo- 
 ple of the world are enabled to subsist. 
 
 The common law has not been in force until very recently where irrigation 
 was required. In no part of the United States is irrigation practiced to any 
 considerable extent, except in the territory acquired from Mexico. No case 
 has arisen in this State where the fact that water must be used for irrigation 
 has been taken into consideration as a guide to a proper decision. It has 
 been suggested that, inasmuch as convenient laws for economical irrigation 
 exist only in counties where arbitrary rule prevails, that no effective system 
 can be devised or executed in a free government controlled by the common 
 law. This suggestion comes from a total misconception of the principles of 
 the common law. It is the elasticity and adaptability of the common law to 
 all new changes in the circumstances and conditions of civilized man that 
 constitutes its superiority over arbitrary codes. 
 
 LEADING LIGHTS OF THE LAW. 
 
 Chancellor Kent tells us: 
 
 •' A great proportion of the rules and maxims which constitute the immense 
 Codes of the common law, grew into use by gradual adoption, and received 
 from time to time the sanction of the Courts of Justice, without any legisla- 
 tive Act or interference. It was the application of the dictates of natural 
 justice and of cultivated reason to particular cases. In the just language of 
 Sir Matthew Hale, the common law of England is • not the product of the 
 wisdom of some one man, or society of men, in any one age, but of the wis- 
 dom, counsel, experience and observation of many ages of wise and observing 
 men.' And his further remarks on this subject would be well worthy the 
 consideration of those bold projectors who can think of striking off a perfect 
 code of law at a single essay; ' Where the subject of any law is single, the 
 prudence of one age may go far at one essay to provide a fit law; and yet, 
 even in the wisest provisions of that kind, experience shows us that new and 
 tinthought of emergencies often happen that necessarily require new supple- 
 ments, abatements, or explanations. But a body of laws that concern the 
 common justice, applicable to a great kingdom, is vast and comprehensive;, 
 consists of infinite particulars, and must meet with various emergencies, and 
 
125 
 
 therefore requires much time and much experience, as well as much wisdom 
 and prudence, succes.sively to discover defects and inconveniences, and to 
 apply apt supplements and remedies for them; and such are the common 
 laws of England, namely, the productions of much wisdom, time and expe- 
 rience,'" 
 
 Professor Pomeroy's excellent work on municipal law was written while 
 he was uninfluenced by any local surroundings, and his graphic description 
 of the principles of the common law, written under such circumstances, will 
 be read with interest. He said: 
 
 " The underwritten law, by its very process of becoming law, is continu- 
 allyjrejecting what has outgrown, and stating new rules to apply to the relations 
 which are constantly arising. It pushes out its advances in every direction. 
 If the enterprise of any portion of the citizens has opened new channels of 
 trade and business, it anticipates the legislature, and is immediately at hand 
 to define and establish the new rights and duties which may spring from the 
 untried field of activity. It cannot be denied that this power of the law of 
 judicial decision is one or great importance, and that it gives the system a 
 decided superiority over the other as a practical instrument for adjusting the 
 private relations of the people of a State. The fourth requisite of a perfect 
 municipal law is, that its rules, as they exist at any given date, should be 
 flexible, and should embrace the power of admitting exceptions to their general 
 acquirements, so that, when a case does not fall within the reason, although 
 it may within the letter of a regulation, it shall not be controlled by it, con- 
 trary to right and equity. Every National jurisprudence should aim at pro- 
 moting justice; the nearer that it approaches to the teachings of conscience 
 and the morality of Christianity the nearer it is to an ideal legislation. The 
 contrast between the statutory code and the free law of judicial decision in 
 this faculty of doing right by adaptation to the difl'erent circumstances is 
 striking and exhibits in a clear light the superiority of the latter system. The 
 one is rigid and inflexible in its rules; they may be repealed by Legislatures, 
 but while they last they admit of no exceptions. The very nature of a statute, 
 as the expression of the supreme will of the State, allows of no interference 
 with its provisions by the courts or other departments of the Government. 
 It may require judicial construction to arrive at the meaning of particular 
 enactments; but this once ascertained, they must be implicitly followed. 
 Were the judges permitted to bend the statutory rules to meet the exigencies 
 of individual cases, and thus promote substantial justice, their essential char- 
 acter would be lost; they would become part and parcel of the unwritten 
 law." 
 
 COMMON LAW AND IRRIGATION. 
 
 Why may not the principles of the common law, as described by these 
 learned authors, be invoked for the formation of rules and regulations by the 
 courts for the distribution of water for irrigation? Shall it be said that the 
 common law cannot survive a drouth, and that it be enforced in an arid 
 country the inhabitants must perish? Does not nature, the parent of the 
 
126 
 
 common law, exist in all climates, both wet and dry? Why may not the dic- 
 tates of natural justice and of "cultivated reason" be applied in a desert as 
 well as in a swamp? Why may not the courts say that in a country where 
 liuman life can only be sustained by irrigation, that water for irrigation is a 
 natural right and its use for such a purpose is an ordinary use? Why may 
 not the courts hold that each land-owner over whose land water can be made 
 to flow, in a desert, has an equal and common right with all others similarly 
 situated to the use of such water? Why may not the courts apply the well- 
 known rule of the common law to this ordinary use of water, and class it with 
 the use of water for domestic purposes, and give to the first appropriator so 
 much water as is absolutely necessary for the natural want of irrigation? If 
 the principles of the common law are inconsistent with an economical and 
 convenient system of irrigatiou, because irrigation was not generally prac- 
 ticed in England, it will be the first time the common law has failed because 
 new conditions have arisen. If the common law is not elastic, how did the 
 Federal Courts acquire maritime jurisdiction over the great lakes and rivers 
 of the United States, when by all English authorities that jurisdiction was 
 confined to where the tide ebbs and flows? Why do the Courts of this country 
 deny the common law doctrine that light and air will pass by deed as an ap- 
 purtenant to a house having windows, if English precedents, however absurd, 
 must be enforced in this country? Why did the Supreme Court of this State 
 refuse to enforce the common law rule in regard to fencing in one's cattle, if 
 it had no power to reject common law rules which were repugnant to our cus- 
 toms? If the common law is so absolute and arbitrary as to require the 
 abandonment of one-half of California, because water cannot be used for ir- 
 rigation, why have we in our common law books more than 
 
 THBEE THOUSAND OVEERULED CASES? 
 
 If one decision in regard to water, rendered a hundred years ago, must be 
 precedent for all other cases wherein the use of water is involved, why have 
 ■we in England and the United States hundreds of decisions making distinc- 
 tions and discriminations between different cases involving the use of water? 
 If the common law is not elastic, and its principles adapted to the growth and 
 development of a free people, how does it happen that the usages and cus- 
 toms of a rude people in Eugland, without manufactories or any of the appli- 
 ances or refinements of modern civilization, have been enlarged and expanded 
 by the wisdom of learned Judges, until those customs and usages constitute 
 only small springs or rivulets at the headwaters of the mighty rivers of learn- 
 ing and law, which constitute the governing principles of all countries in 
 which the English language is spoken? If there is anything good or wise in 
 the laws of other countries on the subject of irrigation, why may not our 
 Judges be guided by the experience of such countries? Why may they not fol- 
 low the examples of the great Judges of England, who, without legislation, 
 ■engrafted upon and adopted, as a part of the common law, the law merchant 
 of Continental Europe — the maritime law which had been developed on the 
 shores of the Mediterranean, and the principles of equity which had grown 
 
127 
 
 and matured for more than 2,000 years by the learning and experience of the 
 people of Rome? It ought not to be difficult for the Courts of California to 
 find precedents and good reasons to allow the life-giving element of water to 
 fructify the fields. They ought to find laws which will deny to one selfish 
 man owning forty acres of swamp or marshy land on the Bay of San Francisco 
 the power to deprive the people of the great interior of the State of all means 
 of subsistence by denying them the right of irrigation. 
 
 WHAT IS TO BE DONE? 
 
 Unfortunately the Courts hesitate to apply 'the principles of the common 
 law to the use of water for irrigation. Ruin threatens the State. What is to 
 be done? Have we a remedy in our form of government? We answer, yes. 
 The legislative department may also make municipal laws. And from time 
 immemorial, when the Courts were unable to provide a remedy, or failed to 
 enforce the principles of common law by reason of technical bewilderment, 
 the legislative department has furnished a remedy. It is gratifying to know 
 that in all that portion of the United States acquired from Mexico, except 
 Nevada and California, the Legislatures and the Courts have operated in 
 harmony in establishing and enforcing wise laws for the regulation of irriga- 
 tion. We find complete systems in existence in Colorado, Wyoming, Mon- 
 tana, Dakota, New Mexico, Idaho, Utah and Arizona. Some of these 
 commonwealths furnished examples of great wisdom in adjusting the rights 
 of irrigators. The laws of Colorado are superior in effectiveness and sim- 
 plicity to any we have been able to find in other countries. 
 
 There can be no question of the power of the Legislature to deal with this 
 subject. That power is conceded. Professor Pomeroy, in speaking of the 
 laws of Colorado and the Territories last enumerated, says: 
 
 " It is enough to say that in each of these commonwealths the statutes 
 have covered the whole ground, entirely displacing common law doctrines, 
 and the labors of their Courts will be confined to the proper construction and 
 application of the statutory rules. Without attempting any further examina- 
 tion of these statutes which so completely displace the common law doctrine, 
 I shall confine myself to the law concerning riparian rights, riparian proprie- 
 tors and the use of streams flowing through private land in the common- 
 wealths which have not adopted these complete statutory systems and settled 
 all questions of right by legislation. These commonwealths are the States of 
 California and Nevada." 
 
 ^ EIPABIAN BIGHTS IN MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 The Mill Acts of Massachusetts and other States made quite as radical 
 changes in the rights of riparian proprietors as the bills now pending before 
 the Legislature. The Supreme Court of Massachusetts, in an elaborate re- 
 view of these Acts, among others, said : 
 
 " This regulation of the rights of riparian proprietors, both in respect to 
 the stream and to their adjacent lands liable to be affected by its use, involves 
 no other governmental power than that to make, ordain and establish whole- 
 some and reasonable laws, statutes and ordinances as the general Court shall 
 9 
 
128 
 
 judge to be for the good and welfare of the commonwealth, and for the 
 government and ordering thereof and the objects of the same. All indi- 
 vidual rights of property are held subject to this power, which alone can 
 adjust their manifold relations and conflicting tendencies. The absolute 
 right of an individual must yield to and be modified by corresponding rights 
 in other individuals in the community. The resulting general good 
 of all, or the general welfare, is tue foundation upon which the power 
 refits, and in behalf of which it is exercised. (Lowell vs. Boston, 111 
 Mass., 467.)" 
 
 This power to legislate for the public good was recognized and declared by 
 the Supreme Court of the United States, in Barbier vs. Connolly, decided at 
 the October term, 1884. In speaking of the Fourteenth Amendment to the 
 Constitution, the Court said: 
 
 " Neither the amendment, broad and comprehensive as it is, nor any other 
 ameudment, was designed to interfere with the power of the State, sometimes 
 termed its police power, to proscribe regulations to promote the wealth, 
 peace, morals, education and good order of the people, and to legislate 
 so as to increase the industries of the State, develop its resources and 
 add to its wealth and prosperity. From the very necessity of society, 
 legislation of a special character, having these objects in view, must be 
 had in certain districts, such as for drainage of iiiarshes and irrigating arid 
 plains." 
 
 Nor does it make any difference as to the right of the State to legislate, 
 whether persons living upon the stream derived title from the Mexican 
 Government or the United States. This proposition is most clearly and 
 forcibly demonstrated by Professor Pomeroy in an article on that subject, 
 which is found in the West Coast Reporter. In concluding his argument, he 
 says: 
 
 "It seems plain, therefore, that the riparian rights of a private proprietor, 
 holding by a Mexican grant duly confirmed, are exactly the same, governed 
 by the same rules as those held by any other private riparian proprietor with- 
 in the State. The source of its title can make no difference as to the rights 
 of property which accompany and flow from his ownership!" 
 
 WHAT POMEEOT OVEELOOKED. 
 
 But Professor Pomeroy, in his series of articles upon riparian rights in 
 California, departed from his usual liberality and candor, and took a limited, 
 narrow and technical view. He gave a synopsis of the various Acts of Legis- 
 latures of the Pacific States and Territories. This summary is substantially 
 correct as to all the States and Territories except California. The Professor 
 either overlooked or neglected to mention any of the legislation of this State, 
 except two Acts which are printed in the Civil Code. It is possible that the 
 Professor would not have arrived at the conclusion that irrigation is illegal 
 in this State if he had read all the Acts in relation thereto. As early as May 15, 
 1854, the Legislature passed an Act providing for a system of irrigation in 
 the counties of San Diego, San Bernardino, Santa Barbara, Napa, Los 
 
129 
 
 Angeles, Solano, Contra Costa, Colusa and Tulare, and provided for the 
 appointment of Commissioners and other officers to carry the law into effect, 
 since which time over fift}' other Acts have been passed on the subject of 
 irrigation, relating to the counties above named and including some 
 other sections of the State. It seems strange that the Legislature 
 should pass fifty Acts relating to irrigation without changing the law on 
 that subject. 
 
 The claims of elasticity and adaptability of the common law must be aban- 
 doned if a decision as to the right to the use of water rendered in England 
 a hundred years ago is the law of California, notwithstanding it denies to 
 the people the right of irrigation, and is in direct conflict with the 
 Legislature of the State. If the Courts must so construe the common law 
 as to make prosperity in California impossible, it is time the Legislature de- 
 prived them of such an engine of mischief by repealing the law adopting 
 such a system. 
 
 Let the Legislature try once more. Let it declare in terms that cannot be 
 misunderstood that California will not let her rivers run to waste into the 
 ocean. That right to deprive the people of the use of our rivers does not 
 exist in any set of men, however selfish they may be. All people in the 
 irrigating sections of the State are proprietors. The so-called riparian 
 proprietors in the San Joaquin Valley have no use for the water in its 
 original channel,' but desire to levy tribute upon those who have appropri- 
 ated it! 
 
 It may as well be understood that the people of California are inter- 
 ested in the development of the State, and that they will have such 
 laws, either from the Courts or the Legislature, as will enable them to utilize 
 the resources of California. Let him who stands in the way of this move- 
 ment beware. 
 
 Modesto Evening News. 
 
 Sacramento Iietter. 
 
 Sacramento, February 21, 1885. 
 Editor Evening News— /SeV.- The great question before the Legislature at 
 this time is that of irrigation. It is the question above all others that 
 excites the attention of the people of the State, and yet there are but few 
 •who understand the position of many of the legislators on this subject. As 
 a fact, about two- thirds of the Assembly are for irrigation; but it is hard to 
 say how the Senate stands. There are two widely separated and distinct 
 classes of people to this fight, viz: The irrigators and the riparian owners. 
 Some seem to think that the irrigators are trying to have the Legislature 
 take away the rights of riparian owners, but this is all bosh — no Legislature 
 can take away the property rights of an individual without paying him for 
 such rights. The case is simply this: Our Civil Code contains several pro- 
 visions relating to "water rights," but Section 1422 (the last section relating 
 
130 
 
 to the subject) says: " The rights of riparian proprietors are not affected by 
 the provisions of this title." Where our law does not cover a question, the 
 common law rules of England apply. Now, the common law holds that the 
 owner and proprietor of the banks of a stream is entitled to the flow of that 
 stream, and that he has certain rights by reason of being such owner. There- 
 fore there are riparian owners in this State, and they have certain vested 
 rights. These rights exist, but under them streams of water flow on and on, 
 benefiting a comparative few. There are large tracts of land in this State, 
 perfect deserts in their nature, which, by a little irrigation, can be turned 
 into, and in many instances have been turned into an*earthly paradise; lands 
 where thousands of homes are and can be made, where homes are clustered 
 into towns, where schools flourish and where business interests afford em- 
 ployment to thousands of hands. It is a question of political economy, it 
 is a question of expediency, whether the State should foster and encourage 
 the reclaiming of these desert lands, the reclaiming and settling of some of 
 which has added millions of dollars to our assessment rolls. These lands 
 cannot be settled and these homes cannot be maintained, unless water can 
 be had for irrigation purposes. The water cannot be had, owing to the rights 
 of the riparians. The greatest good to the greatest number being the guide, 
 the present Legislature, in response to popular demand, is undertaking to 
 solve the problem, with a view of doing substantial justice to all parties 
 concerned. It acknowledges the vested rights of riparians, but, by repealing, 
 Section 1422 of the Civil Code, persons are prevented from acquiring such 
 rights in the future. It undertakes to set in motion machinery by means of 
 which some of the private rights of riparian owners can be condemned and 
 turned over to public use, after an adequate compensation therefor. This 
 is all there is in the present proposed legislation. No one will be damaged 
 by this at this time. Whoever has any property or any right of property 
 will retain it or get its value. H. R. 
 
 Golton Semi-Tropic. 
 
 "Water Jjwluvb of California— To Users of Waterin San Bernardino Connty. 
 
 The undersigned representatives of San Bernardino county to the State 
 Irrigation Convention held at Fresno, commencing December 3d, and con- 
 tinuing in session for four days, were members of the legislative committee 
 appointed by that convention to represent the interests of this section of the 
 State. 
 
 The discussion of the irrigation laws of the State, as interpreted by the 
 Supreme Court, develops a startling state of affairs, which must be remedied, 
 or ruin stares California in the face. We have confidence that the problem 
 will be solved, for no people will ever submit to be ruined. 
 
 The recent decision of the Supreme Court in the celebrated case of Miller 
 & Lux vs. Haggin & Carr, taken up from Kern county, aflBrms the doctrine 
 of riparian rights to an extent which would permit a landowner near the 
 
131 
 
 Santa Ana river, below Anaheim and Santa Ana, to get an injunction from 
 the courts compelling every user of water and every company taking water 
 from the Santa Ana river or its tributaries to turn every drop of water back 
 into the river, whether such water would ever reach the land of the applicant 
 or not, or whether or not he desired to use the water when it did reach him. 
 Thus the North Fork ditch, the South Fork ditch, the Redlands Water Com- 
 pany, the Mill Creek ditch, the Meeks & Dale}-, the Riverside canals, the 
 Yorba ditch, the Semi-Tropic ditch (irrigating Orange, Tustin City, and Santa 
 Ana), the Anaheim ditch and Cajon ditch, would all be compelled to turn 
 their water back into the river — no matter how long they had used it — and 
 Highlands, Lugonia, Redlands, Crafton, Old San Bernardino, Colton, River- 
 side, Yorba settlement, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin City, Placentia and Ana- 
 heim would all lapse back into desert wastes, and fifty millions or more of 
 property would be destroyed, if the doctrines of the Supreme Court were 
 carried out and there was no legislation to remedy the evil. 
 
 To say that this is an alarming state of affairs is putting the statement in a 
 very mild form. There are two methods of obtaining a redress of grievances: 
 First, by getting the Supreme Court to reverse its own decision (and a re- 
 hearing has already been granted), and secondly, failing in this, to get 
 legislation that will allow appropriators to condemn riparian claims and take 
 the water for a public use. 
 
 There is no question but the desired end can be reached one way or the 
 other. The most satisfactory remedy would be a modification or reversal of 
 the Supreme Court decision; but, failing in this, legislation can and must be 
 obtained. 
 
 If this evil cannot be remedied we shall have no use for an Immigration 
 Association; but an emigration association will be necessary to help people 
 out of a country where it is impossible for them to obtain a livelihood. 
 
 Already most of the canal companies of the San Joaquin valley are under 
 injunction to turn the waters back into the streams. In one instance the 
 people took forcible possession of the canals and defied the courts. In 
 another the waters were all turned back into the stream and for three months 
 in midsummer ran to waste in the sands of the river bed, doing no one any 
 good, even to the extent of never reaching the riparian claimant who de- 
 manded the waters. 
 
 To do this work money will be needed. The committee on legislation at 
 Fresno last week resolved to raise $5,000, two-fifths of which amount was to 
 be called for at once, and the balance as it might be needed. It is possible 
 that even a larger sum of money may be needed before the question is set- 
 tled. 
 
 San Bernardino County has been assessed $500, which sum the represen- 
 tatives from this county pledged should be forthcoming, and all water 
 companies, land owners and citizens generally should at once respond by 
 placing themselves in communication with John C. North of Riverside, who 
 represents this county on the finance committee. 
 
132 
 
 Every man of influence in San Bernardino county and throughout the 
 State should at once exercise that influence in a manner that will help the 
 cause of the people. 
 There is no time to lose. What we want is prompt and decisive action, 
 
 John G. North, 
 S. C. Evans, 
 L. M. Holt, 
 Members of the Legislative Committee from San Bernardino county. 
 
 San Francisco Weekly Star. 
 
 Irrig^ation. 
 
 A lar^e part of California can only be cultivated by moans of artificial sav- 
 ing and distribution of the natural streams of water. What is the conse- 
 quence ? Of course that monopolists have bought up the land next the 
 streams, and propose to hold and sell the water at their own rates to every- 
 body else. If it were possible to get all the air into one bag and all the sun- 
 light into another, the monopolists would certainly do it, and would then 
 put their own prices on the means of breathing and seeing. Why shouldn't 
 they? " The earth is the (land) lord's and the fullness thereof "—says their 
 Bible. They have pretty much got the public lands already. They are at 
 this moment engrossing the water. If they do not monopolize air and light, 
 it is solely because they can't. They wish they could. 
 
 The common sense principle at the basis of this irrigation matter is per- 
 fectly plain. Wherever irrigation is necessary for agriculture, the use of 
 water should be controlled by government for the equal benefit of all land 
 owners. Our monopolist partisan Legislature has before it a number of bills 
 on the subject, and there has been some voting backwards and forwards about 
 it in an aimless way. The name thus far applied to the parties in interest is, 
 riparians {i. e. riversiders) for the monopolists who have been undertaking 
 to buy up and monopolize the streams, and irrigationists, for those who want 
 a just and equal system for using water. Now, the riparians, being on the 
 wrong side, have a good organization in the Legislature and thus far have 
 prevented anything from being done; while the irrigationists have acted just 
 as folks who are in the right are very often fools enough to do — they have not 
 organized nor planned, and they haven't carried a point. What a fool a man 
 is, who thinks that the right side will win by itself ! The fact is exactly the 
 other way. The right side needs the utmost help because men in the wrong 
 work like devils. 
 
 We have not the remotest idea that a good irrigation law will be passed 
 this session. But if the irrigationists have the ordinary common sense to fix 
 upon a good plan of operations, to form an organization, and to push their 
 good plan, they can carry their good plan— if not this session, then next 
 session. Two years seems a good while to wait, it is true; but two years is & 
 very short time in which to carry an important public measure. 
 
Napa Daily Register. 
 
 Riparianism. 
 
 While there are those inside and outside of our Legislature who are trying 
 to adapt the old riparian law of England to California, or California to Eng- 
 land's riparian law, the S. F. Post thus pointedly dissects the subject: 
 
 "The body politic is now sorely afflicted with a disease called 'riparianism.' 
 The germ of the disease was brought into the State with the common law of 
 England. It was supposed until lately that, after treatment for a generation 
 by our doctors of the law, the affliction had been eradicated from our political 
 system, never to reappear. But- the present Supreme Court has brought it to 
 the surface, and now the malady has taken such form that nothing short of 
 radical treatment will be efficacious. 
 
 "The diagnosis of the case in a nutshell is this : When we organized as 
 one of the Federal Union we adopted the common law as the general system 
 which should be the rule of decision in our Courts. The people began the 
 development of the two great industries of the State — mining and farming. 
 They early found that mines and farms in many portions of the State must be 
 located more or less remote from the streams, Water was a necessity for 
 both, and not being able to move either farm or mine to the stream, the water 
 was taken out in ditches and canals to wash the gold-bearing earth and irrigate 
 the fertile soil. It never occurred to the hardy miner or the toiling farmer 
 to send over to England for a copy of 1 Sim. and Stuart, where he would have 
 found, in the case of Wright vs. Howard, the language of Sir John Leach: 
 'Aqua curis et debet currere ut currere solebat, ' the riparian law of England. As 
 time passed, farms and farmers multiplied. The farmers trod the path of 
 those before them, and diverted the waters of streams for irrigation when- 
 ever necessary. No one needs to be told to what magnitude the irrigation 
 interests have grown. It is enough to say that nearly every man, woman 
 and child in the State is more or less interested in irrigation, directly or in- 
 directly. However, after irrigating for thirty-five years, the farmer awoke 
 one day to the fact that the Supreme Court, which they had helped to choose, 
 had procured a copy of 1 Sim. and Stuart, and translated the Latin of the 
 common law, and that the plain English of it is that irrigation is against the 
 law, and the irrigator is a wrong-doer." 
 
 Assembly Bill No. 410, intended to legalize irrigation, was passed last week 
 by a vote of 50 to 16 in the House, our member. H. A. Pellett, voting right 
 by voting in the affirmative. The fate of a similar bill in the Senate is yet to 
 be decided. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 "The Convention. 
 
 The State Irrigation Convention, which concluded a session of four days in 
 Fresno on last Saturday, we believe will accomplish the purpose for which it 
 was held. It is true that it but commences the great work that is to be done, 
 
134 
 
 but there is no small advantage in starting right, and this, in our opinion, 
 the convention has done. As was hoped and intended that it should be, the 
 convention was composed of representative men from all parts of the State 
 where irrigation exists, and also from many parts where there is an awaken- 
 ing interest in the matter so important to the general welfare of the State* 
 Intelligent and far-seeing men from sections where there are at present no 
 irrigation interests, but in which exist the natural resources for grand possi- 
 bilities when the people have learned to utilize the waters of our streams, 
 were present and engaged in earnest counsel with thosa who have studied 
 the question more carefully and had the benefit of practical experience. 
 
 The proceedings of the first two days of the convention were not calcu- 
 lated to inspire the hope that the conflicting views of the members could be 
 so harmonized as to bring about the unanimity of opinion so much desired 
 as to the manner of adjustment of existing difficulties. There were many in 
 the convention who evidently came simply as the representatives of some ex- 
 isting right, either of riparian ownership or appropriation, who had only in 
 view private interests or that of some particular locality, and the main ques- 
 tions were frequently lost sight of, and it was only after long and patient 
 discussion that these parties could be brought to see that a law is to be framed 
 to meet the requirements of the State and not of some particular individual, 
 corporation or community. Among the first to address the convention were 
 also a number of speakers who hold, or pretend to hold, the opinion that no 
 legislation is necessary, and that the courts will construe the present law so 
 that irrigation may not only exist but flourish under its provisions. It is 
 doubtless to the credit of the convention that all speakers were given a re- 
 spectful hearing, but it would most certainly have been to the advantage of 
 all had less valuable time been consumed by those entertaining this opinion. 
 Even if the courts finally decide in favor of irrigation, but few acquainted 
 with the subject will deny that some additional legislation is needed under 
 which to build up a satisfactory system of irrigation in California. 
 
 The Legislative Committee labored assiduously for more than two days to 
 draft the principles which it deemed necessary to be embodied in a bill to be 
 presented to the Legislature. It is well that the committee acted with so 
 much deliberation and care, as it undoubtedly resulted in the wisest action 
 possible on its part, and also gave the convention time to pass through its 
 frothy stages and be prepared to receive and consider the report in the spirit 
 in which it was made, and with a view to the greatest good to the greatest 
 number, and not to the interest of individuals and sections. 
 
 The report of the committee, briefly summarized, recites that the waters of 
 the natural streams and lakes of California belong to the people; that for the 
 purpose of appropriating water, irrigation districts may be formed, vested 
 with power to assess the land for the construction of canals and other irriga- 
 tion works; that the law of Eminent Domain be so extended as to allow the 
 people to condemn the rights of riparian owners, canal owners and appropri- 
 ators, and pay for rights of way, or whatever private or corporate property 
 
135 
 
 may be necessary for the successful appropriation for the use of water; that 
 the old common law of riparian rights does not apply in this State; that laws 
 of appropriation be more clearly defined. 
 
 This is the platform upon which the irrigators of California will go before 
 the incoming Legislature, and will ask the adoption of these principles as the 
 law of state. That their adoption without a dissenting vote by a convention 
 so represeutative as that assembled at Fresno last week will bring a strong 
 influence to bear on the Legislature there can be no doubt. In that conven- 
 tion were the representatives of all the irrigation interests of the State, repre- 
 sentatives of riparian claimants and representatives of sections disinterested 
 except in the general welfare. Wisdom and experience were united in the 
 personel of the committee which framed the declaration of principles, and its 
 work was marked throughout by careful and conservative deliberation. 
 That its action was the wisest and best that could have been taken, the unani- 
 mous approval of so large, representative and intelligent an assemblage as 
 that composing the convention is the strongest possible proof. 
 
 If the action of this convention were to have no direct influence on legisla- 
 tion, its effect on the State at large would more than compensate for the time 
 and expense necessarily devoted to it. The greatest drawback to the advance- 
 ment of irrigation in the past, and the passage of laws that would encourage 
 and aid its development, has been the existing ignorance concerning it, out- 
 side of a few irrigated districts. This convention has created a general inter- 
 est throughout the State. Newspapers are discussing it, plans are forming 
 for irrigation systems in places where it has hitherto been unknown and 
 almost unthought of, and the people of the entire State are awakening to its 
 importance. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 Igfnorant oi the Faets. 
 
 The Chronicle persists in holding to a previous statement that a majority 
 of the farmers and old settlers of California are riparian owners. In its issue 
 of December 5th, it says: 
 
 " A country contemporary reproves the Chronicle for saying that the old 
 farmers are generally in favor of riparian rights. Yet this will be found to 
 be the case. As a rule the farms that were laid out in this State from 1850 to 
 1865 were located on the borders of running streams. So long as such land 
 could be taken up no one was fool enough to locate at a distance from water." 
 
 The Kepublican is the country contemporary referred to, and while it 
 makes no denial of its bucolic location, it does most emphatically deny the 
 truth of the Chronicle's statement, so far, at least, as it applies to this por- 
 tion of the State. 
 
 Kings River is the most important stream in California from which water 
 has been extensively diverted for irrigation. From its source in the Sierra 
 Nevada to where it empties into Tulare Lake, there is probably not 160 acres 
 
136 
 
 of land irrigated by the owners of small farms along the stream. The blufifs 
 of the river rise abruptly almost from the water's edge to the common level 
 of the surrounding country, and it is, we believe, a demonstrable fact that 
 water can be brought from Kings River to Fresno (although the river is 
 some eighteen miles distant at the nearest point) in a canal of less length 
 than would be required to bring it to land lying along the banks of the river 
 at an equal distance from the foot-hills. From the crossing of the Central 
 Pacific railroad to the foot-hills, a distance of about twenty miles, there are 
 less than half a dozen farm houses on Kings Eiver, and with the exception of 
 one or two small orchards in the swampy bottom lands near the hills, there is 
 no irrigation w^hatever. The banks of Kings River are the most unproduc- 
 tive and desolate part of the country. Those located upon its banks can 
 only watch the waters flow idly by, except the little that may be used for 
 stock. There were no early settlements along its banks except by those who 
 bought land lying along the river at a nominal price that they might monopo- 
 lize a vast stock range. Between the railroad crossing and the mouth of the 
 river the banks are nearly all the property of these land monopolists, who 
 own thousands of acres which are used only as a stock range. It is from 
 these monopolizing riparian owners that nearly all the opposition to diver- 
 sion of water has come. The small owners along the streams are almost 
 ■without exception in favor of the diversion of water. 
 
 What has been said of the Kings River can be said with slight variation of 
 the San Joaquin in this county. There are no settlers along its banks to 
 whom the water is a necessity, or to whom it is especially beneficial except for 
 stock. 
 
 Farmers on the banks of the streams enjoy no advantage over those on the 
 open plains, except that their stock has access to water at the surface, while 
 their neighbors distant from the river and irrigating canals have to draw 
 water from a well. This is the reason many of the early settlers located on 
 the rivers. The bulk of the farming in this county has always been done in 
 the foothills and on the open plains. 
 
 Our metropolitan contemporary should endeavor to acquire a more accurate 
 knowledge of existing conditions before passing judgment on a case in which 
 so many vital interests are involved. 
 
 Santa Rosa Democrat. 
 
 The Irriffation Q,iiestion. 
 
 The subject of irrigation is one of the most important that engages the at- 
 tention of the people of California at this time. More interest has beerr 
 manifested in it in the southern part of the State until now, for the reason 
 that it is of vital importance to that section. Its prosperity, indeed its very 
 existence as an agricultural and horticultural country depends upon it. There 
 is a large area in which crops cannot be raised without the artificial applica- 
 tion of water. Northern California and the coast counties are less dependent. 
 
137 
 
 because the rainfall is greater. On the coast all kinds of crops can be raised 
 from the natural rainfall, and in the Sacramento valley the cereals and fruit 
 do well frequently, but occasionally there come dry years in which the crops 
 fail. It is well known that crops will be certain and the yield much greater 
 if irrigation were resorted to, and hence the subject is exciting interest in 
 Colusa, Tehama and other coast counties. 
 
 The present Legislature will be called upon to deal with this question and 
 settle the policy of the State with regard thereto. A very important question 
 is involved. It is whether the old English law of riparian rights shall pre- 
 vail, or whether the land- owners along the course of the streams shall be 
 permitted to take out and appropriate their waters. The importance of this 
 question is illustrated in Kern county. Kern valley is entirely dependent 
 upon Kern river for a supply of water to fertilize the land. Haggin & Carr 
 and other:^ own the land in the upper part of the valley, while Miller & Lux 
 have a large body of land lower down. The land-owners in the upper part 
 of the valley, years ago, laid claim to the waters of the river, and made can- 
 als to divert and turn them out upon their lands. A few years ago Miller & 
 Lux set up a riparian claim to the water, and denied the right of those owning 
 land above them to divert it for irrigating purposes until they were supplied 
 for ordinary purposes. They brought suit to prevent such diversion, and 
 won their case in a recent decision. An appeal will be taken, and the case 
 carried to the highest court before it is finally disposed of. In this case, if it 
 is decided that riparian ownership gives priority of right, the better part of 
 Kern valley will be converted back into a desert, for there will be no water 
 left for anybody after Miller & Lux are supplied, at the season of the year 
 when water is absolutely essential, for the reason that Kern river runs over 
 a sandy bed and through a sandy subsoil, and the water in the dry season 
 sinks and is lost, a very small quantity reaching the lakes into which it flows^ 
 and some seasons none at all. If the old riparian doctrine becomes the set- 
 tled policy in California, a blow, almost fatal, will be struck at the prosperity 
 of Southern California. It applied well enough in England where the rain- 
 fall is abundant and the use of water is limited, but the case is different in 
 California and requires different treatment. 
 
 In Northern California another difficulty seems likely to arise. It is that 
 the diversion of the waters of the Sacramento river will imperil its usefulness 
 as a navigable stream. This difficulty has been suggested by the Record- 
 Union of Sacramento, and is under discussion by the press at this time. 
 The position assumed by the Sacramento paper, if we understand it, is that 
 apart from the injury that would result to navigation, all navigable streams 
 are the property of the General Government, and the State cannot confer any 
 rights that will impair their usefulness. 
 
 Sonoma county has very little interest in the controversy except as it af- 
 fects the general prosperity of the State. In that particular it is deeply in- 
 terested, and earnestly desires that there shall be such a solution of the 
 question as will be best for the people, and will create millions of dollars. 
 
138 
 
 -worth of taxable property, aud thousands of happy homes, by the distribu- 
 tion of water over the largest area practicable. 
 
 Alta California. 
 
 The Opposition to Immigration. 
 
 Upon a large map of California may be observed, near the center of the 
 great southern valley, several large swamps lying to the north and the south 
 of Tulare Lake, formed by the overflow of Kern and Kings rivers. The com- 
 bined area of these swamps is, some two or three hundred thousand acres. 
 The riparian owners upon the rivers above the swamps are chiefly farmers, 
 •who have long since appropriated water for irrigation, under the State com- 
 mon law of appropriation, and who rely upon that law for the security of 
 their right. A petition signed by a large number of these owners was pre- 
 sented to the Senate yesterday, asking for the passage of the Fresno Irri- 
 gation Convention bills. Such riparian owners as these are, almost to a man, 
 opposed to establishing the English system of riparian rights. This may 
 seem singular to one unacquainted with the nature of that country. The ex- 
 planation is simple. By his right of appropriation the riparian owner can 
 irrigate; but if his riparian right is thrust upon him he cannot take water 
 from the streams, because if he does there will be no water left for the last 
 riparian owner at the mouth of the stream, for either domestic purposes or 
 for watering cattle, let alone irrigation. That this statement is true can be 
 proved by the testimony of every riparian owner in the valley. 
 
 The owners of these swamps are almost alone, among the land owners of 
 the State, in their opposition to the proposed laws to perpetuate appropriation 
 and irrigation. Their business is cattle raising. The plea they make against 
 irrigation laws is that they have vested rights as riparian owners, of which 
 the Legislature cannot and ought not deprive them. They claim that, if 
 nothing more, water should be left them for domestic purposes and for water- 
 ing cattle. jJThe Legislature should treat this water question as a conflict 
 between the whole people on one side and the monarchs of Kern and Kings 
 rivers swamps on the otherJ 
 
 These swamp land owners are not riparian proprietors. Both the rivers 
 mentioned, when considered as natural water courses, end where the swamps 
 begin. Only the owner of land upon the banks of a natural watercourse is a 
 riparian proprietor. Where there are no banks there can be no riparian 
 ownership. When the rivers just named reach the swamps they cease to be 
 rivers and their banks disappear. The water spreads out over the face of 
 the country in all directions, without any definite course or channel. It does 
 not require a flood, reaching the mouths of the rivers where they discharge 
 into these swamps to overflow the country. At the lowest stages of the river, 
 •whenever there is sufficient water so that any amount, however small, flows 
 to the margin of the swamp, it there loses itself in all directions. A water- 
 <Jourse is defined as a stream of water, usually flowing in a definite channel 
 
139 
 
 having a bed and sides or banks, and usually discharging itself into some 
 other stream or body of water; it must be something more than a mere sur- 
 face drainage over the entire face of a tract of land. This is an authorized 
 and well established definition, and within it these swamp-land owners are 
 not riparian owners, and are not entitled to any rights as such. 
 
 The claim made by them that their lands are naturally watered by the 
 overflow of the rivers, even if conceded, gives them no rights at common 
 law or under any law of this State. They obtained title to the land from the 
 State for a mere song, and then only on condition that they should reclaim 
 the land. They have never reclaimed it. If any partial reclamation has 
 been accomplished, it has been by the diversion of the river waters above, 
 by third parties for irrigation purposes. They now ask this Legislature to 
 grant them rights which no existing law gives; the right to have forever 
 overflowed lands which the State gives them to reclaim from the overflow. 
 Instead of having any rights, their lands ought in justice to be forfeited to 
 the State for failure to comply with the condition. The Senate, which has 
 now under consideration a proposition to give riparian owners the pre- 
 ferred right, against irrigators, to water for domestic purposes and for cattle, 
 must plainly see that it is not made in behalf of the real riparian owners, but 
 for the sole benefitof the swamp-land owners; for if under the law the water 
 must all flow to the last riparian owner at the margin of the swamp, no one 
 but the swamp-land owner, who has no riparian right, will get the benefit 
 of it. 
 
 Santa Barbara Express. 
 
 Water Rij^bts. 
 
 For several weeks a fierce contest has been going on at'Sacramento over the 
 irrigation problem. The lobbies of the Legislature haveibeen swarmed with 
 advocates of opposing sides of the great question — than which no more 
 weighty has ever come before the people of California. Our dispatches of 
 yesterday state that the Assembly has passed the series of bills framed by the 
 Fresno Convention. This will be good news for the people, and the Repub- 
 lican party should receive all credit for the upright manner in which its 
 members in the Assembly have worked and voted. 
 
 Merced Express. 
 
 The members of the Calitornia Legislature who vote against the Irrigation 
 bill now before that body should be placed upon the "black list," and if ever 
 they should poke their heads up for office the people should go for their 
 scalps. The time is at hand when the people of the agricultural districts of 
 California demand and must have suitable irrigation laws, and those mem- 
 bers of the Legislature who oppose snob \&ms are defying the earnest and di- 
 rect wishes of the people. 
 
140 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 J. \V. Shanklin, once Surveyor-Geueral of this State, "hogged" more 
 water in Los Angeles county than he has land to cover, or has " hogged " 
 more laud than he has water to cover, we know not which, is up at 
 Sacramento * bellyaching " against the irrigation bills. The burden of his 
 song is that the laws proposed don't fit his case. Shanklin ought to buy an 
 uninhabited island and move on it. Then he could pass laws to suit his own 
 views. 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 Thus far all the opposition to the irrigntion measures has come from three 
 men, Miller & Lux and Senator Cox. While it has been noisy and obstruct- 
 ive there has been no basis to it except money. The open opposition of Cox 
 in the Senate has done himself and his friends more hurt than good. His argu- 
 ment is that they may hurt him to the extent of a few thousand dollars, ignor- 
 ing the fact that a way is provided to make good all his damage, and bring 
 upon him other fearful hardships. All he has had to say, thus far, his not 
 been of a nature requiring reply, and the irrigators sincerely hope he will 
 continue to occupy the floor as much as possible. He deems it sufficient argu- 
 ment to insure their defeat that they may possibly work some injury to him- 
 self. And this is good reason why half the State should remain desert and 
 untold thousands of present and future generations suffer poverty, want, and 
 all the attendant evils. 
 
 Who Are They ? 
 
 The reports from Sacramento show that some twelve or fifteen Senators 
 Are ** dodging" the irrigation bills by refraining from voting. Yet, when the 
 Heath amendment to reduce railroad taxes was passed, every Senator was in 
 his seat and voted. The passage of the irrigation bills is of as much im- 
 portance to the people as the adoption of the Heath amendment is to the 
 railroad company. Is the inference to be drawn that the Senate believe in 
 making the public interest subordinate to that of the railroad? Explanations 
 seem to have been the order of the day at the final roll-call upon the Heath 
 amendment. Many Senators took occasion to explain their votes. It would 
 not be entirely uncalled for if the Senators not voting upon the irrigation 
 bills would rise and explain their silence. There is more or less curiosity to 
 know who these men are that are more friendly to the monopoly than to the 
 people. 
 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 Since the defeat of the irrigation measures has become apparent, a strong 
 effort is being made to induce the Governor to call an extra session of the 
 Legislature for the consideration of this question alone. Should it become 
 
141 
 
 necessary, it is to be hoped that the extra session will be held, that the 
 rights of the irrigators may be thoroughly established. The question is one 
 of too much importance, and the interests involved are too vast to permit of 
 their remaining unsettled for two years more. 
 
 Petaluma Argus. 
 
 Our Advantaj^es. 
 
 The Argus recently referred to the great advantages possessed by Sonoma 
 county over some other sections of the State, in that our farmers and orchard- 
 ists are at no expense, trouble or care incident to artificial irrigation. We 
 have become so habituated to having bounteous yields of grain and fruit, 
 assisted alone by Nature's gentle dews, that we do not aright appreciate the 
 advantages we enjoy. Had our orchardists and vineyardists to irrigate, as 
 they have to in some of the southern counties of the State, it would entail 
 upon them an expense at least four-fold that of their present tax-rate. Water 
 for irrigation, and exorbitant water-rates, is the vexed question now agitating 
 the iuhabitants of many portions of the State. The question has assumed 
 the proportions of a political issue, and the most formidable issue with 
 which the present Legislature is now grappling relates to riparian rights. The 
 question of right to divert water from its natural channel to slake the thirst 
 of arid agricultural and fruit lands now threaten to even overshadow the 
 mining debris problem. If at this early date, when only a small portion of 
 their lands have been reduced to cultivation, the water supply for irrigating 
 purposes is a matter of grave concern, what will be the probable proportions 
 of that subject twenty years hence? It is important that the incoming immi- 
 gration to this State should be correctly advised in reference to the advan- 
 tages that Sonoma and adjacent counties eujoy in this respect. Here neither 
 drought nor mining debris '• molest or make afraid " those dependent on the 
 generous soil for a livelihood. In these advantages alone Sonoma county has 
 a bonanza of greater value than was ever laid bare on the Comstock Lode, 
 for it is as enduring and imperishable as are our rich hills and valleys. With 
 a soil and climate of demonstrated adaptability to the raising of principally 
 all the staple products of either grain or fruit, there is not within the borders 
 of the State a more inviting field for families seeking homes than right here 
 in Old Sonoma. We are possessed of the superior advantages above enumer- 
 ated, and there is no good reason why we should not profit by them to the 
 extent of quadrupling our population in the next few years. 
 
 S. F. Examiner. 
 
 The Slickeng Buj^aboo. 
 
 The riparian claquers, after ringing the changes on the " vested rights " 
 business, are now trying to raise a false alarm among the people of the north- 
 ern counties by pretending to discover a slickens "joker " in the pending irri- 
 
142 
 
 gation bills as amended by the Senate in Committee of the Whole. The lords- 
 of Kern and Kings river swamps, who are the commissaries of the riparian 
 squad and furnish ammunition to the anti-irrigatiou sharpshooters, would see 
 the uoithern half of the State buried in debris, provided their bogs and mo- 
 rasses are not interfered with. The pretense made by them, that the naviga- 
 bility of the rivers of the State can be affected by the provisions of Assembly 
 Bill 410, or by any language added to the bill that the united skill and inge- 
 nuity of all the lawyers in the State could devise, or that it can make lawful 
 any use of water which is now unlawful, is the veriest sham. The courts 
 have forbidden in the most absolute language the deposit of mining debris in 
 the rivers. The Judges have laid down the law to be, that hydraulic mining 
 cannot be pursued in this State to the detriment of the navigable rivers, or to 
 the injury of private property. It has been declared by the courts that this 
 law is inexorable and unchangeable; that the State Legislature cannot change 
 it, and that Congress cannot alter it. But, even were it otherwise, there can 
 be no pretext that the amendment proposed would in any way affect the debris 
 question. The right to appropriate water does not carry with it the right to 
 fill up the streams with slickens. The legislator who pretends to be fooled 
 by the suggestion made against the irrigationists on this subject cannot hope 
 to make the people believe that he has been deceived. 
 
 Santa Cruz Daily Sentinel. 
 
 The Irrif^ation Prospect, 
 
 Thus far the proposed irrigation legislation has made fine progress. All 
 the measures proposed by the irrigation convention have passed the Assembly 
 and appearances indicate that they will pass the Senate. The most import- 
 ant of the bills is the one providing for the condemnation of water rights 
 under the power of eminent domain. If it becomes a law it cannot but prove 
 highly beneficial to the State. It will emancipate us from the dog-in-the 
 manger spirit that lies at the foundation of the theory of riparian rights as 
 construed by the common law and the Supreme Court. It will give to the 
 people of California what nature designed for them — an equitable distribu- 
 tion of the rich life-blood circulating through the river-veins of their State. 
 It will be worth all the expense of the session ten times over if this measure 
 ripens into a law. 
 
 The other irrigation bills are of more or less importance, but do not com- 
 pare with the one above mentioned. They could all be defeated without sub- 
 stantially lessening the good which that will accomplish. One of them de- 
 clares that the common law does not apply to water rights in this State. This 
 •will be of small importance in the face of the decisions of the Supreme Court 
 declaring that the common law does apply. 
 
 Another of the bills repeals the section of the civil code which declares 
 that the present law governing the appropriation of water shall not affect 
 riparian rights. But the repeal of that section will not prevent the Su- 
 
143 
 
 preme Court from declaring in the future, as it has in the past, that ripar- 
 ian rights are vested rights and can not be arbitrarily taken from one citi- 
 zen and given to another by either courts or legislatures. This law would be 
 useless without the other one, sanctioning the taking of riparian rights for 
 public use. 
 
 Another bill is designed to define the extent of the water rights now 
 claimed under the operation of the present appropriation laws. This will be 
 a useful law, as it will tend to prevent clashing and uncertainty when it is 
 sought to condemn or regulate the rights of appropriators under the bill first 
 above mentioned. 
 
 The remaining bill of the series is one proposing an amendment of the 
 Constitution prohibiting Supervisors and other municipal authorities from 
 .^fixing the price of water furnished for sale by private persons or corporations 
 at a figure that will not be at least seven per cent, upon the capital invested. 
 
 It will be seen as above remarked, that the first one of the bills above 
 named is the one in which the people are specially interested. Every person 
 who has studied this irrigation question uninfluenced by self-interest or 
 prejudice, will heartily rejoice at the passage of this measure, and will hail 
 those members of the Legislature who aid in the good work with the plaudit, 
 •'Iwelldone!" 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 The Irri£fation Struggle . 
 
 We publish in another column articles from the San Francisco Post and AUa, 
 showing the earnest fight they are making for the people on the irrigation 
 contest. They strike the key note for the future. Although the battle against 
 riparianism seems to be at its hottest at this moment, it is in truth just be- 
 gun. The field of active operations will soon be transferred from the Legis- 
 lature to the people. It is time even now to begin preparations for active 
 warfare against riparianism and against all its friends. In the coming struggle 
 let Democrats and Republicans sink their difl'erences in the common cause 
 against the common enemy. Organize into anti-riparian clabs. Keep in the 
 records of the clubs a list of the names of those who, either in the Legislature 
 or elsewhere, have encouraged riparianism and the destruction of irrigators 
 and irrigation. Let every one of them be marked for defeat at all times and 
 in all places. Beat them in conventions. Destroy them at the polls. When- 
 ever one of them appears as a candidate for office, high or low, or is an aspi- 
 rant for any favor from the people, see to it that he is denounced as recreant 
 to the interests of the people and unfit to be trusted by them. At the head of 
 such a black-list, as having had greatest power for good or evil, chose to ex- 
 •ercise it to crush irrigation, and deliver Southern California over to R. E. 
 10 
 
144 
 
 Honghton and his riparian clients, should be placed the following-named 
 riparian, anti-irrigation Assemblymen: 
 
 ALLEN, of Sonoma. 
 
 COLBY, of Placer. 
 
 DAVIS, of Sacramento. 
 
 ELLISON, of Tehama. 
 
 FIREBAU-GH, of San Francisco. 
 
 JORDAN, of Alameda. 
 
 HE^[RY, of Butte. 
 
 HEYWOOD, of Alameda. 
 
 HOLLISTER, of Sacramento. 
 
 JONES, of Sacramento. 
 
 McJUNKIN, of San Francisco. 
 
 WALRATH, of Nevada. 
 
 WATSON, of Alameda. 
 
 WARD, of Butte. 
 
 WOOD, of Sierra. 
 
 San Francisco Alta, 
 
 Have the Roll Called. 
 
 Not very long ago the friends of irrigation were encouraged to believe that 
 viotory in the Legislature was near at hand. They were supported in the 
 Assembly by a majority against which the dilatory tactics of Jordan, McJun- 
 kin and other anti-irrigationists were unavailing. A clear majority of the 
 Senate was found to favor the bills, but since they were taken up for consid- 
 eration, day after day has been wasted in idle talk. The efforts of the ripa- 
 rianists to suspend action until it should be too late to get the bills through 
 before adjournment, have been nearly successful. Unless the Committee of 
 the Whole shall report the bills back to the Senate favorably on Monday, and 
 the Senate can be induced to act immediately upon the report, they cannot 
 be passed before the expiration of the constitutional sixty days. This Is a 
 most lamentable state of affairs. That with a decided majority of both 
 branches of the Legislature in favor of legislation for the relief of irrigation, 
 all attempts to reach a final vote have failed, is a source of profound regret. 
 The only remedy open to relieve the situation and save the State from the 
 calamity of non-action for two years, is either to prolong the session or for the 
 Governor to summon an extra session for the exclusive purpose of arriving 
 at a solution of the irrigation problem. But, whatever is to be done, if the 
 skulking course pursued heretofore in Committee of the Whole is pursued on 
 Monday, the friends of irrigation in the Senate should not fail to so move in 
 the open Senate as to discover to the people whom they may depend upon 
 hereafter to advance their cause in the Legislature, and upon whom they may 
 rely to be faithful to the greatest of the State's necessities. If the leaders of 
 the warfare against riparianism, in the Senate, do not force a yea and nay vote 
 in that body before adjournment, so as to unmask and drag into the light the 
 men who cannot be trusted on this question, they will make it possible for 
 faithless representatives to again betray their trusts. 
 
145 
 
 San Francisco Call. 
 
 Mining' and Irrigf^ation. 
 
 It is a matter for regret that the irrigation question should have become 
 mixed up with hydraulic mining. The fact that the principle upon which 
 water is taken irom its natural bed for purposes of irrigation is the same as 
 that upon which it is taken for mining purposes does not make these kindred 
 measures. The irrigationist may admit the fall force of Senator Cross's 
 amendment, and then proceed to legislate upon mining and upon irrigation 
 as two quite distinct industries. We may include the right to appropriate 
 water for mining purposes in the declaration that the common law of England 
 ■which relates to riparian rights is ''repugnant to and inconsistent with the 
 climate, topography, physical conditions and necessities of the people of this 
 State," and afterward deal with any branch of the mining business on its 
 merits. We do not propose to stop hydraulic mining on the ground that the 
 Tarious water companies which supply these mines have no right to the water 
 they have appropriated, but on the ground that the owners of these mines 
 have no right to deposit the debris from the mines in the natural water-beds, 
 from which they will be flooded upon the valleys below. 
 
 When Senator Cross interpolated the words "and mining" into the second 
 section of bill 410, he simply creates the necessity of sending the bill back to 
 the House for concurrence. The amendment does no other harm. A friend 
 of the irrigation bill would not have thrown this obstacle in the way of its 
 passage; but there really is no reason why the House should not promptly 
 concur in the amendment if the bill passes the Senate. We think the Record' 
 Union attaches too much importance to the amendment, while agreeing with 
 that journal that no bill should be passed which would reopen the hydraulic 
 mining question. The right to appropriate water for mining purposes was 
 established thirty odd years ago, so far as doing a thing can establish the 
 right to do it. Hydraulic mining has been stopped within three years be- 
 cause of the destruction of property that is clearly unavoidable from such 
 operations, 
 
 Los Angeles Express. 
 
 Irri£fation of the Plains, 
 
 Emerson, in his "Dictionary of Rural Affairs, " says: "There is no question 
 of more importance in a national point of view than the improvement of the 
 soil by the practice of irrigation, for in its prosecution all the rich organic 
 and other matters diflfased through the rivers, which would otherwise be 
 carried into the sea, are saved to agriculture." There are vast acres of land, 
 as in Egypt, Italy, Spain, France and lodia, where barrenness and desola- 
 tion would reign were it not for the enrichment furnished by artificial sup- 
 plies of water. 
 
 The desirability of a system of irrigation over an immense area in this 
 State is now too generally recognized to admit of discussion. From the ex- 
 
146 
 
 treme southern part of the San Joaquin valley to the extreme northern part 
 of the Sacramento valley summer crops cannot be possibly raised without 
 irrigation. There are large districts of the State where the hope of the farmer 
 is liable to be blighted by winter drought or a dry season. Then there are 
 •other large plains where farming is practically impossible without artificial 
 «upplies of water. In many counties where irrigation is necessary the topo- 
 graphy of the country is such as to make it very difficult, laborious and ex- 
 pensive to cut canals and store the water. Nature, in planning the topo- 
 graphy of California, seems to have had an eye to business, and with a 
 beneficent foresight has laid the foundation of the grandest system of irriga- 
 tion the world has ever seen. From the mountain ranges along the entire 
 eastern boundary of the State to the Pacific Ocean on the west, the surface 
 slope is so gradual that the waters of rivers which traverse the territory can 
 be carried in canals over the greater part of this immense region of arable 
 land. The supply is abundant, and if properly distributed, would insure 
 crops on millions of acres where the crops are now uncertain or impossible, 
 and add greatly to the aggregate wealth of the State. The Tuolumne, Cala- 
 veras, Stanislaus, Mokelumne, Merced, Fresno, San Joaquin, Kings, Kla- 
 math and Kern rivers embrace a territory as large as the States of Connecti- 
 cut, Rhode Island, Vermont and New Hampshire. It is believed that every 
 ioot of land in this immense district can be irrigated by the waters of these 
 rivers if properly collected and fairly distributed. 
 
 By an Act of the Legislature, March 29; 1878, the office of State Engineer 
 was created, and one of the most important duties assigned to it was that of 
 investigating the problem of irrigation. The problem is a vast one that may 
 jtake a number of years to completely solve. Any one who has not carefully 
 •studied Mr. Hall's report can form no adequate idea of the vast amount that 
 •remains to be accomplished. The general maps of the State and the special 
 . maps and profiles that have been constructed, showing more minutely and 
 v^accurately large scopes of country and their gradients, as a basis of engineer- 
 ing study, are a monument of patient and intelligent industry, and the geo- 
 ^aphical, topographical, and hydrographical data that have been collected, 
 ■are of inestimable value. Why our legislators failed to appreciate the im- 
 portance of completing this great work we never could divine. Still less can 
 we understand why, in the present session of the Legislature, there should be 
 euch an organized and determined opposition to the repeal of Section 1422 of 
 ithe Civil Code. If the principle involved in that section is allowed to remain 
 lin the Code, it is a virtual termination of the whole scheme of irrigation. It 
 would turn the Fresno plains, now dotted with grain fields, orchards, vine- 
 :yards and gardens, into a cheerless waste. It seems hard and unreasonable 
 cthat a system of riparian rights that has grown up in another country, in 
 anany respects very dissimilar to this, should have been kept alive so long. 
 The State Engineer, in his report, called the attention of the Legislature four 
 years ago to the fact that the common law doctrine of riparian rights, " that 
 water runs and ought to run as it has ,been accustomed to run," as Black- 
 
147 
 
 Btone states it, would make difficulty in this State in attempting to carry oui 
 a system of irrigation unless changed by legislation. 
 
 Political Record. 
 
 Irriiration./— Riparian Riiplitg and the Common Ijafv, — Tlie Rigftitg of tli»- 
 
 Peopie are Snprente.— Nothings is Guaranteed bat Liberty. 
 
 Tbe Republic is above all. — Amending^ at Pleasure. 
 
 There is an irrepressible conflict now imminent between those who contend 
 for the sovereignty of the people and those who set up technicism, prece- 
 dent, authority, and vested rights, as the supreme law of the land. 
 
 Naturally those who have got possession of land, franchises and monopo- 
 lies are the advocates of "Vested Rights." Mr. Stanford, our new Senator^ 
 is of this class. In a recent letter to the New York Chamber of Commerce- 
 he laid down the broad doctrine that grants of land or franchises made by- 
 Congress however corruptly, and sustained by the decisions of courts, muste 
 be respected, though the people starve and the Republic perish. 
 
 The same doctrine is held and argued in the Legislature, in relation to the- 
 common law and riparian rights. It is contended by these advocates of mo- 
 nopoly that when the United States Government deeds a piece of land to a- 
 private holder, he takes from the center of the earth to the vault of heaven^ 
 with all the appurtenances, according to the then law, and that the deed be- 
 comes a vested right that no subsequent legislation can take away. Senator 
 Cross says that the courts of the United States will so adjudge and set aside 
 any legislation to the contrary. And it will do so under the common law of 
 England. 
 
 We do not hold to this view of the case. This is the common law, holding 
 only till the people set it aside by statute. It is then dead. The common 
 law is the very tail end of our law, wagged by all the rest. While unre- 
 pealed the United States Courts would be bound to abide by it; but when 
 repealed by statutes it is dead. 
 
 Now what really is the common law in relation to l^d holding and riparian 
 rights? In England it is and has been this, and nothing more: The patentee 
 of land from the Throne, takes the land, with all the appurtenances, as de- 
 scribed by the common law subject to the statutes of England, for all time» 
 to amend, enlarge, curtail, tax, hamper or nullify, as the sovereign power 
 may decree. 
 
 True, the landholder in England was the law-maker, the judge, the jury, 
 and almost the factotum. He therefore made his rights as perfect as possi- 
 ble. He claimed land, water, game, fish, everything of value. Within his 
 lines he was lord of all, with none but slaves to stand in the way. He de- 
 nied the right even of a baloon to come between his land and the sun. He 
 claimed all tbat fell upon it, whether from land, air or sea. At one time 
 human beings trespassing on it without his leave were made his slaves, serfs^ 
 and vassals, unless claimed by some one more powerful. 
 
148 
 
 But the statutes of England have stripped the feudal lords of a great many 
 of these ancient common law rights. They have taken for public use all 
 navigable water. They have taken the right of way for roads, railways 
 and through travel. And recently, in Ireland, the Government has dictated 
 the terms on which the landowner should rent and even sell the land to the 
 tenant. In the very empire of the common law, and the landholder, and the 
 riparian and vested rights, the Government has declared that all must yield 
 to the changing policy of the times; and the landholder hold nothing but what 
 it is the best policy of the country to permit. 
 
 This is eminently and necessarily the law of the great Kepublic. Onr 
 fathers well knew what they were about when they made the Constitution 
 amendable, forever, at the will of the people. "We cannot have laws like the 
 fabled Medes and Persians, fixed forever. We cannot permit any man or any 
 set of men to set and fix stakes for us which we can neither pull up nor break 
 down. No corrupt Congress, no corrupt courts, no monopolists or technical 
 pleaders, can tie a knot that the sovereign people cannot untie. If they do 
 we shall cut it. Our monopolist may as well know first as last that only the 
 Republic and the sovereign will of the people can be supreme. 
 
 Every landholder in America took his land under this implied contract. He 
 might keep snakes, run a hydraulic mine, build a whisky-still, or store his 
 land with dynamite till the people made a statute against it, and then he u)ust 
 stop. The State of California is sovereign. The United States sold him the 
 land subject to the Sovereign Power forever. If now, the State of California, 
 in a new and peculiar position, choose to say, that as to the waters of this 
 State, and so far as they are needed by the people for domestic use, and for 
 the irrigation of land, the Common Law is set aside, and the Statute shall 
 rule, there is no lawful power in man to overrule the decree, and all the 
 courts of the country will be obliged to take notice. 
 
 Let it not be forgotten that the Riparian himself, in the new arrangement, 
 will acquire as a person and a resident of the district, a right to water in 
 many cases more useful and secure than his riparian right. 
 
 But in any case, wate#in California becomes a thing of prime value, more 
 than in most other lands, and the people in taking charge of it do but resume 
 a right long monopolized by the land-owner, under an arrogant and unjust 
 rule. 
 
 Only two things are guaranteed in theso United States: 
 
 That the Republic is forever! 
 
 That the people rule. 
 
 Daily Examiner. 
 
 Riparian liobbyigts. 
 
 It is currently reported that a delegation, composed of members of the Re- 
 publican State Central Committee, are at Sacramento lobbying against the 
 irrigation bills and in favor of the so-called McClure "compromise." The 
 
149 
 
 •end in view, according to report, is the **good of the party." It is to be 
 assumed that this delegation of party lobbyists are acting by authority and 
 represent the Republican party organization. Their programme is to defeat 
 the bills and postpone action for two years longer, and then undertake in the 
 next political campaign to shoulder the responsibility of the defeat upon the 
 Democrats. They hope then to catch the people with irrigation planks in 
 their convention platforms. But the people have had enough of *' molasses 
 to catch flies." The coming political conventions may pnt irrigation planks 
 in their resolutions to their heart's content; they can gull the people no longer 
 on this water question. The difference between resolving and acting has long 
 since become apparent to the masses. What is wanted is votes for irrigation 
 now, not party resolutions favoring it two years hence. "We call the attention 
 of the people to the fact that the Republican party organization is exerting a 
 pressure upon Republican Senators against the public interest to ac- 
 complish selfish party ends. If the votes of Republican Senators shall 
 render it impossible to pass irrigation legislation before adjournment; if the 
 head-centers of their party now in the lobby of the Senate buttonholeing Sen- 
 ators against iriigation are successful in their efiforts to prolong the present 
 unfortunate condition of affairs two years, their party must bear the burden 
 of responsibility. The Republican party must go before the people at the 
 next election with a record they have made against the farmers of the State. 
 The people will thoroughly understand what a selfish political leadership has 
 done, and how these Republican leaders have sacrificed the great farming 
 interests of California to serve their sordid ends. The McClure compromise 
 Avas, beyond doubt, prepared for the express purpose of defeating the irriga- 
 tion legislation. A legislator who favors it is opposed to irrigation for all 
 time, and the party leaders who are now pressing it cannot hereafter fool the 
 people by idle words in party platforms. The Barmecide feast which Mr. 
 McClure proposes shall satisfy the popular demand for water for irrigation 
 will appease and satisfy no one. The time has arrived when the question 
 must be settled and legislation must go upon the record. 
 
 The Republican leaders may successfully lobby against irrigation measures 
 now, but the people are thoroughly aroused all over the State. There is no 
 section of the State which is not directly interested in the subject of irrigation. 
 It is one of the most important questions which has been presented for years, 
 and the legislator who, at the dictation of a few self-styled Republican leaders, 
 now refuses to give the people relief, will find it impossible to explain his 
 action or make any excuses which can be accepted. 
 
 Democratic Senators need not be reminded that one of the great underlying 
 principks of Democracy — the one which contributed more largely than any 
 other to our recent glorious success in the nation— is that the welfare of the 
 people is the piramount law of the p irty, and only by identifying the party 
 with the interests which the people have nearest their hearts can it hope for 
 success in the future. Let it not be said that the farmers of the State asked 
 jou for bread and yon gave them a stone. 
 
160 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 Wliitney** BUI. 
 
 Whitney's anti-irrigation bill is a special order in the Senate to-day. The- 
 vote upon this bill will discover to the people the names of the hitherto con- 
 cealed opponents of the popular irrigation policy. Mr. Whitney, a Kepub- 
 lican Senator from Alameda, proposes by this bill that the waters of the State 
 shall be divided between the riparian owners and the swamp-land grabbers; 
 and that if any water shall be left, after supplying the fever and ague dis- 
 tricts with sufficient to prevent the disappearance of that disease, and fur- 
 nishing poisoned and putrid water for cattle, then the irrigators may have it. 
 But rather than have the swamps reclaimed, irrigation must go to the wall. 
 To catch the unthinking man, or entrap the unwary friend of irrigation, this 
 bill of Mr, Whitney is the most shrewd and ingenious decoy that the ripar- 
 ianists have set afloat. It purports, on its face, to advance irrigation to the 
 front and to make it subordinate only to the use of water for domestic pur- 
 poses and for watering cattle, with a proviso, however, that lauds naturally 
 watered by the overflow of running streams shall practically have the first 
 right to the water of the stream to the extent of the overflow. The proposition 
 to give preference to that use of water for domestic purposes and for watering 
 cattle has been fully discussed and disposed of in both houses of the Legis- 
 lature, and of course could no^ stand in the Whitney bill. But the sting of 
 bill is in the overflow clause of Section 8. All of the rivers of the upper 
 and middle San Joaquin valley end in swamps. The waters begin to increase 
 in the streams in the Winter season, until instead of being lost in their sandy 
 beds far above the mouths of their channels, they gradually progress until 
 finally they reach the margin of their swamps, into which they empty and 
 overflow. In the late Summer the waters gradually diminish until the water 
 no longer reaches the swamps, and the terminus of the flow gradually recedea 
 up the river. There are many weeks during the irrigating season when the 
 flow of the stream is so greatly diminished that, while a very large quantity 
 of water may be flowing in the channel from the mountains, a very small' 
 quantity reaches and overflows the swamps. At such times the diversion of 
 a very slight quantity above would prevent water from overflowing the 
 swamps, and would deprive the swamp of the natural overflow provided for 
 in the Whitney bill. And it is at the season when this is the situation that 
 water is most needed for irrigation. The whole flow of the river is the nat^ 
 ural overflow upon the swamp lands, and this proviso giving this overflow, 
 that is to say, all the water of the river, to the owner of the swamp, effect- 
 ually shuts off all irrigation above. 
 
 If this is the kind of irrigation legislation the supporters of the Heath 
 amendment and the Republican leaders in the Senate propose to give the 
 State, the irrigators will decline it without thanks. They prefer the less in- 
 jurious riparian law. 
 
151 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 The Legislature will adjourn without passing any of the irrigation bills*. 
 The Senate has manifested an intense hostility to the measures, and unfor- 
 tunately, so far, there has been no roll-call, so that the irrigators can know 
 just who their friends are. Their leading enemies are well known, but the 
 individual standing of each of the forty candidates for Governor, Congress 
 and Senatorial honors is what the people want to know. They want to know 
 them all, so that they may separate the sheep from the goats. 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 The irrigators of Southern California know who are the leading opponents, 
 of their rights in the State Senate. They know that Kellogg, Clay, Webster, 
 Taylor and Dennis Spencer head the gang. They know that this trio expect 
 future preferment from the people, and they have iinally made up their 
 minds that not an irrigator's vote can they get for any purpose. These men 
 find it possible to vote for measures of taxation favorable to the railroad 
 company, but they cannot find it possible to vote for a bill in the interest of 
 the people. The Expositor may ever be counted as against these, and other 
 statesmen of their kind. 
 
 Fresno Expositor- 
 
 The action of Cross, of Nevada, in saddling the mining amendment on As- 
 sembly Bill No. 410, and known as the Wigginton Bill, will likely prove fatal. 
 As amended, the section now reads: 
 
 '♦ Section 2. Section 1422. That portion of the common law of England 
 which relates to riparian rights is hereby declared to be repugnant to and in- 
 consistent to the climate, topography, [and] the physical condition of this 
 State, [and the necessities of the people thereof] and the laws concerning the 
 appropriation of water for puposes of irrigation, and to that extent [forms 
 no] part of such laws and the use of water for such purposes of irrigation is 
 a public use." 
 
 As amended the bill will be opposed by the representatives of the ' ' slick- 
 ens " counties, and it looks as if the measure — the only one that can bring, 
 instant relief to the irrigation interests— will be defeated, as so few days re- 
 main of the session. The "statesmen" of the Senate will do well to remem- 
 ber that they are marked, and that every man who has not openly shown his 
 hand in behalf of the irrigators will be classed as against them, and so will 
 be "knifed" in future should they aspire for office. 
 
 The Examiner holds up Assemblymen McJunkin and Firebaugh, of San 
 Francisco to public scorn for their repeated and persistent efforts to prevent 
 irrigation legislation. Good. 
 
152 
 
 San Jose Republican. 
 
 \Fhat are Riparian Rigrhts? 
 
 It may not be out of order to give a definite answer to this question, for 
 there are many who think they understand it who do not. The word "ripa- 
 rian" is derived from a Latin word meaning "river," or the "bank of a river," 
 generally the latter. " Eiparian rights," therefore, may be said to be the 
 rights a man may have because of his living on the banks of a river or creek. 
 The doctrine of riparian rights may be stated as follows: The owner of land 
 owns the water running through it, and the owner of land higher up the 
 stream cannot reduce its volume or impair its quantity to his detriment. 
 The application of this doctrine in this State has been limited to two condi- 
 tions — where a ditch company appropriated the water for irrigation purposes 
 five years before the riparian owner complained, he is estopped by the statute 
 of limitation; and, second, where the riparian owner cannot show actual 
 damage by the withdrawal of water from the stream by an appropriator 
 higher up, he cannot claim an injunction against the appropriator, Kiparian 
 rights are found often to interfere with what appear to be the rights of others 
 who do not own land on the river bank; for those who are not on the bank 
 might often be able to use the water for irrigation with profit if allowed to 
 take it out farther up the stream. This is the "irrigation "question, stated 
 in a general way, that hds been agitating our Legislature — how to give the 
 man who is not on the bank of the stream a chance at the water. It is now 
 pretty certain that nothing will be done this session. 
 
 Modesto Eepublican. 
 
 Anti-Monopoly Senators. 
 
 The friends of the water and land monopolists iu the Senate, thus far, have 
 managed to avoid placing themselves on the record against irrigation by par- 
 liamentary tactics. Occasionally, however, one of them shows his hand. 
 The other day the anti-monopoly Senator from Napa, Dennis Spencer, so far 
 forgot himself as to make a pathetic and tearful appeal in behalf of Miller & 
 Lux. Of course, the Hon. gentleman would like to have the people believe 
 that his remarks were of a general nature, and applied to monopolists gener- 
 ally, and not to Miller & Lux in particular. Be that as it may, there is no 
 getting around the fact that his speech was in the interest of the water mo- 
 nopolists, and as Miller & Lux are to be the greatest beneficiaries by the Hon. 
 Senator's speech, it is but fair to presume that he drew his inspiration from 
 those gentlemen. There are other honorable Senators who have been some- 
 what conspicuous in their opposition to irrigation measures. Among them 
 we find the names of Taylor and Kellogg. Now, all of these gentlemen may, 
 and no doubt have political aspi |^.tions, and they may as well make up their 
 minds now, that the irrigators will go for their scalps, as surely as they ever 
 show their heads for office. The Freano Exposiiort in this connection, says: 
 
153 
 
 ■** The Expositor may ever be contented as against these, and other statesmen 
 of their kind." So say we. 
 
 What a blessing it is to have such an abundance of water flowing down to 
 the sea in undisturbed grandeur; but more especially when a dry year puts in 
 an appearance. See Senator Dennis Spencer's speech against irrigation. 
 
 Dennis Spencer, and men of his ilk, by courtesy called Hon., are fairly 
 entitled to the name of prohibitionists. They favor the prohibition of the use 
 of water, except by the favored few. 
 
 Santa Ana Standard. 
 
 Our legislature is gettiog down to business. All of the irrigation measures 
 pending in the lower house were passed on Tuesday by large majorities, but 
 they have to run the risk of being butchered in the Senate by men who are 
 owned and controlled by capitalists and corporations. 
 
 Santa Barbara Press. 
 
 The bill to make irrigation lawful and possible passed the Assembly by the 
 following vote: 
 
 Ayes— Messrs. Ashe, Banbury, Barnes, Barnett, Buhlert, Carter of Contra 
 Costa, Clark, Cook, Corcoran, Daley, Deveny, De Witt, Dooling, Franklin, 
 French, Goucher, Gregory, Hazard, Henley, Hunt, Hussey, Johnson, Jordan, 
 Kalben. Lafferty, Long, Loud, Lovell, May, McDonald, McGlashan, McLean, 
 McMurray, Mears, Moffitt, Munday, Patterson, Pallet, Pyle, Reeves, Eose- 
 berry, Russ, Sullivan, Swayne, Torrey, Van Voorhies, Watson, of Eldorado; 
 Ward, of San Francisco; Weaver, Woodward, Yule, and Mr, Speaker — 51. 
 
 Noes — Messrs. Allen, Colby, Coleman, Davis, Ellison, Firebaugh, Heath, 
 Henry, Haywood, Hollister, Jones, McJunken, Walrath, Watson, of Alameda, 
 Ward, of Butte, and Wood— 16. 
 
 Riverside Press and Horticulturist. 
 
 Honor to TTlioin Honor is Due. 
 
 The irrigation question has become the great problem of the State. It has 
 been the one great question which has occupied the time and careful consid- 
 eration of the present Legislature assembled at Sacramento. It has been the 
 only great question before that body, the election of a United States Senator 
 even being but a little ripple as compared with the great tidal wave of irri- 
 gation that has swept over the State. 
 
164 
 
 The Tehama Democrat. 
 
 Who are They ? 
 
 That staunch old advocate of the people's rights, the San Francisco Exam- 
 iner, asks the following pertinent questions : 
 
 The reports from Sacramento show that some twelve or fifteen Senators 
 are " dodging " the irrigation bills by refraining from voting. Yet, when the 
 Heath Amendment to reduce railroad taxes was passed, every Senator was 
 in his seat and voted. The passage of the irrigation bills is one of as much 
 importance to the people as the adoption of the Heath Amendment is to the 
 railroad company. Is the inference to be drawn that the Senate believes in 
 making the public interest subordinate to that of the railroad ? Explana- 
 tion seems to have been the order of the day at the final roll-call upon the 
 Heath amendment. Many Senators took occasion to explain their votes. 
 It would not be entirely uncalled for if the Senators not voting upon the irri- 
 gation bills would rise and explain their silence. There is more or less curi- 
 osity to know who these men are that are more friendly to the monopoly 
 than to the people. ^■ 
 
 S. F. Examiner. 
 
 ACT. 
 
 It is about time that that extraordinary body, presumed to represent the 
 people of California, and now holding its meetings in Sacramento under the 
 name of the Legislature of California, should begin to legislate for the peo- 
 ple who elected them. Every railroad measure has been passed. Every ap- 
 propriation, except those from which the people of the State, as a whole, 
 could derive some benefit, has met with the most favorable consideration; 
 every retainer has been given a clerkship; nearly every raid upon the Treas- 
 ury has been successful. Commercially speaking, the Legislature has, per- 
 haps, been to some people a grand financial success. As the monopoly, the 
 lobby, the clerks, porters and parties asking appropriations have been wholly 
 and fully satified, it is not too much to ask that the Legislature now take 
 action on the irrigation question. There has certainly been time enough to 
 consider the matter. The people are demanding, and have a right to de- 
 mand that something shall be done. The time has come when all masque- 
 rading must end. We simply ask that the tactics which have blocked irriga- 
 tion legislation be abandoned, and that the irrigation measures be permitted 
 to come up for final discussion and decision. The legislators who have shown 
 such eagerness to forward monopoly measures in the past should now be 
 willing to permit the people's measure to come before the Legislature for 
 action one way or the other. We trust that hereafter no legislator who was 
 elected as a Democrat will record his vote against action on the irrigation bills. 
 
155 
 
 S. F. Chronicle. 
 
 The lie^fisla'ture. 
 
 On Thursday last the sixty days for which members of the Legislature are 
 constitutionally entitled to draw pay expired. Since then they have been 
 serving for love. Speaker Parks, looking at the situation from the stand- 
 point of the Drainage claims, ruled some time ago that "sixty days" meant 
 sixty working days. But the Speaker, who, with all his faults, is not a fool, 
 knows that the Constitution will not bear any such construction, and Con- 
 troller Dunn will not draw his warrant in favor of any member for a larger 
 sum than $480, no matter how long the session lasts. We may therefore feel 
 pretty sure that the session will end to-morrow or next day, and the irriga- 
 tion measures will have to go to another Legislature. It will cause much 
 -trouble in the southern counties, but the event will be chieflj' memorable 
 from the slaughter of ambitious politicians which it will involve. Many a 
 budding statesman will trace the overthrow of his prospects in life to the 
 mistake he made in opposing irrigation in 1885. 
 
 There is no prospect of an extra session. The men who resisted and de- 
 feated irrigation measures at the regular session would resist and defeat them 
 ■&t an extra session. Whitney would be there with a bill to block the way, 
 and Spencer, of Napa, would exhaust the patience of the Senate with more 
 harangues to show that irrigation in the south would prove fatal to the inter- 
 ests of some peanut and candy store in the lovely town of Napa. Cox would 
 tell the story of his cows which died of thirst, owing to the diversion of their 
 water supply; and Langford and Baldwin would rally to the support of ac- 
 quired rights. In a word, there would be men enough to defeat legislation. 
 The irrigators must make no mistake. 
 
 Sierra Mountain Messenger. 
 
 Warm Contest. 
 
 The irrigationists and "raparians" [as yerrunkle Stidger phrases it], are 
 at it, hot foot in the Legislature. While it is of no direct personal interest to 
 many of Sierra county people, there is considerable quiet satisfaction to be 
 derived from the fact that the rabid anti-mining faction is split square in two 
 in the middle. The riparian doctrine was a fine thing as long as it affected 
 nobody but the "vandal " miner, but when the principle was invoked to pre- 
 vent the irrigationist from getting water to irrigate their dry land, the matter 
 assumed a different aspect. The riparian law is an old English arrangement, 
 and is doubtless well suited to a country that is fortunate if it gets thirty 
 fair days in a year, but is not so well adapted to a country where the condi- 
 tions are reversed. We hope the irrigationists will win, for unless they do, 
 large sections of several of the Southern counties will become depopulated, 
 and will return to the condition of a howling wilderness, from which they 
 have been redeemed. 
 
156 
 
 Los Angeles Herald. 
 
 The tactics resorted to by obstructionists in tlie Assembly for the purpose 
 of staving off action on the Irrigation bill, though persistent, serve only to 
 make the friends of the cause more in earnest than ever. Some of the ob- 
 structionists clutch at very fragile straws. One ingenious gentleman, when 
 at length the previous question was moved for the purpose of putting an end 
 to the farcial amendments offered by the opposition, rose to remark that he 
 had nothing to say on the motion, and was reminded promptly by the 
 Speaker that he could not say anything, being out of order. The question 
 was put. It is not probable that the passage of the bill can now be prevented 
 by the kind of tactics mentioned. Should the bill become a law, as there is 
 now every reason to hope and believe, our people will have cause to be grate- 
 ful to the gentlemen who composed the Fresno Convention, and to those 
 now aiding in the passage of the bill. 
 
 Contra Costa Gazette. 
 
 The Irrigation Bill. 
 
 We doubt, as stated last week, if the legislation now being sought in aid of 
 the irrigators will prove altogether effective. But it is a movement in the 
 right direction, and any existing defects in the Irrigation District Bill may 
 be remedied two years hence. In the meanwhile it is a good idea to keep 
 before us the legislators who are working for the best interests of the farmers 
 and the State. The bill passed the Assembly by the following votes: 
 
 For irrigation— Ashe, Banbury, Barnes, Barnet, Buhlert, Carter of Contra 
 Costa, Clark, Cook, Corcoran, Daley, Daveney, DeWitt, Dooling, Franklin, 
 French, Goucher, Gregory, Hazard, Henley, Hunt, Hussey, Johnson, Kal- 
 ben, Laffarty, Long, Loud, Lovell, May, McDonald, McGlashan, McMurray, 
 Mears, Moffat, Munday, Patterson, Pellet, Pyle, Reeves, Eoseberry, Euss, 
 Sullivan, Swayne, Torrey, Van Voorhies, Watson of El Dorado, Ward of San 
 Francisco; Weaver, Woodward, Yule, and Parks— 50, 
 
 Against irrigation — Allen, Colby, Coleman, Davis, Ellison, Firebaugh, 
 Jordan, Heath, Henry, Heywood, Hollister, Jones, McJunkin, Walrath, Wat- 
 son of Alameda, Ward of Butte, and Wood. 
 
 Pacific Rural Press. 
 
 Irrifi^atlon Ijaivg. 
 
 This past week has seen quite a gratifying advancement in irrigation legis- 
 lation at Sacramento. Setting apart a special portion of each day to these 
 important matters has proved a wise arrangement. The will of the people has 
 been signified by numerous petitions and resolutions, and by the sending of 
 committees to assure the legislators of the disposition of the various districts 
 represented. So far as we have observed, these expressions have been largely 
 
167 
 
 on the side of the Fresno Convention bills, or at least in the affirmation of" 
 the principle embodied in them. 
 
 The Assembly has proceeded further than the Senate up to the time of ' 
 writing on Wednesday. Last night in the Assembly, on motion of Weaver, 
 the irrigation bills were taken up and finally passed; No. 171 repealing the 
 common law of England in as far as it guarantees riparian owners any rights 
 in this State, by a vote of 52 yeas to 11 nays; and bill 170, providing for the 
 diversion of water and the adjudication of all water rights, by the same vote. 
 The constitutional amendment, placing the minimum rate that may be allowed 
 corporations for water supplied for irrigation or domestic purposes at seven 
 per cent, on the investment in said works, was finally passed by a vote of 56 
 yeas to 13 nays. 
 
 Santa Barbara Republican. 
 
 Cheek! 
 
 Our evening contemporary says: "The Republicans have complete control 
 of the present Legislature." For pure unadulterated cheek commend us to 
 the News. What has become of the twenty Democratic Senators the Democ- 
 racy made so much talk about before the convening of the present session of 
 the Legislature? Those unterrified, incorruptible twenty, with the President 
 of the Senate, are a majority of that body, which gives the Democracy the 
 control, and they made it their boast, before the Legislature met, that the 
 Senate would be Democratic, and would hold the "black Republican aboli- 
 tion Assembly in check." Well, the Democratic Senate has held the Repub- 
 lican Assembly in check sure enough. The Republican Assembly passed the 
 irrigation bills; bills that had for their object the emancipation of the people 
 of this State from the grinding exactions of a soulless set of land sharks and 
 water monopolists. What fate awaited these bills in the Democratic anti- 
 monopoly Senate? Why,- defeat, as might have been expected. Yes, the 
 Democratic Senate is holding the Republican Assembly in check, with a blank 
 to it. It appears that what was meant by holding the "Republican Assembly 
 in check," was that the Democratic Senate would protect the water mo- 
 nopolists from any interference with their monopoly by the Assembly. Great 
 is water monopoly, and the Democracy is its friend. 
 
 Pacific Rural Press. 
 
 Irrigfation, 
 
 The irrigation issue at Sacramento has apparently been lost for this session.. 
 One week ago there seemed a good chance of passing the bills necessary for 
 placing this matter upon a sound footing, but by some sort of legislative 
 hocus-pocus, the strength which was then shown has been fritted away, and 
 those who labored all winter to secure the desired enactments, have appar- 
 ently given up the fight. What will be the ultimate result cannot be foreseen,. 
 
158 
 
 but it can hardly help spreading great distrust and disappointment throughout 
 the irrigated districts until some relief can come from some quarter. Mr. 
 -J. Dr. Barth Shorb, who has given the last three months to solid work in the 
 interest of the irrigators, expressed his views to a reporter of the Chronicle 
 on Tuesday, in referring to the total failure of irrigation legislation this ses- 
 sion — he spoke quietly but very seriously. He did not disguise the fact that 
 he entertained grave fears as to the result of the attempt which must soon 
 be made to shut off the water from the irrigators drawing supplies from 
 King's and other rivers. This, of course, is assuming that the decision of 
 the Supreme Court in bank will confirm the decisions already made in the 
 case of the riparian owners against the irrigators. This has been a dry sea- 
 son where the water obtained from irrigation works is especially needed, and, 
 as the irrigators believe they have acquired their rights under the law, and as 
 to be deprived of them means obsolute ruin to thousands, there will be seri- 
 ous trouble when the attempt is made to take the water out of their irrigating 
 canals. The Supreme Court's decision must be made by the 12th of this 
 month, following close upon the refusal of the Legislature to grant relief. 
 Mr. Shorb concluded by saying that he had done all in his power to secure 
 -the passage of the Fresno bills, but had met a power in the Legislature which 
 is supreme here and against which it is useless to strive. 
 
 Maxwell Colusa Star. 
 
 Sacramento, February 25, 1885. 
 
 Editor Stab: The Legislative Committee of the State Irrigation Conven- 
 tion desire to convey to you their thanks and the gratitude of every irriga- 
 tor in California for the kindly appreciation you have shown of the justice of 
 their cause, and the substantial aid you have rendered them, through the 
 columns of your paper. The subject of irrigation is the leading question of 
 the day in this State, and is destined to overshadow all other potitical issues 
 before the people. All far minded men are satisfied that the bills now before 
 the Legislature, prepared by this committee, are the best yet proposed, and 
 should pass. Their imperfections will become known by experience, and 
 changes and amendments will become necessary in the future. The gigantic 
 proportions which the irrigation interests have already assumed, together 
 with the certainty of increase of the hundreds of thousands now interested, 
 to millions in the not distant future, warrant the belief that henceforth the 
 irrigation question will always be second to none. 
 
 Ths enemies of irrigation are leaving no stone unturned to defeat the pop- 
 "ular will in the Legislature. Nothing will finally crush riparianism but un- 
 ceasing efforts of those arrayed on the side oi irrigation. Your record upon 
 this subject assures us and the people of your continued and active support. 
 
 We herewith inclose a copy of the address of this committee, containing 
 an appendix of expressions of the press upon irrigation. The lack of time 
 
159 
 
 has necessarily made it impossible to obtain extracts from all papers which 
 are on the people's side of the question. "We hope in another pamphlet 
 to present to the people the views of all the papers in the State. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 J. DjaBarth Shobb, * H. S. Dixon, 
 
 J. F. Wharton, L. B. Ruggles, 
 
 W. S. Green, E. H. Tucker, 
 
 E. D. HUDNUT, D. ZUMWALT. 
 
 Legislative Committee of the State Irrigation Convention. 
 
 I 
 
 The San Francisco Call. 
 
 The Ii-risfation Bills. 
 
 The Irrigation Committee has issued a last appeal. There is time for the 
 Senate to heed it, but no one expects it will. There is apparently a profound 
 respect for vested rights in that body. Senators argue with a show of force, 
 that the owners of lands along the banks of streams cannot lawfully be de- 
 prived of a portion of the water that they may desire to retain. In this water 
 case there must be a compromise of rights. People went to work in this State 
 and used water without kpowing exactly what rights they had. There was a 
 general understanding that the use of water *vould eventually be settled on the 
 general principle of the greatest good to the greatest number. There are no 
 fixed and uniform laws governing the use of water in different countries. One 
 nation exacts one set of water laws and another another set with due regard 
 to the conditions prevailing in each. In this State, water was appropriated for 
 certain uses before any laws were made. It was by this appropriation and 
 use that the most profitable use of water could best be determined. The Irri- 
 gation Committee's address says that the people who went upon the arid des* 
 erts of California demonstrated that the State can be mad^ to sustain a popu- 
 lation equal to that of the entire Union at the present time. These people, 
 then, have developed a use for water which we did not know to exist. We 
 knew the arid deserts were there, but we did not know what they could be 
 made to produce.by means of irrigation. The relative value of water to the 
 general public for purposes of irrigation to the value of water running in 
 streams to the same public, must enter largely into this question. What use 
 of the water will do the most good? Individual rights in what the law gives^ 
 individuals must be protected, but in this case the riparianist's rights are at 
 best constructive or inferential. They assume that they have such and such 
 rights because in some other country a set of laws which would give them 
 such rights has been enacted. There is not a man claiming to own water 
 through the ownership of land who did not become possessed of his land with 
 the full knowledge that his right to water would be disputed. The first thing 
 people did in this State was to take water out of its natural channel and con- 
 duct it where it would perform a more valuable service. Water was carried 
 hundreds of miles in ditches and used in mining before a location of land was 
 11 
 
160 
 
 made. The land locator could not know more than the water appropriator 
 what would be the final determination of the question as to the title in water. 
 The talk about vested rights under these circumstances is ill timed. Rights 
 in water in this State have never been defined. The Supreme Court has given 
 an interpretation of law based upon the common law of England. But the 
 common law cannot be made to stand against a positive enactment; it only 
 stands as law in cases where there is no positive enactment. The experiment 
 of irrigation has now proceeded to that point which warrants final action as to 
 the use of water. It has been demonstrated that water will do a greater good 
 to a greater number when used for irrigation purposes than for any other pur- 
 pose. The question for legislators to solve is if the interests of the few shall 
 overcome the interests of the many. Is the development of the State to be 
 arrested because a few men declare that when they located or purchased cer- 
 tain lands they understood that they acquired ownership of certain water? It 
 is clear that these riparianists had no actual title to the water, but that they 
 assumed that such title would be awarded to them by the courts. As a funda- 
 mental principle in law it may be said that the individual has no absolute 
 right to water in its natural bed except for personal use. If there is but water 
 enough to serve as a beverage for a community, the right of each individual is 
 limited to the use of water for that purpose. An excess may be divided in the 
 same way. But the individual may only acquire a property right in water 
 when there is an excess above the wants of the community which may be 
 made useful elsewhere by the investment of labor or money. The nature of 
 that use should be finally determined by its comparative value for one pur- 
 pose or another. The sooner the doctrine that the individual can acquire an 
 ownership in water in its natural bed which he may appropriate to his own 
 use without regard to the general good of the community is exploded the 
 better. There has been too much of that kind of speculation in this State 
 already. 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 The Vote on Irrigation. 
 
 "Friday's vote on the motion in the State Senate to take up the Irrigation 
 measures in preference to the swarm of jobs which have got precedence on the 
 Senate file, enables us to classify members and will show the people where 
 they belong. It goes without saying that six of the San Francisco Senators — 
 Boone, Creighton, Days, Dougherty, Drum and Kelly — voted wrong. No one 
 •expected them to vote right. It is not their style. They know, or ought to 
 know, that the irrigation of the southern counties is vital to the future pros- 
 perity of this city, but for reasons which all can conjecture, they voted not to 
 take up the bills. Cross and Wallis, of Nevada, dealt a stab at the mining 
 interest of their county by antagonizing the members from the south. They, 
 like the San Franciscans, rarely vote right on anything, but they might have 
 realized that before long the mining counties will want something, and thai 
 
161 
 
 it -was bad policy to make enemies in advanoeiof men who will haye it in their 
 power to deny their request for favors. What harm would it have done 
 Nevada to let Kern and Tulare have water? 
 
 Some votes are inexplicable. Cox is understood to be a riparian owner; 
 but Baldwin and Langford of San Joaquin, and Saxe of Santa Clara, repre- 
 sent communities which are as much interested in irrigation as any part of 
 the State. There may be private interests in those counties which would be 
 injured by a general system of irrigation, but Senators are supposed to rep- 
 resent counties, not companies. What purpose Spencer, of Napa, is driving 
 at in his malicious opposition of all measures of irrigation, cannot be con- 
 ceived. He passes for a man of brains. Can he not see that irrigation is 
 going to be a vital issue, and that men who get squarely on the record against 
 it had better order their political coffins at once. 
 
 The votes of Kellogg and DeLong are not worth discussing. They will go 
 back to their constituents with the proud distinction of never once having 
 Toted right on any measure. But surely such sensible Senators as Taylor of 
 Shasta and Chandler of Yuba will see that duty as well as common sence 
 requires them to reconsider the position they have assumed. Shasta wants a 
 great deal, and Taylor is supposed to want a little something. Is this the 
 -way to get it? 
 
 The irrigators have got the men once on the record. Let them try it again. 
 If such measures as the public interest requires cannot be passed, let the 
 people at all events be thoroughly informed who are the men that defeat 
 them. Time moves slowly, but it moves, and the day of retribution, though 
 •deferred, will come at last. 
 
 Daily Alta California. 
 
 A liittle More Patience. 
 
 The friends of irrigation in the Legislature now have the inside track. 
 Thus far, the desperate efforts of the riparianists to adjourn without action 
 have been futile. By patience and good management the irrigation bills can 
 be passed through the coming week ; to do this, however, business must be 
 dispatched rapidly and without waste of time in useless talk. The policy of 
 the riparian minority will continue to be delay. They will attempt to wear 
 members out by filibustering motions and long-winded speeches. The gen- 
 eral questions involved have been fully and exhaustively debated. No one 
 who has participated either as speaker or listener is now uninformed as to 
 the relative merits of riparianism and irrigation. The time has come when 
 argument is no longer effective. Those who have taken the riparian side of 
 the question are no sooner refuted in one objection than they raise another. 
 
 Having exhausted all the feeble arguments the riparian attorneys have been 
 able to invent, they are now wearying the Senate with tiresome reiterations 
 of their exploded fallacies. For the remainder of the session less talking and 
 the more voting, the sooner and more satisfactory will be the result. One 
 
162 
 
 riparian Senator is opposing the bills from motives of petty spite. Another 
 treats the irrigation problem as simply of local interest. A third trembles 
 lest the Supreme Court take offense at what he is pleased to term an attempt 
 to usurp judicial functions and influence the judgment of the Court. It is 
 suggested here, parenthetically, that the most of the laws enacted by the State 
 Legislature for the government of the people have more or less influence upon 
 the action of the Courts. To argue with or try to convince such men as these 
 is simply waste of breath. To earn the gratitude of the people and carry the 
 irrigation bills through to a successful issue, all that is necessary is a little 
 patience, something of a firmness, a great deal of attentive silence and some 
 solid voting. He is a poor friend of irrigation who cannot give a few days 
 more of his time to the business of the State. A vote for adjournment is a 
 vote against irrigation. 
 
 The irrigators have it in their power'' to keep the Legislature in session 
 until the irrigation bills are reached and passed upon, and it ought to be 
 done. It is a great cause and should not be abandoned without a stubborn 
 fight. 
 
 Senator Cross, in a speech in opposition to the irrigation bills, gave utter- 
 ance to the following Christian sentiment: "Let the people of the southern 
 counties and their representatives feel the wrongs we have felt, may they 
 suffer as we have suffered, and may the God who distributes his sunshine 
 equally on our mountains and their plains hear them cry in vain for relief, 
 until they award uj| that mercy they themselves claim." There is just one 
 point in this worthy of notice. Senator Cross admits that the irrigated 
 counties are suffering "wrongs," and that their present demands are for re- 
 lief from conditions of extreme hardship. In other words, Senator Cross 
 grants the justice of the claims of the irrigators, but opposes any concessions 
 to them. 
 
 The Call thinks that California ought to have been given a member of the 
 Cabinet because her growing viticultural industry would have profited by hav- 
 ing a representative. But how can California ask consideration from the 
 Federal Government for interests which she herself treats with shameless dis- 
 regard? The welfare of our vineyards in half of the fruit-growing counties 
 depends on irrigation, and the State Senate vexatiously delays to pass the nec- 
 essary irrigation laws, and threatens to adjourn leaving this duty unperformed. 
 The benefits which the California vineyardists would receive from having a 
 representative in Cleveland's Cabinet are distant and speculative compared 
 with the benefits to be derived from a Legislature with honesty enough to re- 
 spond to the obvious wants of the majority. 
 
 S. F. Call. 
 Crosg Purpoges. 
 
 The very able Senator from Nevada County seems to have mixed together 
 Iwo entirely separate propositions, viz: that to authorize the construction of 
 dams to impound debris and that to authorize the use of water for irrigation 
 
163 
 
 purposes. Mr. Cross finds that the interdict of hydraulic mining has worked 
 considerable hardships upon a portion of his constituents, and as a means of 
 getting even, he opposed the irrigation bills. While we can make some allow- 
 ance for a Senator who goes wron^, on a proposition that his immediate cli- 
 ents favor, we beg leave to remark that statesmen do not permit a local inter- 
 est to warp their judgment as to matters of State or national policy. The 
 fact that hydraulic mining has been prohibited on account of the destruction 
 of property inseparable from its prosecution has no possible connection with 
 the proposition to authorize the appropriation of water for irrigation pur- 
 poses. Senator Cross appears now in the light of a legislator who aided to 
 defeat a bill he might under other circumstances have favored in order to pun- 
 ish certain other legislators for not supporting his own pet measure. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 Irrigfation Bills in the Senate. 
 
 It is reported from Sacramento that the Republican Senators have taken 
 united party action, which if true and strictly carried out, will have an im- 
 portant e£fect upon the pending irrigation bills. Their future coarse, it is 
 said, will be to oppose any further dilatory practices to prevent the bills from 
 being reached. This, if report be true, was the informal conclusion reached 
 by the caucus of Republican Senators. But it is stated that, in the same con- 
 ference, a formal understanding was reached that henceforth, during the re- 
 maining days of the session, they will refuse to take up any bills out of the regu- 
 lar order. This reported formal action of the republican caucus may not be 
 founded on fact, or it may be that it is only intended as a general policy, to which 
 an exception in favor of the irrigation bills will be permitted to be made by 
 individual members f ivoring irrigation. At all events, if this action has been 
 taken, it places the Republican party in a position to claim that the bills were 
 defeated by Democratic obstru.'-tionists, if any Democrat be the cause of delay. 
 This will be difficult to explain away before the people, although this eleventh 
 hour Republican concession comes too late to permit the bills being reached 
 in the regular order. And here is the opportunity of the Democratic party. 
 If every Democratic Senator who has heretofore opposed the bills will refrain 
 from dilatory tactics; if he will go a step further, vote to take up the bills out 
 of the regular order, and bring them to a final vote, he can, while reserving his 
 own individual judgment as to the wisdom of the measures now proposed, and 
 indicating it in his vote on the passage of the bills, render the party good ser- 
 vice. Such a course would placo the Democratic party before the people in 
 batter order than the Republican party, if the latter shall refuse to consider 
 these bills second to none but the appropriation bills. It would be better for 
 the people of the State if both parties were in full accord on this great ques- 
 tion; but it behooves every Democrat of the Senate to place the position of 
 his party in the vanguard, even to the partial sacrifice of his private opinions. 
 A Senator who, even from honest conviction, votes against the irrigation bills, 
 
164 
 
 •will find it difficult to satisfy the the people by any explanation of hiscourse^ 
 But a Senator who prevents a final vote, or contributes to such an event, wilt 
 make explanation impossible, either to his party or to the people. 
 
 Sacramento Record-Union. 
 
 Tlie Irriifation. Problem. 
 
 The subject of irrigation has been the one perplexing question before the- 
 Legislature. It is not to be denied by any one that the need of a safe system 
 of irrigation is a great one in many sections of the State. In establishing such 
 a system, however, the Legislature has found itself beset by two apparently 
 conflicting interests, technically known as those of the appropriators and the 
 riparianists. The equities of each have been freely debated — we may say too 
 freely discussed, since intemperate heat has awakened antagonisms that 
 should not be stimulated. We have believed, and do believe, that the Legisla* 
 ture would have been nearer a wise solution of the problem to-day had it been 
 badgered less by passionate debates in the press and elsewhere. It is a ques- 
 tion to which must be brought the calmest deliberation and the profoundest 
 wisdom. No legislator need be shamed in the confession that it is perplexing, 
 and involved in doubt. Its final settlement must be the result of concessions- 
 and compromises. We believe these all possible, and that the interests now 
 at war may be adjusted so as to give to the riparian owner for his needs, and to 
 the irrigator a just quota of water; or, as one correspondent has suggested, so 
 to merge interests as to distribute the water with a due regard to the needs of 
 all. We are perfectly aware that to accomplish this is no easy task, nor will 
 its accomplishment be unattended by friction. To evolve a perfect sys- 
 tem at once is not possible, but by wise concessions and adjustments an ap-- 
 proach may be made to it. The use of water to the stimulation of earth 
 growth must be made as broad as is possibly consistent with the common, 
 weal. 
 
 There have been in public debate suggestions made and plans outlined upon 
 which the Legislature might have grounded the basic structure for a system 
 acceptable to the people. We have faith that this will be done; that out of all 
 this contention good must come; that the waters of the State proper to be 
 taken for irrigation will be utilized to the fullest extent in increasing produc- 
 tion, and that we will secure a system under which their volume may be 
 augmented by storage. We have faith in the right solution of the present 
 problems being worked out. If it is not done now it will be a cause for pro- 
 found regret. The whole State is interests in the founding of an irrigation 
 system and its practical working. It means increased population, increased 
 production, increased wealth, decreased taxation and full development. The 
 whole State is interested in so building the system that no man shall suffer 
 irreparable iujury, and that the greatest good possible shall accrue to thetr. 
 largest possible number. 
 
165 
 
 Modesto Eepublican. 
 
 The Bnd. 
 
 According to the latest news from Sacramento, the irrigationists are def eatedt 
 in the Senate, which will, in all probability, put an end to the irrigation fight, 
 for this session, at least. It is greatly to be regretted that those Senators who 
 have opposed irrigation could not have been brought to book and forced to 
 place themselves on the record, so the people could know for a certainty who 
 they are. Bad management on the part of those having the irrigation bills in 
 charge, in the Senate, is said to have been the cause of the disaster. The 
 vote was taken in Committee of the Whole, consequently no roll call could bo 
 had; hence there is no official record of the vote by name. It is only knowa 
 that there were 13 votes in favor of reporting favorably on the bill, and 17 
 against it. Ten refused, absolutely, to vote at all, and as there can be no roll 
 call, they could not be made to vote. So ends practically the irrigation fight. 
 
 S. F. Examiner. 
 
 The Common Law, 
 
 It has been satisfactorily shown that the common law of England was in- 
 tended to be adopted in this State only so far as applicable to our condition, 
 and necessities. The courts, in settling whether or not any given portion of 
 the common law is to stand as the rule of decision to them, must ascertain- 
 and define the law, and also determine what are in fact our condition and 
 necessities. The one is a question of law, and the other a question of fa3t» 
 When each is determined the courts are then ready to form their conclusions 
 as to the applicability of the law to the fact. It is no invasion of the rightful 
 province of the judiciary for the people to assist in determining the fact. No 
 better source of information as to their condition and wants can be found 
 than the people collectively speaking. The Legislature represents the peo- 
 ple, and may well assume to speak for them. The common law relating to 
 riparian rights is clearly defined by the Courts so that it (the Legislature) 
 may easily become acquainted with it. The fact that the portion of the com- 
 mon law which relates to riparian rights, as it is claimed to be administered 
 in England, is repugnant to and inconsistent with the climate, topography, 
 physical condition and necessities of the State cannot be successfully contro- 
 verted. If it be the fact, why should the Legislature not so declare? While 
 it is an undoubted, existing fact, many of the Courts have refused to recognize 
 it, and some, among them the Court of last resort of »the State, have yet to 
 finally determine the question. Such a declaration is contained in Section 2, 
 of Assembly Bill 410. It is not an ex post facto declaration of law. It is a de- 
 claratory assertion that the fact exists. There can be no constitutional objec- 
 tion made to such a declaration. If the Courts see fit to reject it as evidence 
 of the fact, that ends the matter. But it seems that the Judicial Department 
 of the Government ought to give great weight to the positive assertion mado 
 
166 
 
 by the cliosen representatives of the sovereign people, that irrigation is a 
 climatic, physical, and absolute necessity to the State. Such a declaration 
 cannot result in harm, and may avail to save the irrigating sections of the 
 State from thefatallydestructixeapplicationof the doctrine of riparian rights. 
 The intelligent lawyers in the Legislature must be able to recognize the differ- 
 •ence between an ex post facto declaration of law and a legislative affirmation 
 of an existing fact. 
 
 The Gait Weekly Gazette. 
 
 Irrigfation t8. Riparianism. 
 
 This case is now engaging the earnest attention of the whole people of 
 California, and almost the entire population of our great valleys are plaintiffs 
 in the case. Their cause is a just one and popular feeling is with them. No 
 one, though saturated with the law of riparian ownership, will deny that the 
 use of water for irrigating purposes on the great plains of the Sacramento 
 and San Joaquin valleys is a beneficial use. No one will deny that many of 
 the dry and sterile lands of these regions, now unproductive for want of water, 
 will, by its use, be turned into green and refreshing oases. It would cover 
 these lands with a new growth of timber, verdure, gardens, vineyards and 
 happy homes. The gloomy, uninviting unproductive desert would blossom 
 with life and vigor, promise and plenty. But how shall all this be done? 
 The riparian owner is now the keeper of the flood-gates which, if opened, 
 would infuse vigor and vitality into a region now paralyzed with heat and 
 drought. And his office is a perpetual one. He seems to have a vested in- 
 terest in it forever. The law gave it to him, but the law is reluctant to take 
 it away. The common law of England and the Supreme Court of our own 
 State declares in favor of the riparian owner. And it is this apparently im- 
 pregnable vested right of a comparatively few riparian owners, as opposed to 
 the thousands now famishing for water, that constitutes one of the most 
 serious and profound problems of the age. The whole water question re- 
 solves itself into the one as to the use and extent of the use. We concede 
 that vested rights to property in any form ought not to be lightly taken away; 
 and the judgments of Courts should generally remain undisturbed. But the 
 march of civilization controls all law; and the law should be so modified and 
 expanded as to protect the millions of people now scattering over the earth's 
 surface. They cannot all be riparian owners; they cannot all look upon the 
 sheen of running waters; they cannot all sit upon their own doorsteps and 
 dip their drink from pellucid streams. The chief merit of the common law 
 is its flexibility and adaptability to different conditions and necessities; and 
 a liberal application of this merit should be made in California. If this be 
 impossible, the Legislature ought to declare the use of water for purposes of 
 irrigation to be a public use. A private house in a burning city may be law- 
 fully destroyed to check the spread of the conflagration. Why not take, with 
 due compensation, the riparian's property, for the purpose of avoiding the 
 
167 
 
 poverty, want, famine and devastation which is sure to come to thousands of 
 families unless they can irrigate? And all this under the right of eminent 
 domain. 
 
 Los Angeles Daily Times. 
 
 Irrigfation, Unpaid Taxes and the Railroads. 
 
 In an interview between a Times reporter and Charles Crocker, President of 
 the Southern Pacific Kailroad, which appeared in yesterday's issue of this 
 paper, the railroad "magnet," being asked, " What do you think of the 
 work of the Legislature ?" replied that he considered the action of the Senate 
 in neglecting to pass the irrigation bills "an outrage upon the people." Mr. 
 Crocker then went on to give reason for his opinion, putting himself squarely 
 on record as being in full sympathy with the irrigationists, and, therefore, 
 with the people of Southern California as a mass. 
 
 The Merced Star. 
 
 The Modesto Republican says the latest advices from Sacramento indicate 
 the defeat of the irrigationists, which will, in all probability, put an end to 
 the irrigation, for this session, at least. It is greatly to be regretted that 
 those Senators who have opposed irrigation could not have been brought to 
 book, and forced to place themselves on the record, so the people will know 
 for a certainty who they are. Bad management on the part of those having 
 ;the irrigation bills in charge, in the Senate, is said to have been the cause of 
 the disaster. The vote was taken in Committee of the Whole, consequently 
 no roll call could be had; hence there is no official record of the vote by name. 
 It is only known that there were 13 votes in favor of reporting favorably on 
 the bill, and 17 against it. Ten refused absoLitely to vote at all, and there 
 being no roll call they CDuld not be m ide to vote. So ends, practic dly, the 
 irrigation fight. 
 
 San Francisco Alta. 
 
 Put tKem on Record. 
 
 Assembly bill 410 is the key to the irrigation situation. It is sheer non- 
 sense to talk about irrigating if riparian rights according to the English law 
 are to prevail in this State. Whether it be finally resolved to confirm the 
 doctrine of appropriation, or establish some other system of distributing 
 water for irri'^ation, whatever course is to be adopted, the riparian doctrine 
 stands in the way. Assembly bill 410 proposes to break down this barrier to 
 irrigation, without qualification or hesitation. With this bill once on the 
 statute books, riparianism becomes a thing of the past, and in no other way 
 can any system of irrigation obtain a sure foothold in the State. The resist- 
 -aace to the passage of this bill is not so strong in number as to defeat it, if a 
 
168 
 
 vote could be had. The strength of the opposition lies in their power to pre- 
 vent action. If the bill fails of passage at this session, it will come up at the 
 next. The people are for it. They will elect to the next Legislature those 
 whom they believe to be its friends, and they will defeat its known enemies. 
 The Assembly is already upon the record. The Senate has yet to declare it- 
 self, by a yea and nay vote, upon any direct question which absolutely draws 
 the line between the friends of the bill and its enemies. The bill is now on 
 the general file of the Senate. Ahead of it on the file there is no measure that 
 comes within gunshot of being of as vital importance. There is no excuse 
 for not taking it up out of its order and ahead of all other bills. A motion to 
 this effect would reveal its certain enemies. If such a motion was carried, it 
 would be certain, with proper managemeat, to reach a vote where every 
 Senator would be forced to array himself positively on one side or the other. 
 The irrigation leaders must force such a vote. The people must not be left 
 in the dark, lest they panish the innocent as the guilty. 
 
 There is no necessity for an extra session of the Legislature. The irrigation- 
 bills and all other necessary legislation can be passed if the regular session 
 is continued a few days. The members will have to serve without pay, but 
 what of that? They have not done their work yet, and should be glad of the 
 opportunity to stay and finish it, even at the cost of a little personal incon- 
 venience. 
 
 Fresno Expositor. 
 
 So far there is no riparian diflaculties in Merced County. The West Side- 
 canals take the water from the San Joaquin river, and although in exception- 
 ally dry seasons, about all the water of that stream is turned into the canal, 
 there have been no complaints from the riparian owners below the place of 
 diversion. The Merced river furnishes an abundance of water in early sum- 
 mer. The water taken from this stream by the present canal even at low 
 stages of the river is sufficient to irrigate and insure permanent fertility to a 
 large area of land. Merced has one advantage over counties lying further 
 south — there is no present or prospective litigation over water rights. So says 
 the Merced Star. The Expositor opines that as soon as Merced county gets 
 its irrigating canals in effective shape, some "dog-in-the-manger" dwelling on 
 the banks of its streams will step out and demand that the water shall fLo'W 
 by his domains that he may listen to its murmur. 
 
 San Diego Sun. 
 
 It is believed that the irrigation obstructionists in the Senate will succeed 
 in preventing action being taken on irrigation bills during the present ses- 
 sion. It is thought, however, that if the sixty Assemblymen on whom the 
 irrigationists rely will sign a petition to the Governor asking for an extra 
 session, agreeing that no constructive mileage will be charged, and that the 
 
169 
 
 session will not be extended longer than ten days, the Governor will acced&< 
 to the request. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 The Railroad Irrigation Bill. 
 
 Senator Whitney claims that his bill, "to declare the title to water inrivers^. 
 streams, lakes, and ponds, and the right to its use," is the result of much 
 study, and of a sincere desire to oflFer a solution of the vexed problems. He 
 assumes that, after all the discussion that has taken place, he is convinced 
 "that the key to the intricacies of the situation will be found in his Senate 
 Bill, No. 50. He would be right in his theory if, in all sections of the State,, 
 where irrigation is carried on, or is a necessity, the streams carried water 
 enough to irrigate all irrigable lands and to supply all other uses to which 
 water may be applied. It is unfortunate for the State that this theory is not. 
 founded on fact. It is because the water supply is at the present time insuffi- 
 cient for all that the existing controversy over the use of water has arisen. 
 Senator Whitney's bill proposes that all shall have water, for all purposes, 
 out of the running streams. This is not possible. The problem is how to 
 distribute the waters of the streams so as to confer the greatest good on the 
 greatest number without violating justice, and to apply such waters to abso- 
 lute necessities. If there be any flowing waters of streams now put to uses 
 which can be supplied from any other source, such uses as cannot be other- 
 wise supplied should be given preference in the disposition of the streams* 
 Now, it can be demonstrated beyond dispute that water for sustaining life, 
 for domestic and sanitary uses, and for the watering of stock, which are pre- 
 ferred over irrigation by Senate Bill No. 50, can be obtained in other ways, 
 than from the natural streams. It can be shown with equal certainty that 
 water for irrigation cannot be otherwise obtained. Such being the fact, how 
 can any one contend that irrigation should not be given the preference over 
 the other uses mentioned? It would take a volume to go through Senator 
 Whitney's bill, and show the disastrous effect which it would have if put into 
 practical operation. Theoretically, nothing could be more just. But if the 
 only theory upon which it could operate successfully, and with justice to all, 
 were based upon facts which have an existence, the bitter controversy over 
 water rights in the Legislature and in the courts could never have ariscTi. 
 Does not the unanimous opposition of every practical irrigator in the State 
 familiar with the sources of our water supply convince thinking men that, 
 whatever may have been Mr. Whitney's intentions in the premises, his bill 
 cannot promote irrigation? It is a misnomer to call this an irrigation bill. 
 
 Senator Whitney is also reported as saying that, so far as he has been in- 
 formed, the interests of the railroad corporations are considered by them as 
 identical with the irrieiators, and thai he has never seen from them, or from 
 any one acting in their behalf, the least indication of hostility to the interests, 
 of irrigation. If the railroad company favor this bill, it is certainly a very 
 
170 
 
 unmistakable evidence of their hostility to irrigation. The bill, as framed, 
 •certainly enables them to pursue their usual and unerring course toward 
 the people's interests. Tbey have never failed, on any great public question, 
 to meet the public with a smile and stab it under the fifth rib. They have in 
 their hire attorneys by the dozen, who are practiced in framing laws purport- 
 ing to mean one thing and actually effecting another. The Whitney bill is of 
 this class. 
 
 Mendocino Dispatch Democrat. 
 
 Irrigation in California, is a problem that must be solved, but the Repub- 
 lican Legislature of to-day is not equal to the emergency. There is not a 
 spot of land in the dry plains of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys, 
 nor in the whole of Southern California, but can be made to yield bounti- 
 fully for the support of man by the free use of water, but laws must be pass- 
 ed whereby its use can be governed and regulated, and the rights of the more 
 enterprising citizens protected. The subject of irrigation is one of the lead- 
 ing issues that will engross the minds of our thinking leading men for many 
 years, and when laws, which, at first, must be of a crude and imperfect 
 nature, shall be perfected so that the greatest good will or can be accom- 
 plished, this State will have entered upon a period of unprecedented pros- 
 perity. 
 
 Daily Evening Expositor. 
 
 The California Senate found sufficient time to pass a bill to pay John 
 Wilkins (colored), of San Francisco, $500 for a $40 horse that he carelessly 
 drove into a hole on the water-front, but it has not yet been able to find time 
 to pass any of the irrigation bills. John Wilkins' horse was probably more 
 nearly within the scope of the comprehension of the majority of the Senators, 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 The liegislatnre. 
 
 The Legislature now convened at Sacramento has fairly earned the reputa- 
 tion of being the worst and most reckless which has ever assembled. This 
 statement, to those who remember what some of the California Legislatures 
 have been, may seem harsh, but it is nevertheless true. Every measure of 
 the railroad monopoly has been railroaded through without much friction, 
 and with the speed of an express train. The railroad has had everything and 
 the people nothing. Men heretofore considered honest have fallen by the 
 wayside. The treasury has been raided unscrupulously; the people's money 
 voted away in the shape of appropriation bills with unprecedented prodigality; 
 irrigation measures which every one recognizes of supreme importance have 
 ■been kept back by the railroad manipulators, in order that their own pet 
 
171 
 
 measures miglit be forced on the people. The necessity for irrigation legis-> 
 lation is apparent to all. The right to appropriate water, not only for agri- 
 cultural, but for mining purposes, is absolutely necessary to thousands and 
 tens of thousands of people. Orchards which are now furnishing fruit that 
 renders California famous; vineyards which are producing our best wines and 
 raisins, and mines in the mining districts in the State depend upon and can- 
 not be conducted without the use of water. There are towns and settlements 
 all over the State which will be depopulated unless this water question is set* 
 tied. Meetings of the people have been held on the subject, and petitions 
 have been poured in upon the legislators begging for relief. But the legisla- 
 tive ears, attuned to monopoly music, have been deaf to the appeals of the 
 people. The constitutional limit, so far as pay to the legislators is concerned, 
 has expired. Exactly how a majority of the legislators are now making their 
 expenses it is not necessary to discuss. A scrutiny of the bills which have 
 passed, and, indeed, of the entire conduct of the majority of the legislators^ 
 will suggest many reasons why they prefer remaining at Sacramento to re- 
 turning home and facing their constituents. There are some men in this 
 Legislature who have made good records, but the majority of them are well 
 advised in desiring to linger at the State Capital and prolong their official 
 lives. The people will see hereafter that they will never be returned to. 
 misrepresent them. 
 
 San Francisco Alta. 
 
 Benefit of the Doubt. 
 
 Several Senators are devoting their energies to the full capacity to show 
 that the irrigation bills are unconstitutional — especially Assembly bill 410. 
 There are lawyers of the Senate equally as able as any opponent of the bills 
 who maintain their constitutionality. It seems fair to say that such a conflict 
 of opinion gives rise to a reasonable doubt in favor of the bills. Other Sen- 
 ators, even though they be lawyers, might take the wise and public spirited 
 attitude attributed to Senator Johnson of Sonoma, and give the people the 
 benefit of the doubt. These Senators who assert that there is no question 
 but that portions of the bills are beyond a doubt unconstitutional, when 
 construed literally to their full extent, lay themselves open to the charge, 
 made by some, that their assertions are not made in good faith, when they 
 pursue a course which prevents the Senate from deciding whether or not the 
 bills are to become laws, either in whole or in part. The people of this State 
 feel so strongly on this irrigation question that it is almost certain that, in 
 the event of failure to pass even a single bill, any obstructionist or any op- 
 ponent to the bills who goes again to the people will be told that they want 
 no more representatives who cannot sacrifice technical notions to the sover- 
 eign will and the public necessity. They will be told that to whatever ex- 
 tent any of these bills are unconstitutional the Courts of the United States 
 afford full protection. The Legislature ought, without hesitation, to go to. 
 
172 
 
 ^he very fullest constitutional limit in this legislation for the benefit of irri- 
 gation. Let the Courts mark the line where the constitutional ends and the 
 unconstitutional begins. 
 
 Stockton Herald. 
 
 A San Joaquin Petition. 
 
 The following petition relating to irrigation was laid upon the desk of 
 Senators Langford and Baldwin to-day: '^To Senators Baldwin and Langford 
 of San Joaquin County: The undersigned business men of Stockton, request 
 you to support and vote for the irrigation bills now pending in the Senate, 
 introduced by Senator Reddy, being the same as Assembly bills 440, 171 and 
 170, and the amendment to the water clause in the Constitution, and to do 
 all in your power to secure their enactment at this session of the Legislature, 
 and without further delay. We ask this because we believe those bills 
 having the approval of the committee from the State Irrigation Convention, 
 and being favored by the people of Southern California, are necessary to the 
 prosperity of that portion of the State upon which the trade and commercial 
 importance of Stockton is largely dependent. Signed, Moore & Smith, J. D. 
 Peters, H. W. Weaver, J. M. Welch, Wm. H. Woodbridge, and sixty-two 
 others." 
 
 Tulare Register. 
 
 We trust that the members of the present State Senate will exhibit a degree 
 ■of common sense, be it ever so little, that will enable them to see the neces- 
 sity of expunging from our laws every trace of the pernicious and selfish 
 doctrine of riparian rights as construed by our courts. 
 
 Vallejo Evening Chronicle. 
 
 It begins to look as if the irrigation legislation prayed for by the people of 
 the southern part of the State will fizzle out in the Senate. The Assembly 
 passed the bills in the shape asked for, but the Senate has added amend- 
 ments which will make the bill obnoxious to the irrigators themselves. It 
 will be a great blow to the southern part of the country if the measures fail 
 of passage or are loaded down witfi unfriendly amendments. 
 
 Anaheim Gazette. 
 
 Irrigation measures go on swimmingly in the Assembly. The bill provid- 
 ing for the discovery and adjudication of water rights and claims passed the 
 Assembly by a vote of 53 to 10. The bill providing for the organization and 
 •control of water and irrigation districts was passed by a vote of 51 to 11. 
 The constitutional amendment, which is part of the irrigation legislation, 
 -was passed by a vote of 56 to 13. The gist of these bills was published in the 
 
173 
 
 Gazette some weeks ago. But it is barely possible that the bills will be 
 wrecked in the Senate, in which body the riparian proprietors have some 
 conspicuously able advocates, and they may, by parliamentary methods of 
 obstruction, defeat all irrigation legislation. The pay of the Legislature 
 stops in a few days, and it may adjourn. 
 
 i 
 
 Stockton Independent. 
 
 A Black Eye for Irri(;ation. 
 
 The Kiparianists appear to have the upper hand of the Irrigationists in the 
 Senate. Last night's dispatches say the Legislature will adjourn before the 
 irrigation bills can be agreed upon by the Seriate, and the only hope for their 
 passage lies in the possibility of an extra session for that purpose. It is 
 hardly probable an extra session will be called. This fight of the riparianists 
 has not been conducted with a particle of fairness. The Senators enlisted 
 against the irrigation bills have not met the issue squarely, or with any evi- 
 dence that they were willing to have the controversy settled in a just and 
 equitable way. They have resorted to obstruction proceedings that were 
 only a bald pretence for judicial consideration, and will receive, as they 
 merit, widespread condemnation. 
 
 Modesto Eepublican. 
 
 Their Record. 
 
 The water and land monopolists appear to have it all their own way in 
 the Senate. "What with bad management on the part of the friends (?) of 
 irrigation, and the unfairness of the obstructionists, and other sufficient and 
 weighty reasons, irrigation legislation is doomed, for this season, at least. 
 The Democracy have at all tiqjes claimed to be the anti-monopoly party, par 
 excellence. The Senate is Democratic; the Assembly is Eepublican. The 
 Democratic party charges the Republican party with favoring monopoly? 
 The Assembly passed the irrigation bills by large majorities. The Senate 
 defeated those same bills. Now, in view of these facts, by what right does 
 the Democracy arrogate to themselves the title of anti-monopoly party? 
 The only real monopoly that can exist is the monopoly of water and land, 
 and here we have the strange spectacle of an anti-monopoly Democratic 
 Senate standing in with the water and land monopoly as against the people of 
 the State. 
 
 The tactics resorted to by the obstructionists in the Senate is such that a 
 vote by a call of the roll cannot be had; hence the names of those Senators 
 who voted against irrigation cannot be known officially. But the people will 
 remember that the Senate is Democratic, and in that body irrigation was de- 
 feated; thus placing the Democratic party on the record as the friend of the 
 land and water monopolists. This record they cannot dodge, and the party 
 will be called upon to face the music at future elections. 
 
174 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 Fiction and Fact. 
 
 When the riparian attorneys in the Legislature picture the deplorable con- 
 dition of the old pioneer riparian-like Senator Cox and Miller and Lux, who 
 in an early day, built his residence on the banks of some charming river, and 
 created a garden of delight around him, should the irrigation bills become 
 laws and his right to have this river flow past his premises be condemned 
 and he paid for it in order that it may be brought out of its deep channel on 
 to the adjoining arid plain and used for irrigation — his home destroyed, life 
 blasted, etc. — the answer is, although it has never been made in the proper 
 quarter: 
 
 There is not a man settled on the bank of a stream in Southern California 
 who is not an appropriator and irrigator, and there is not a man so living in 
 that part of the State who is not either a friend of, or at least, not an oppo- 
 nent, of the irrigation bills. As far as the streams of Southern California are 
 of any benefit in the way of fertilizing the soil, flowing in their natural chan- 
 nels, the riparian proprietor might as well live twenty miles away. But let it 
 be supposed, as the riparian attorneys state, that the land of the riparian pro- 
 prietor is moistened and fertilized by the stream flowing in the natural chan- 
 nel, and that, taking advantage of this circumstance, he had created a Gar- 
 den of Eden, and his right to have this stream even condemned for a greater 
 ■Qse — to be brought upon the surface and used to irrigate and fertilize a wider 
 area, would not the same right still remain to this riparian that every other 
 member of the community enjoyed? He would have the right of appropri- 
 ation. He could connect with the canal that diverted the stream and irrigate 
 as his neighbors would do. The danger of his land being made desolate 
 even under this given state of facts, which has no existence in reality, is a 
 mere idle figment of the brain. There are no riparians in the sense of 
 opposing these bills except Hon. Fred. Cox and Miller & Lux, all of them 
 large appropriators of water and irrigators, who own lands at the ends of or 
 sinks of the streams in the Tulare Valley, and under the riparian law, as 
 there is nobody and no stream below them, expect to blackmail everybody 
 above them. Should opportunity be given them to do this, it would be worth 
 to them millions of dollars per annum. 
 
 The following item from the Yisalia Fret Press, furnished by a Traver cor- 
 respondent, is suggestive. It shows that Senator Cox, while opposing irriga- 
 tion in one direction, where he thinks it accords with his views of interest, in 
 another where he thinks he is safe from the doctrine of riparianism that he 
 invokes, that he is an irrigator. The Press says: 
 
 Clark & Cox are putting in the old "Williams field of 9,000 acres to grain 
 and alfalfa; about 2,000 acres will be devoted to the latter. They have let 
 the contract for building side ditches to irrigate the whole tract, and the 
 water will soon be on all parts of the farm if needed. 
 
175 
 Sacramento Capital. 
 
 Wliere the Regpongibility Will Rest. 
 
 The Republican Assembly has passed the irrigation bills by overwhelming 
 majorities, and they are now before the Democratic Senate under so-called con- 
 sideration. This latter body is proceeding with a slowness and deliberation 
 supposed to be a peculiarity of the august Senatorial dignity, but which, con- 
 sidering the shortness of the session, if continued means the defeat of the 
 bills. For some weeks these bills have been a special order daily in Com- 
 mittee of the Whole, yet practically only the first section of the first bill has 
 been considered. This delay, in view of the magnitude of the interests requir- 
 ing this legislation, can scarcely be too severely condemned. "Why is it these 
 gentlemen are so afraid of recording their votes on this question, for to judge 
 by the words of the members gravely offering amendments in good faith, they 
 all acknowledge the necessity of and favor the proposed legislation. It is 
 absurd to say that forty minds cannot reach an agreement as readily and 
 surely as eighty, unless it be that they do not want to. Possibly there may 
 be some Senators who believe that by smothering this legislation by parlia- 
 mentary tactics they will escape the political consequences of their act. We 
 would assure them that this is a vain and delusive hope, for every one of 
 them, open enemy or false friend, is marked and will be remembered by 
 the public when they apply for further political favors. The question is not 
 a political one in any sense, nor a sectional one, yet it cannot but prove det- 
 rimental to the Democratic party if the Senate, controlled by it, oppose itself 
 to the legislation demanded by the great material interests of the State. 
 
 San Francisco Post. 
 
 Irrigation.— Ho-iv tbe Railroad stands on tlie Q,uestion. — Interesting^ 
 
 Interview with Colonel C. F. Crocker, —He Talks Right Out 
 
 in Meeting. — Solid Railroad Interests. 
 
 Having exhausted other subjects of attack, the unfairly rabid anti-railroad 
 press and politicians are now protesting loudly that the railroad company — 
 meaning the Central Pacific Railroad, Southern Pacific Railroad and allies — 
 is endeavoring to kill the irrigation bill. People who have followed the course 
 of the Legislature cannot, of course, be deceived by so bald a falsehood; but 
 there are those who will accept any uncontradicted statement as true, and 
 lest they be deceived in this matter, it is necessary to state the true facts of 
 the case. A Post reporter called on C. F. Crocker, Vice President and Di- 
 rector of the Southern Pacific Railroad and Central Pacific Railroad, to-day, 
 and asked him point blank if the railroad company was in any way opposed 
 to the passage of a bill protecting the irrigators of this State in the appro- 
 priation and beneficial use of water. 
 
 " We favor irrigation all the time, and these wild statements that we are 
 opposed to necessary legislation to secure the use of water to irrigators are 
 12 
 
176 
 
 utterly false and malicious, "replied Mr. Crocker, with some warmth. "These 
 charges of interference on our part to prevent the passage of the irrigation 
 bill are made for a purpose. They are made to prejudice the people against 
 us and to keep alive the agitation which has been made in the interest of a 
 few selfish politicians, and which has retarded the extension of railroad 
 building in this State, has kept out capital by its hostile attitude towards 
 public improvement, and has indirectly resulted in the loss of large and 
 important trade to this State." 
 
 •'Will you state the exact position of the railroad company on the iniga- 
 tion question?" 
 
 "Certainly I will, and I can speak advisedly, for the subject has been 
 much discussed by our executive department. We are in favor of the widest 
 possible use of water for irrigation, and heartily in accord with the sense of 
 the Fresno irrigation Convention. It does seem to me that it should be un- 
 necessary for any one to ask our position on this matter, but our enemies are 
 so unfair, so disingenuous, so regardless of truth in their anxiety to foment 
 a popular feeling against us, that they will even run the risk of making 
 charges against us as false on their face as any statement could be, and which 
 ■will not stand for an instant, if the light of our self-interest and^ the record 
 of our friends is applied." 
 
 " "You speak of self-interest. What interest has your company in irri- 
 gation?" 
 
 "A greater interest than any other man or set of men — greater, in fact, 
 than all other interests. We run and operate the S. P. B. R., a railroad 
 2,300 miles long. That 2,300 miles of road would not pay enough to keep 
 the tracks in repair but for irrigation. Look at the territory it traverses, 
 starting from the bay line. There is Stanislaus County, with millions of 
 acres of dry land, now assessed at $1 per acre, which is worth $100 an acre 
 as soon as water is put on it. Why, in Merced County alone, my father and 
 myself and a few other members of the company, have spent over a million 
 dollars on an irrigating canal, with which we expect to irrigate 170,000 acres 
 of land, and increase the taxable value of the county at least $16,830,000 as 
 soon as the water is flowing. We will probably spend half a million more, for 
 the canal is a huge undertaking, and the water has to be carried over and 
 through a range of mountains. Now that water is running to waste in a 
 swamp so full of malaria that human beings can only live there a few months 
 in the year, but when our ditch is completed the swamp land can be tilled 
 and the dry land will yield marvelous crops. We have land to sell there, and 
 our railroad will carry its produce. What stronger interest could any set of 
 men have in irrigation than that? Why, since our ditch was started real es- 
 tate in Merced City has gone up 100 per cent, in value, and our shipments 
 from that city have more than doubled. Take, for example, the next county — 
 Fresno. Where once was a desert — on land which our company sold for less 
 than a dollar an acre — there are now dozens of irrigated colonies, worth from 
 $150 to $400 per acre. Settlement is close and healthy, the plain is dotted 
 
 k 
 
177 
 
 with towns and villages, all of which yield a profit to our road. Should we 
 work to kill that interest and relegate the laud to an occasional grazing ground 
 on which cattle will range that can be driven to market, and will not pay our 
 road a cent in. freight. It would be absurd to suppose that we would cut our 
 throats in that manner, yet these enemies of ours would have the people so 
 believe. Look at the next county — Tulare — with its million and a half of 
 acres irrigated and producing an average of thirty-five bushels to the acre, 
 every bushel of which, except the little used in the county, has to come over 
 our road one way or the other. That whole country depends on irrigation, 
 and think you the railroad would be the one to attempt to convert it into 
 ' poor pasture land,. ' 
 
 " Look at the country south of Tulare. It all, except some small portion, 
 depends on irrigation. What would Arizona and New Mexico be without 
 artificial irrigation? It is absurd to suppose that we could fight our own in- 
 terests by opposing irrigation. We favor it in every way, and are prepared 
 to make sacrifices to insure its perpetuation. We would be willing to pay in- 
 creased assessments if money was needed for reimbursing vested rights. I 
 have had conversations with Mr. Shorb, the head of the irrigation movement, 
 and he can testify that we are in full accord with his plans, and even while I 
 was in New Orleans I telegraphed to our land agents to do all in their power 
 to further the popular cause. Call it selfish interest, if you will, but what- 
 ever you choose to call it the fact remains, we are heartily in favor of irriga- 
 tion, as opposed to riparian rights. If there was any reason for this attack 
 upon us, I would not complain, but there is no reason at all. They have 
 charged that some members of the Senate, whom they class as our friends, 
 have voted against the bill. Suppose that was true, does it make us respon- 
 sible? Because a Senator votes to give the railroad fair, or even favorable, 
 treatment on one subject, that does not prove this company owns him and is 
 responsible for him. 
 
 It is absurd on the face, and an insult to every man in the Legislature to 
 make such a suggestion. There is not a gentleman at Sacramento who has 
 not at one time or another voted in favor of what are called railroad measures. 
 Let me cite an instance: A certain Senator votes for what is known as a rail- 
 road bill. He also votes for the fireman's bill. What would be thought if 
 the foreign insurance companies set up the claim that the railroad was active 
 to have foreign companies taxed? Why, tha suggestion would be laughed at. 
 We have enough business of our own to attend to without bothering with the 
 afi'airs of others, and I defy any one to show the slightest evidence that we 
 have interfered with this irrigation business in any way, except to ask all of 
 our friends to vote for the irrigators, and all statements to the contrary are 
 false. But that is all we have done. We have not sought in this or any 
 other matter to influence legislation. We are not in politics even for our own 
 protection. We recognize that the people of the State are disposed to treat 
 us fairly. We believe that the friction caused by misstatements has been 
 smoothed away, and we are perfectly willing to trust ourselves in the hands 
 
178 
 
 of the people, whose interests are identical with ours. We have no one to 
 set up and no one to pull down. What we need we will ask for plainly and^ 
 freely, and will trust alone to the merits of our request." 
 
 The Livermore Valley Review. 
 
 The address to the Legislature of the State of California, by the Legisla- 
 tive Irrigation Committee, is before us. It is a full report upon the question 
 of irrigation, and the subject is discussed fully under the following heads : 
 "Irrigation a Natural Want; Benefits of Irrigation; Injurious Consequences 
 of Denial of Right of Irrigation; Customs and Usages, Irrespective of Law; 
 The Law on the Subject." Next is the noted case of CoflSn et al., vs. The 
 Left-Haud Ditch Company. Then follows the opinions of the press on the 
 subject of irrigation. They are all of the opinion that a well regulated 
 system of irrigation must be established before the agricultural re- 
 sources of the State can be fairly developed." The following on the 
 irrigation contest from the Record- Union, is to the point, and expresses our 
 sentiments : 
 
 * ' The people are agreeing upon the need for an irrigation system, and are 
 aU of one mind concerning the use for irrigation, of all waters that can be 
 diverted to that purpose, consistently with the best interests of the State and 
 all its citizens. When we come to methods, it is discovered to be the most 
 difficult problem for solution that has yet presented. But we have faith that 
 it will be solved. The future of the valleys needing irrigation, under a wise 
 system of use of the waters, will be one of the greatest possibilities, wealth 
 and prosperity. Where we now have hundreds of homes, we shall have 
 thousands; where we now have one consumer, we shall have fifty or a hun- 
 dred. Every interest, commercial or industrial, will be advanced, and all the 
 people will be benefited. But not even can this glowing future be realized 
 at the expense of the destruction of the navigable streams. They are neces- 
 sary for commercial uses and sanitation; they secure to the interior commer- 
 cial advantages not otherwise obtainable; they cheapen transportation; they 
 build up trade; they are free highways, the heritage of all the people." 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 No More Extra Sessions. 
 
 The baffled irrigators talk of having an extra session called for the purpose 
 of trying to pass their bills. It would be a mistake. Nothing can be done 
 with the present Legislature. It would be as difficult to pass the irrigation, 
 measures sixty days from now as it is at present. The men will not change. 
 It is no secret why the bills will not pass, and if an extra session were called 
 the obstructionists would simply raise their terms. The only chance for th& 
 irrigators, if the bills fail, is to be sure to elect men to the next Legislature 
 
179 
 
 npon whom they can rely. No tainted man, no man who is affiliated with 
 the monopoly, no man whose character does not raise him above the suspic- 
 ion of bribery, should be nominated, and if either party 'nominates such a 
 man his party associates should bolt the ticket and knife him. 
 
 It is very seldom that any good is done at an extra session. It is expensive 
 and every one is impatient to go home. It is like a lesson set to a schoolboy 
 on a holiday — his soul revolts against it. Strikers revel on such occasions. 
 They know, too, that when an extra session is called somebody wants some- 
 thing very bad and they raise their price accordingly. Somebody congratu- 
 lated a railroad man last June on the success of the monopoly in defeating 
 legislation at the extra session last year. "Ah!" said the other, "you do not 
 know what it cost. The scoundrels knew we were at their mercy." 
 
 Everybody will be sorry if the bills for irrigation fail to become laws and 
 the business of supplying water to Southern California under a comprehen- 
 sive system has to be deferred for two years more. But it would not mend 
 matters to summon an extra session and it might be the occasion of the pas- 
 sage of some very bad bills, for the*" call would probably be broadened so as 
 to embrace other subjects deemed important. 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 Why This Delayl 
 
 The committee from the Fresno convention has laid before the State Sen- 
 ate a last appeal to take up the irrigation bills. It may or may not be suc- 
 cessful. From present appearances we should say it would not. There ap- 
 pears to be a set purpose on the part of the railway brigade to defeat all leg- 
 islation for supplying water to Southern California. Why the monopoly 
 should pursue this course is inexplicable. It is to the interest of the 
 Southern Pacific that the resources of the country through which it runs 
 should be developed. If any one will benefit by irrigation laws it will 
 be the railroads, which is the largest landholder in the dry section of the 
 State. Yet it is a fact which has escaped the attention of no careful reader of 
 the Legislative proceedings that from the opening of the session to the pres- 
 ent time the men who serve the monopoly have steadily obstructed the pass- 
 age of these laws. They would have been much nearer their passage but for 
 the absurd and ridiculous bill which Whitney — whom the monopoly often se- 
 lects to do its work — introduced for the purpose of blocking their path. The 
 anomaly can only be explained on the hypothesis that the irrigation bills 
 were advocated by men who have been prominent as anti-monopolists, and 
 that on this ground the railway tools determined to murder them. 
 
 Members of the Legislature may as well understand at once that for them it 
 is a matter of political life or death. No member of the Legislature from 
 Southern California who failed to give all possible aid and assistance to the 
 passage of these bills can ever hope again to be nominated for office, and it will 
 not be in Southern California alone that popular resentment will be shown. 
 
180 
 
 San Fraucisco and every other town in the State is vitally concerned in the de- 
 velopment of the southern counties. California's future largely depends on it. 
 Last year has taught us that we cannot rely on wheat alone for prosperity. 
 To hold our own in the race for success, we must increase our acreage of 
 fruit and vines, and this cannot be done in the sections best suited to that 
 branch of agriculture without irrigation. The men who, in obedience to the 
 demand of the railway, render irrigation impossible are striking a blow at the 
 progress of the whole State, and they will be punished accordingly. 
 
 Admonition, however, will propably fall on deaf ears. When the Legisla- 
 ture passed Heath's Amendment and Parks' Drainage Claim bill, members 
 must have felt that they were bidding farewell to political life. There prob- 
 ably never was before, in any State of the Union a Legislature which exempt- 
 ed railroads from taxation, or oae which postponed measures of general utility 
 for the purpose of passing an Act to divide a quarter of a million among a 
 parcel of speculators and their conspirators. Bad as many of the past Legis- 
 latures have been in this State, there never was one as bad as this. It there- 
 fore seems almost hopeless to expect at this late hour the prayer of the 
 southern farmer will be heard. 
 
 Visalia Delta. 
 
 The liegfislatnre and Irrigfation. 
 
 The Assembly has done excellent work on irrigation legislation, but the 
 Senate has accomplished nothing as yet. The members of the lower house 
 from all the irrigating counties, and from many others in Northern Cali- 
 fornia, have worked earnestly to have this matter settled. On Tuesday the 
 bill providing for the discovery and adjudication of all diversions of State 
 water was passed by a vote of 55 to 10; and the bill for the formation of 
 water and irrigation districts was passed by a vote of 52 to 11. The 
 Assembly constitutional amendment fixing the minimum charge at which 
 County Supervisors can rate irrigation water supplied by works owned by 
 others than irrigation districts at 7 per cent, on the investment, was also 
 passed, by a vote of 56 to 13. The last-named completes the list of bills and 
 amendments proposed by the State Irrigation Convention held at Fresno, 
 so far as the Assembly is concerned. All but one of these have been sent to 
 the Senate for action, but there every effort is being made to obstruct legis- 
 lation on this matter by several Senators, although a number of influential 
 members of that body are in sympathy with the majority in the Assembly, 
 and are anxious to have the Senate take speedy and favorable action in the 
 matter. 
 
 The metropolitan press still fcontinnes to give considerable space to the 
 discussion of the irrigation question, and treats it more practically and intel- 
 ligently than it did a few weeks ago. The whole State, including the sec- 
 tions where irrigation is a necessity, have learned much regarding this 
 matter during the past three months. Several associations of business men 
 have raised their voice in asking the Legislature to act in the matter during 
 
 i 
 
181 
 
 the present session, and the presentation of the resolutions passed by them 
 has not been without its effect. Directors of the Immigration Association, 
 whose work lies in every part of the State, at a recent meeting adopted 
 resolutions to the effect that although a uniform irrigation law seems 
 impracticable, owing to the widely varying climate and topographical condi- 
 tions of the State, yet, as an equitable distribution of water for irrigation 
 purposes is essential to the agricultural development of some parts of the 
 State, and the purpose of the Association may be injured by placing unwise 
 restrictions upon the use of water for irrigation purposes, particularly in 
 the San Joaquin Valley in Southern California, it was resolved that the San 
 Francisco members of the Legislature be requested to use their best efforts 
 to secure an economical and beneficial application of the available water 
 supply, and to provide against excessive charges for the same. 
 
 Those members of the Legislature who are straining every nerve to kill the 
 irrigation bills, are doing their best to cripple the prosperity of the State. 
 There is a large area of the State that can be made productive by irrigation, 
 and must remain almost worthless without it. The artificial use of water in 
 such places will in no way affect water rights in non-irrigating parts of the 
 State. And no injustice will be perpetrated on riparian owners or others by 
 the working of the proposed laws, as will be seen by a careful reading of 
 them. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 Dangerous Ground. 
 
 The Senate amendment to the bill repealing the statutory law recognizing 
 the old common law of riparian rights, is the most dangerous move yet made 
 against irrigation. It is more dangerous because it has upon the face of it 
 the appearance of fairness. The amendment provides that at all times 
 riparian proprietors are entitled to a sufficient flow of water by their 
 premises for the use of their stock, etc. To those unacquainted with the 
 natural conditions of the streams of Southern California, this proposition 
 has the appearance of equity and justice. A large majority of the members 
 of the Legislature are unacquainted with natural and other conditions of 
 the irrigated portions of the State, hence the danger of their being misled. 
 
 As a matter of fact, the riparian claimants have no interests adverse to 
 irrigators except in that they wish to be declared the owners of the waters 
 of natural streams that they may exact tribute from those who would divert 
 the water from its natural channel. 
 
 The few settlers along the high banks of the upper portions of the streams 
 are not factors in this fight. They are almost universally in favor of irriga- 
 tion, and admit that the general benefits which accrue from it more than 
 compensate them for any real or imaginary loss in the diversion of water. 
 The riparian claimants proper are the owners of large tracts of alleged swamp 
 or overflowed lands at the lower end of the streams. During flood times in 
 wet years, the water flowing through these channels fill small lakes and 
 
182 
 
 swamps on which their lands are located. During these seasons they are 
 only too anxious to have as much water as possible diverted. It is at such 
 time that the irrigators have but little use for the water to apply to their 
 rain-soaked lands. It is during the dry seasons that water must be had for 
 irrigation, and it is during those seasons that the riparian owner can get no 
 water, irrigation or no irrigation. There is no season so dry but that a con- 
 siderable volume of water flows from the mountain reservoirs of snow and 
 ice at the heads of these streams. In dashing down its steep and stony 
 channels from the mountain tops, but little or no water is lost by evapora- 
 tion or seepage. It would flow on through the deep channel in the higher 
 plain without much loss, but when it reaches the great level plain it widens 
 and spreads out into vast beds of quicksand into which the ordinary flow of 
 water sinks and is as completely lost as though it had dashed over a precipice 
 into the very depths of the earth. It never reaches the riparian land monop- 
 olist further down the stream, and is of no more use to him than if it had 
 remained an ice glacier at the summit of the Sierras. He may want the 
 water for the use of his stock at such times, but nature has so ordained that 
 he cannot have it. 
 
 It is then that the irrigators find a most beneficial use for this otherwise 
 useless water. With their canals they tap the flowing streams at the points 
 ■where they issue from the mountains and the water is carried to the plains 
 and makes fruitful thousands of acres of land that without it would be a 
 desert waste. These are facts which the riparianist cannot controvert, and 
 while they apply particularly to Kings and Kern rivers, they apply to many 
 similiar streams in southern California. 
 
 Where, then, is the justice of this amendment? It gives the riparianists 
 nothing, and yet takes the water from the irrigators at a time when they 
 most need it. The Sacramento Capital shows a knowledge of the facts in the 
 following comment on the proposed amendment: 
 
 " What is the effect, then, of this amendment? Is it not to give these 
 alleged riparainists all they could get under the broadest construction of the 
 common law? To give them water for stock and domestic puposes, when 
 the streams are not in flood, and water is most needed for irrigation, would 
 be to compel every drop to remain in the channels to sink in the sand long 
 before it reached their lands, giving them power to levy tribute on the agri- 
 cultural interests above them in millions of dollars annually. Besides all 
 these riparianists — cattle owners — have long since found that the stagnant 
 alkaline water festering in ponds, sloughs and tule swamps, under the burn- 
 ing sun of the dry season, is injurious to their stock, and have substituted 
 with infinite pecuniary advantage the cold, pure water of artesian and other 
 wells, which is found in abundance near the surface. The irrigation bills 
 provide for the payment to them of all damage that may result from the 
 diversion of water above them which must in time again reach them more 
 permanently by percolation, as we have elsewhere shown; but with this, 
 which'would satisfy all men in every other walk of life actuated by the ordinary 
 considerations of interest and business, they are not satisfied." 
 
183 
 
 LThey are not satisfied because they want to be declared the absolute 
 owners of all water in the flowing streams of the State. It would make 
 them virtual owners of a vast empire in southern California, and that is 
 something worthy of the ambition of men who have already a taste of mon- 
 opoly. With such a prize in view they can afi'ord to corrupt a few Legisla- 
 tures, subsidize newspapers and hire attorneys. If there were nothing more 
 at stake than the water they want for their stock, they would not lift a hand 
 to perpetuate the riparian infamy. J 
 
 McClure's bill creating a commission to investigate the irrigation ques- 
 tion, aside from the fact that it defeats the passage of laws necessary to the 
 public welfare, is a humbug. It creates, at a large expense, a body to do 
 work which can be better done by the State Engineer. Indeed, that most 
 competent official has, during the past two years, given the question all the 
 
 nvestigation necessary for intelligent legislative action. The McClure bill 
 is simply a part of the programme of the riparian land monopolists, and has 
 no other object than the defeat of irrigation laws. 
 
 San Bernardino Times. 
 
 It begins to look as though the Legislature would adjourn without definite 
 action upon the only matter of importance that has as yet come before it — 
 the irrigation bill. As the common law now stands, the farmers and horti- 
 culturists of Southern California are wholly at the mercy of parties below 
 them on the stream, who may insist upon the undiminished flow of all water 
 in its natural channel. The decision of the Supreme Court on the riparian 
 question, if followed out to its legitimate conclusion, relegates Southern 
 California to its original desert condition. Irrigation alone has made South- 
 ern California what it is — the garden of the Union. It has made thousands 
 upon thousands of happy homes, where before was only a desert waste; it is 
 increasing our population and wealth each year; it is all tons, and to this 
 vital matter the Supreme Court has dealt a death blow. It is not probable 
 that the Supreme Court will reverse its own rulings, and our only hope was 
 in legislative action, and this hope looks now as if destined to frustration. 
 What the result may be it is hard to tell. There are cranky individuals who 
 may cause trouble by taking advantage of the Court's decision, and, though 
 it may not benefit them, may injure their neighbors. And here is a fruitful 
 source of trouble. Men who have spent years of their lives and thousands 
 of dollars of money to build up homes, are not going to submit to so unjust a 
 ruling, and see them laid waste without a struggle. The man who will not 
 fight for his home does not deserve one, and brave men who have toiled for 
 years to build one up will fight to maintain it. Take away their water in- 
 terests and you take their homes, and this will not be submitted to. The 
 general interest in Southern California is with the irrigators, for the reason 
 that we have no use for running water for other purposes. We have no 
 navigable streams, none that are worth much for manufacturers after they 
 
184 
 
 leave the mountains, and hence public opinion will do much to define water 
 rights, despite court rulings. But a door has been left open for trouble that 
 should not have been; and the people put on the defensive, when the law 
 should protect them in their rights to homes in peace. The Legislature 
 should take action in the matter, and right the wrong that the courts — per- 
 haps justly from a legal standpoint — have inflicted upon us. Common law is 
 applicable in all sections where there is no statutory law. And it is here that 
 the trouble comes. A ruling that would be eminently just and proper in one 
 section, is grossly unjust in another, where conditions are opposite. In the 
 east, and England, from whence we derive our common law, irrigation is not 
 dreamed of. The streams have no use except for navigation or manufactur- 
 ing purposes, and who diverts the water of them and decreases their flow in- 
 jures his neighbors below him. The contrary is true in Southern California. 
 Our streams are valuable only for irrigation. We must divert the water and 
 consume it entirely. Hence a ruling that would suit in the east is wrong in 
 the west. Yet it is made applicable to us because precedent has established 
 it. The legislature has got to right this, or there will be trouble grow out of 
 it in Southern California. 
 
 Modesto News. 
 
 Irrififation. 
 
 Assembly bills number 170 and 171 have been passed by that body, and 
 now only need the concurrence of the Senate to become part of our statutory 
 law. Bill No. 170 provides that water in our rivers may be diverted and 
 appropriated to the uses and purposes of irrigation. The rights of riparian 
 owners are thoroughly adjudicated and determined by this bill. Bill No. 
 171 repeals the common law in as far as it guarantees riparian owners 
 exclusive water rights. These bills will now probably be brought up in the 
 Senate at once, and immediate action demanded, If the Senate should 
 see proper to pass the bills, then the matter, so far as legislation is con- 
 cerned, would be settled. It would then but remain to be practically tested 
 by those in whose behalf it has been desired. The Legislative Committee 
 on Irrigation, and those who have interested themselves in behalf of this 
 legislation, do not claim that these bills are absolutely perfect, but so far as 
 we have learned, they deal with the question in an intelligent and fair 
 manner, and will, without doubt, prove of great benefit to the people of this 
 State, if incorporated into our statutes. The question of irigation is one of 
 Tast importance to the people living in certain portions of this State, and the 
 needs of these people imperatively demand legislative action at this time» 
 The Legislature, so far, has done comparatively little good. But few 
 measures have been passed by it, and none of any great importance. There 
 has been a useless consumption of time and an enormous waste of public 
 money, and the people have derived no substantial benefit. Before a final 
 adjournment, the passage of the needed irrigation laws would at least par- 
 
185 
 
 tially absolve the Legislature from the sins of past bad conduct. In this the 
 Assembly has taken the initiative, and all commend it for its action on these 
 bills. The Senate is yet to hear from, however. And it is not at all certain 
 that that body will take the same view that has been expressed by the 
 Assembly. The Senate is equally divided, politically, and the question of 
 irrigation has not yet become, and should not be made, a partisan issue. 
 Neither party is likely to take any stand against it. It is to be earnestly 
 hoped that the desired legislation will be given to the people during the 
 present session. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 The Gondemnation of Water, 
 
 Objection has been made to the clauses in Senate Bill 410, declaring the 
 use of water for irrigating puposes a public use and providing for its con- 
 demnation for such purposes under the provisions of the Code relating to 
 eminent domain, upon the ground that these clauses are contrary to those 
 sections of the Constitution of the United States and of the State which pro- 
 vide that private property shall not be taken for public use without just com- 
 pensation. In so far as concerns the Federal Constitution, this objection is 
 disposed of by the case of Withers vs. Buckley, reported in 20 Howard, 
 United States, page 84, in which it is held that the provision mentioned was 
 intended to prevent the Government of the United States from taking prop- 
 erty for public uses without just compensation, and was not intended as a re- 
 straint upon State Governments. 
 
 The State Constitution provides that the use of all water now appropriated, 
 or that may hereafter be appropriated, for sale, rental or distribution, is 
 hereby declared to be a public use, and subject to the regulation and control 
 of the State in the manner to be prescribed by law. This is an unlimited 
 declaration that the use of water for sale, rental or distribution is public, and 
 includes sale, rental or distribution for all purposes, and among them sale, 
 rental or distribution for irrigation purposes. How can the Courts declare 
 unconstitutional a law which is expressly and on terms authorized by the 
 Constitution? No Judge on the bench will ever attempt to construe away a 
 clause in the Constitution so direct and free from ambiguity as this. It can- 
 not be limited by the Courts to what may hitherto have been deemed a public 
 use. That would be to substitute a different proposition, so as to make the 
 Constitution read, "the public use of water, etc., is a public use," instead of, 
 as it now reads, "the use of water, etc., is a public use." This is too absurd 
 to give it a thought. Besides, this is only another way of stating that the use 
 of water for rental, sale and distribution for all purposes is a public necessity 
 and will contribute to the general welfare of the community. 
 
 Even independent of this provision of the Constitution, there is good 
 authority for asserting that the Legislature would be sustained by the Courts 
 in declaring the use of water for irrigation purposes a public use. In 01m- 
 stead vs. Camp (33 Connecticut, 548) is found this language: 
 
186 
 
 *' In a broad, comprehensive view, such as has heretofore been taken of the 
 construction of this clause of the declaration of rights, everything which tends 
 to enlarge the resources, increase the industrial energies, and promote the 
 productive power of any considerable number of the inhabitants of a section 
 of the State, or which leads to the creation of towns and the creation of new 
 resources for the employment of capital and labor, evidently contributes to 
 the general welfare and the prosperity of the whole community, and is there- 
 fore a public use." 
 
 In the same case it is again said : 
 
 "The question is asked, with great pertinence and propriety, What, then, 
 is the limit of the legislative power under the clause which we have been 
 considering, and what is the exact line between public and private uses? 
 Our reply is that which has heretofore been quoted. From the nature of the 
 case there can be no precise line. The power requires a degree of elasticity to 
 be capable of meeting new conditions and improvements^ and the ever-increasing 
 necessities of society. The sole dependence must be on the presumed wisdom 
 of the sovereign authority supervised, and in cases of gross error or extreme 
 wrong, controlled by the dispassionate judgment of the Courts. 
 
 The Constitution has thus given the Legislature a power to apply the law 
 of condemnation to the use of water, even it had no prior existence, and has 
 deprived the Courts of the jurisdiction to say whether or not the use of water 
 is a public use. It has been made possible to make the law of water rights 
 meet " new conditions and improvements, and the ever-increasing necessi- 
 ties of , society," and to enable "this State to keep pace with others in the 
 progress of improvements, and to render to its citizens the fullest opportunity 
 for success in industrial competition." The law of riparian rights, if it be 
 more than a phantom here, must be made to yield to the superior necessities 
 of the people. Those who have rights will be justly compensated, but the 
 ancient doctrine which sustains them shall no longer give protection, further 
 than to secure an equivalent in damages. The riparian owners who resist 
 this equitable adjustment between their alleged ,rights and the public needs, 
 may- soon find confronting them a constitutional amendment which abolishes 
 their claims without entitling them to compensation. 
 
 * Alta California. 
 
 The Whitney Water BUI. 
 
 The Senate had under consideration yesterday a bill which, under the guise 
 of friendship to the cause of irrigation, will, if passed, deprive the State of 
 what little right the Supreme Court has left it to the use of running water for 
 irrigation. The bill might properly be entitled "An Act to confirm the com- 
 mon law of riparian rights, to confer additional rights upon swamp land 
 owners and cattle raisers, and to abolish irrigation." There is not a syllable 
 in the bill which merits the approval of any bona fide advocate of the ap- 
 plication of water for irrigation purposes. Among the worst of all the 
 
187 
 
 unwise provisions contained in the bill are sections 6, 7 and 8. TheyreaiJ 
 as follows: 
 
 Sec. 6. The waters hereby declared to be the common property of the State 
 are devoted to the sustaining of life, to domestic and sanitary uses, and to 
 the watering of stock, which shall always be preferred uses. 
 
 Sec. 7. In the arid and agricultural portions of the State, subject to the 
 4)referred uses declared in the preceding section, all lands susceptible of irri- 
 gation from the waters therein mentioned are entitled to such waters for irri- 
 gation to the full requirement of the soil for agricultural purposes. Those 
 parts of the State are declared to be arid, within the intent of this section, 
 in which the increase of the agricultural products of the soil will compensate 
 for the «ost of construction and maintenance of the necessary means of arti- 
 ficial irrigation. 
 
 Sec. 8. The owner of lands watered by the natural overflow of a stream 
 has a right, by ditches constructed so as to prevent waste in the channels 
 above, to sufficient water for the reasonable irrigation of such lands during 
 the times of such natural overflow. 
 
 Every word of these sections is destructive of the policy of devoting the 
 water of our streams to irrigation. The substance of Section six had pre- 
 viously been the subject of discussion in the Senate, and in the form of an 
 amendment to Assembly Bill 410, was defeated upon the sole ground that its 
 practical effect would be to nullify any attempt to legalize irrigation. It was 
 clearly demonstrated in debate that, from the nature and peculiarities of the 
 streams in Southern California, if the amendment were adopted irrigation 
 would have to be suspended for the benefit of the cattle-raisers. It was also 
 made plain to the Senate that water for sustaining life, for domestic and 
 sanitary purposes and for the watering of stock, can be easily and cheaply 
 obtained* by other means. Section seven merely reaffirms the preference 
 against irrigation given by Section six. Section eight was evidently con- 
 strued by one who has made a study of how to so legislate as to inflict a 
 deadly injury to irrigation under pretense of doing good. The "lands watered 
 by the natural overflow of a stream," means swamp lands, whether they be 
 riparian lands or otherwise. The swamp lands overflowed by the streams of 
 Southern California are so situated that, no matter whether the water is high 
 or low, whether in time of freshet or in the dry season when water is scarce 
 if any water reaches the margin of the swamps into which the river empties, 
 all of it spreads out over and overflows them. The consequence would be 
 that under such a provision of the law the swamp land owner would become 
 entitled to all the water of the river at all seasons of the year, to the exclu- 
 sion of all others, and this without regard to whether or not such swamp land 
 owner is a riparian proprietor or not. Whatever may be the design of the 
 Whitney bill, its passage will give us a water law even more odious than the 
 common law of riparian rights. It will receive the unanimous support of 
 riparianists. Senator Whitney, who introduced the bill, evidently has mis- 
 apprehended the practical effect which this bill would have upon irrigation if 
 made the law governing the rivers of the San Joaquin basin. 
 
188 
 Daily Alta California. 
 
 The Brink of tlie Rubicon. 
 
 An eloquent appeal to the Senate in behalf of action upon the irrigation 
 bills before adjournment, signed by the Executive Committee of the State 
 Irrigation Convention, has been prepared and presented. Will the Senate 
 respond? Are the filibustering tactics by which irrigation legislation ha^ 
 thus far been successfully subordinated to every small scheme and every 
 petty measure of private interest to be allowed to stifle the willing action of a 
 majority of the Senate, and to throttle the wishes of the people of the State? 
 The time is short. The irrigation bills must either be taken up and passed 
 immediately, or the session must be prolonged until they can be reached and 
 acted upon. To adjourn without action, is to merit and receive the execra- 
 tions of the great mass of the people. If the Legislature adjourns before 
 taking up the bills the people will have to take up the fight in earnest. The 
 causes of defeat will be analyzed. The proceedings of the Legislature will 
 be closely scrutinized to get at the root of the reason why these bills have 
 failed of passage, with a majority in their favor. Every vote and every word 
 of each individual member will be subject to the severest criticism. Every 
 means of publicity will be made use of to inform the people of the attitude 
 of each individual member of the Legislature toward the irrigation bills. No 
 member shall escape being weighed in the balance. Those whom the people 
 find wanting may expect just retaliation. The motto of the irrigators in com- 
 ing elections will be: •' Let no guilty man escape." 
 
 In brief, the position of the irrigation bills is this: There are a majority 
 of Senators in favor of their passage, but it requires a two-thirds majority to 
 reach and pass them before the expiration of the sixty days of the session, 
 and it is doubtful whether the majority can be obtained. If the Legislature 
 will remain in session a few days after the per diem has stopped, the irriga- 
 tion bills and all other important bills can be passed. By making a little 
 personal sacrifice the members of the Legislature can do the State an in- 
 estimable service. Is it possible that they will adjourn and leave the most 
 important part of their work undone? 
 
 Colusa Sun. 
 
 The Slickens Fi^ ht— A Retrospect. 
 
 When the people of the valley first began to protest against the destruction 
 of their farms by the hydraulic mining process, their voice was so feeble as 
 not to be heard by the nearest neighbor of the men beiug injured. Even 
 those whose turn was to come next, would not lend an assistant hand. 
 Mining was the great interest — farming the smaller. The Courts were ap- 
 pealed to, but men lived and died while the cases hung fire. Keyes, the 
 pioneer in the suits, was buried in slickens, and his family lost the earnings 
 
189 
 
 of his lifetime. The people of Marysville and Sutter county were, after a 
 few years, compelled to take up the fight, but it was up-hill work. Their 
 neighhors, in turn, looked ou with indifference, and no relief came, one small 
 community could not overturn the mining industry from which came millions 
 of money annually. Soon, however, Colusa and Yolo and Sacramento waked 
 np to the matter and a more general fight began. Talk as we will about 
 cold-blooded law, but it is a fact that all courts are swayed by the necessities 
 and conditions of the people. Through speeches, conventions and news- 
 papers the discussion became general all over the State. The farming com- 
 munities of other portions of the State gave expression of sympathy for the 
 farmers whose homes were being ruined. Their newspapers took up the 
 fight. The newspapers of all Southern California circulated a supplement 
 printed at this office. It was not until it became evident from all these ex- 
 pressions of opinion that hydraulic mining was no longer consistent with 
 the physical conditions of the country and the necessities of the people, and 
 the courts so declared the law. This declaration of the law could not have 
 been had by any one man suffering at the hands of this great interest; it 
 could not have been had at the demand of one small community. 
 
 Another interest springs up in another direction. A large portion of Cali- 
 fornia is worthless without irrigation. People began to turn the water out of 
 the streams, and orchards, vineyards, meadows, etc., covered the desert; 
 towns, villages, cities sprung up on the industry thus created, until some 
 hundreds of millions of property became dependent upon irrigation. 
 
 A few speculators at the end of some of the streams invoked the common 
 law of England in order to get in a position to blackmail all this industry. 
 These farmers who stood so nobly by the farmers of the Sacramento Valley, 
 came to -the Legislature asking for a law by which they might pay these • 'end 
 men" a reasonable compensation for their so-called riparian rights, and use 
 the water. The representatives of that portion of the slickens district most 
 affected, with a single exception, have fought against the farmers who stood 
 by them. The irrigators have been abused like pickpockets by the news- 
 papers of the slickens district. The irrigators could have gotten every vote 
 from the mining counties if they had accepted certain amendments which the 
 anti-slickens people opposed; but great as was their interest, they refused. 
 Now suppose the irrigation bills shall be defeated by the votes of the anti- 
 slickens people ? Will there not an antagonism grow up that will throw the 
 irrigators and the miners together solid? We say aye! There will. When 
 that comes there will be restraining dams authorized, and we who have 
 made the anti-slickens fight will have only to thank the stupidity or the 
 venality of our representatives in the Legislature of 1885. 
 
 Great as is the interest at stake in the slickens fight, it is nothing com- 
 pared to the interests involved in irrigation, and it is only by keeping those 
 people our friends that we can hope to prevent such things as restraining 
 dams and other dangerous expedients. In all this the Sun will have a bright- 
 showing record. 
 
190 
 
 Irrlsration Bill. 
 
 We notice by our exchanges that the bill passed the House with only IT 
 votes against it. This, to us, is gratifying intelligence, and means that it 
 must become a law. The prosperity of Sonthern California is at stake, and 
 to defeat the measure would turn civilization backward ten degrees. Take 
 Los Angeles, San Bernardino and San Diego counties, besides many others, 
 and their future prosperity depends upon their ability to use the water that 
 is going to waste in their streams. Let members of the Senate do their 
 duty, and if not another bill passes, the successful passage of this bill will 
 make this a memorable session. 
 
 Tulare Register. 
 
 As It Now Stands. 
 
 One of the effects of the enforcement of ■ the English common law of 
 riparian rights (wrongs) is now being practically demonstrated on Tule 
 river. The settlers on the plains south of the river, and between the railroad 
 and the foothills, some years ago constructed what is known as the South 
 Side Ditch for the purpose of watering their lands with the surplus water of 
 the streams. After the right of these farmers to take water from the stream, 
 had obtained against the riparian owners, by virtue of the statutes of limita- 
 tion, one of the riparian owners appeared in court and brought suit on behalf 
 of minor heirs to restrain the South Side Ditch Company from taking any 
 water whatever from Tule river. Our riparian Superior Court granted an 
 injunction against the ditch company restraining them from turning any more 
 water into their ditch. At present there is running to waste in Tule river not 
 less than 200 cubic feet of water per second. The farmers on the South Side 
 could, if they were only permitted to use the water now running to waste, 
 wet up thousands of acres of land and insure crops where nothing at all will 
 be raised unless the rain from heaven happens to come just right. Here we 
 have the riparian doctrine in its true light — one man owning several hun- 
 dred head of cattle sitting idly on the banks of the stream watching his stock 
 graze, the river running bank full, "undiminished in quantity and unim- 
 paired in quality," while an hundred families on the plains above are forced 
 by an nujust and barbarous law to quietly submit and see the life-giving flood 
 flow past and onward to the lake. The amount of water now running to waste 
 in Tule river would irrigate and insure crops up between 30,000 and 40,000 
 acres of land . 
 
 Now let us ask our recalcitrant Senators at Sacramento: Is it better for 
 thy welfare and prosperity of our State that this one cattle king should enjoy 
 a monopoly of the waters of this stream, only a small portion of which he 
 can possibly use, to the extent of letting practically all the water run to 
 ■waste, than the farmers above should be permitted to divert and use the sur- 
 plus for the production of crops upon say 35,000 acres of land? If it is 
 better for Tulare county, it is better for our State at large, for this one 
 man to have exclusive control, in fact, order of courage to file a complaint 
 
191 
 
 against a delinquent neighbor than to face the rattle of musketry or the roar 
 of belching canons, and our modern reformers possess it not. Men will % 
 stand and be shot full of holes, have their limbs blown into the air and their 
 flesh hacked from their bones without wincing, but attempt to injure their 
 business and they will whimper like infants. The man who can look a dol- 
 lar in the face and say, "I fear you not," will not tremble the day he meets 
 his God. 
 
 San Francisco Alta- 
 
 The Will of the People. 
 
 There is more than one Senator among those who have identified them- 
 selves with the riparian side of the water conflict during this session of the 
 Legislature, whose political ambition reaches beyond the narrow circle of his 
 county constituency. Among them are men whose aspirations soar as high 
 as the Chief Magistracy of the State. Others there are who have heretofore 
 sought favor in the eyes of the people, and, although having failed to secure 
 State recognition, have been lifted from private life into that political promi- 
 nence which afibrds a generous opportunity to find the pathway which leads 
 to the popular favor. The sooner these anti-irrigation Senator's resign their 
 aspirations, and conclude to return to the seclusion of private life, the less 
 bitter will be their disappointment. As Senator Spencer of Napa conceded 
 in his anti-irrigation speech the other day, the majority of the people are in 
 favor of the proposed irrigation legislation. This state qf the popular desire 
 is but mildly stated. Applied to the people of Southern California it sounds 
 ridiculously feeble. With all the energy and all the eagerness that a people 
 can feel, who are prompted by the instinct of self-preservation. Southern 
 California will fight for irrigation laws and against all who oppose them. 
 The failure of the Legislature to give the State such laws will never be par- 
 doned by those people. The refusal of a Senator to support their wishes in 
 this matter will be treated as a demoHstration of enmity to their welfare. It 
 will be well for Senators to consider carefully whether the loud and unanimous, 
 demand of a great agricultural community for salutary laws for its common, 
 salvation may not possibly afford good ground for foregoing private judgment 
 founded merely upon ignorance of the situation, or based solely upon thin, 
 hair-splitting legal objections, invented by riparian attorneys. It will not be 
 surprising, indeed it is almost certain that if the present feeling in Southern 
 California continues, and it is more likely to strengthen than become weaker, 
 the passion of the people will demonstrate itself by exercising a powerful in- 
 fluence in the nomination and election of the State judiciary. Of course 
 this would be a source of regret. But when a people are being stung to death 
 they care not where they strike nor whom they crash, so it be an enemy. 
 13 
 
192 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 Irri£fation and the Railroadg. 
 
 It is now clear that the power which has thus far defeated the irrigation 
 bills is the railroads. One of the most insidious measures of obstruction was 
 the bill introduced by the railroad retainer, Whitney, and the whole policy of 
 the railway Senators has been to prevent the passage of any Fresno bill until 
 the Heath amendment had been passed. The monopoly was unwilling that 
 Southern California should have water until its representatives had agreed 
 to relieve the railroads from taxation. The irrigators* present hope is that, 
 now that the monopoly has got all it wants, it will graciously permit the ag- 
 ricultural interests of the southern counties to be developed. 'I hese hopes 
 may, perhaps, be fulfilled, though Shorb and other friends of irrigation are 
 in low spirits over the prospect. If no irrigation laws are passed at this ses- 
 sion, grave inconveniences will result, the progress of Southern California 
 will be checked, and this will all be the doing of the monopoly. 
 
 An impatient reader complains that this incessant ding-donging against the 
 monopoly has become monotonous. The monotony is not in the criticisms 
 on the railroad. It is in its acts. There is no pleasure in harping incessantly 
 on this one tiling, when so many pleasauter topics are offered for treatment. 
 But whichever way we turn, whatever reform the people seek in any direc- 
 tion, whatever new laws it is attempted to pass, we are invariably met by this 
 far-reaching power, which frustrates our purposes and blockades our path. 
 The Legislature cannot pass any bills except by the consent of the monopoly, 
 and this consent cannot be begged, it must be bought. The railroad will not 
 let mechanics' liens be adjusted, because the bill to adjust them was intro- 
 duced by an independent member who is not in corporation pay. It will not 
 let the dry plains of Sauthern California be supplied with water except on the 
 condition that such men as Keeves of San Bernardino shall vote for relieving 
 it of taxation. The tale reminds one of those Middle Age stories in which a 
 man could only obtain permission to farm his own land on condition that he 
 -would agree that his feudal lord should be exempt from taxation. Monoto- 
 nous, indeed! There never was a tyrant whose oppressions were not pain- 
 fully monotonous to the oppressed, and our tyrant is no exception to the rule. 
 Public censure should fall not on the journals which devote their colums day 
 after day to exposing the progress of railway domination in this State, but on 
 that much larger class of journals which witness the growth of this monstrous 
 power with indifference, or abet it by a silence secured by corruption. 
 
 Eecord-Union. 
 
 Immii^ration and Irrig^ation— Letter from I. N. Hoajf, In&mifipration 
 Commissioner of California. 
 
 Editobs Kecobd-Union: — I am glad to see there is a move on foot favoring 
 the printing of books and pamphlets setting forth the many and great advan- 
 tages offered by California to people seeking new homes and business — en- 
 
 i 
 
193 
 
 couraging immigration. This is a move in the right direction. It will induce 
 a fair and truthful presentation of the advantages of all sections of the State, 
 and will place the expense of the same where it should be — on all sections to 
 be benefited. 
 
 The more western Mississippi Valley States have adopted this plan and 
 have been greatly benefited by the same in the way of an increase of taxable 
 properly and reduction of rates of taxation. They have also found it greatly 
 to the advantage of the producing and general business interests of the coun- 
 try by the increase of the bulk of transportation and the consequent decrease 
 in freight and passenger rates on the railroads. Another view of this sub- 
 ject may be presented for our State: 
 
 California has special interests, as the fruit, raisin and wine interests, to 
 protect and foster which is required stronger and larger representation in 
 our National Legislature. An increase in population can only give us the 
 needed power and influence then. 
 
 Bat while the Legislature is inviting immigrants to cultivate the soil it 
 should not neglect to enact such laws as will on the one hand protect the 
 southern portion of the State from the threatened barrrenness for want of 
 authoratative regulations for the use of the waters of the streams and rivers 
 in fertilizing the soil, and on the other hand protect the northern portion of 
 the State from threatened destruction by the .filling up of the rivers and 
 covering their border lands with hydraulic mining debris. The discussion of 
 these two subjects in our Legislature and by the press of the State has excited 
 a lively interest here, especially among those who are studying our State 
 with a view to making it their future homes, and the failure to settle these 
 questions so as to inspire confidence in the continued prosperity of the 
 whole State will more than counteract any efforts by the State to increase 
 the population. 
 
 It is useless to spend money to induce people to buy and settle on lands 
 that are worthless without irrigation, unless irrigation is made possible by 
 legal authority. 
 
 It is also equally useless to invite people to buy and build homes on land 
 where there is constant danger of destruction of those lands and homes and 
 no legal authority for their protection. 
 
 The passage of any bill or law to authorize dams in the tributaries of our 
 *ivers would be construed here as well as there, as a license to the hydraulic 
 mining industry to hold back and retard the settlement and improvement of 
 all the valleys of northern and central California, and place the people 
 and the property in the same in a constant and reasonable fear of total de- 
 struction, 
 
 I have special facilities for ascertaining and knowing the truth of both 
 these propositions. Chicago is the rendezvous of the migratory portions of 
 the fifty millions of people of the United States, and nearly all European 
 immigration to America passes through Chicago. I am in constant contact 
 with these people, and it is my business to answer all their questions about 
 
194 
 
 California, the advantages and disadvantages of every section of the same.. 
 The constantly recurring question about any locality in Southern California 
 is, What are the facilities for irrigation? In regard to northern and central 
 California the equally frequent question is, as to its liability to injury from 
 mining debris. If all these questions could be confidently and truthfully 
 answered by assertions that good and efficient laws had been passed by our- 
 Legislature securing the benefits of irrigation, wherever there is water for the 
 same in the south, and prohibiting the deposit of hydraulic mining debris irk 
 the rivers when it may endanger the lands and property in the valleys in the 
 north, the tide of iijimigration to California within one year would be aug- 
 mented at least fourfold. 
 
 If, however, the present Legislature should adjourn, leaving the irrigation 
 question where the decision of our Courts have placed it, I cannot say much 
 in favor of an increase or even of a continued immigiation to that section. 
 If the Legislature should adjourn without some legislation to prevent the. 
 filling of the rivers with hydraulic mining debris in the north; or if it should 
 pass any act, the tendency of which would be to open up again the contest, 
 between the people in the valleys and the hydraulic miners, in the Courts, 
 then all effort at inducing people to settle in that section might as well be 
 abandoned. The State, under such circumstances, might as well keep her 
 money in her treasury, and all immigration commissioners and agents might 
 as well be called home. 
 
 The interest of the north and south in these questions are mutual, and 
 there should be no hesitancy about settling both favorably to each section and 
 the entire State. 
 
 It will not do for the Legislature to put the State in the position of en- 
 couraging people to settle on her lands while it refuses the necessary legisla- 
 tion to render these lands productive and secure from destruction. 
 
 Yours, truly, 
 
 I. N. HOAG. 
 
 Chicago, February 25th, 1885. 
 
 Alta California. 
 
 The order of the Secretary of the Interior in relation to the lands covered- 
 by Buena Vista and Kern Lakes, in Kern county, has excited a deal of just 
 apprehension amongst the people of our irrigable districts, for it is a chuck- 
 block in the way of securing the local law reforms needed as the foundation 
 of a comprehensive and useful system of irrigation, which will densely popu- 
 late the great and collateral valleys tributary to San Francisco. 
 
 The Secretary has based his action, properly enough, upon such informa- 
 tion as sought him out, and has left the purpose and inspiration of that 
 information to be developed in the proceeding which he has ordered. 
 
 We do not propose here to make a showing of the law of the uses of water 
 in California, as that law is fixed by the physical characteristics of this pecu- 
 liar region. The civil law of the continent had its origin in natural circum- 
 
195 
 
 -stances, and if we trace it back to the Institutes of Justinian, we find it a 
 •perfect reproduction of the natural wants, rights and relations of men who 
 lived on the rim of the tideless Mediterranean Sea, and therefore it would be 
 inapplicable, for instance, to a question of tide lands that'might arise on the 
 bay of San Francisco when the tides ebb and flow. 
 
 The common law of England, in like manner, is a scientific reduction to 
 system of the rights, relations and natural wants of a people living on a 
 moist island, where the sunshine is rare, fogs frequent, and over which the 
 water of the sea is not infrequently carried by gales of wind. 
 
 The peculiarity of our form of government is, that it may be adapted to 
 •widely differing physical conditions, by leaving local concerns to local gov- 
 ernments. Irrigation is a local concern in California. It was so recognized 
 t)y Mexican law, which set up a special rule for California by specifically 
 granting the waters of this province for the use of the people. That grant is 
 the inheritance of the people of this State, secured by the treaty of Guada- 
 lupe Hidalgo as completely and as unimpaired as the same instrument secured 
 the ^ants of land, for the water was more important than the land, which, 
 without it, served only the uncertain and unprofitable purpose of stock- 
 ranging. 
 
 The intention of the information upon which the Secretary has acted in 
 regard to the lakes of Kern county is to nullify the jurisdiction of California 
 over the waters of Kern river, and hence destroy entirely the State's juris- 
 diction over the whole question of irrigation, for what may be done to the 
 Kern valley by the effect of a Federal meander of its lakes will be repeated 
 on Lake Tulare, to destroy the orchards and vineyards of Fresno, impoverish 
 the prosperous settlements of that county, and turn it back to the support of 
 vagrant herds and flocks. Upon authority of the Kern County Californiant 
 ■the editor of which, Mr. Hudnut, is as conscientious a gentleman as there if 
 in the State, we learn that the lakes of Kern county, which are the key to the 
 irrigation of that valley, are not such bodies of water as are pictured in the 
 information upon which the Secretary has acted. They are at their best 
 estate shallow sheets of water, endangering health on their reedy borders, and 
 their eflScient drainage would be a desirable sanitary measure, even if no 
 •other purpose were to be served. Frequently they have been entirely dry, 
 parched as the plains on the zone above them. They receive the flood- 
 waters of Kern river. If they are once established as bodies of naviga- 
 ble water, under Federal jurisdiction, the enemies of irrigation stretch the 
 strong arms of the General Government along both banks of the stream that 
 feeds them and along its permanent or temporary confluents, ef&ciently pre- 
 venting the removal of a drop of water for the purpose of irrigation. If this 
 is done let us tell the Secretary what will have been accomplished. The 
 Kern valley and collaterals are capable of supporting, not only in comfort 
 Jbut in Christian luxury, a population of a half million people. The sun is 
 never miserly in that region, it shines upon a soil afliuent and generous, and 
 ten acres of that land, with water to irrigate it, throws annually products 
 
196 
 
 eqnal in value to the crops of a quarter section in Iowa or other interior- 
 States. With the land and water wedded, as they were in the law we inherit 
 from Mexico, that valley becomes the modern instance of what Moses saw 
 in the Promised Land, flowing with milk and honey and rich in corn and 
 wine. 
 
 If the Secretary, who is pre-eminently a just man, can find, upon personal 
 inspection of that region, any utility, present or prospective, gilded with 
 results that approach in importance those easily attainable by irrigation, that 
 may be reached by stretching a legal fiction over those ponds, we will confess 
 our error and submit. He knows that we stand for the major utilities. 
 Where there is a wilderness we want a trail; where the trail is we want a 
 road, and where the road is we want a railway, and because we believe in 
 making all natural forces incubate the highest usefulness we deprecate this 
 sinister attempt to turn pondrf and mar.shes into Federal waters, thereby de- 
 feating irrigation throughout the State, and denying to millions who would 
 here find happy homes the health, wealth and pleasure which would be their 
 right, and to other millions the fruits and food, necessary and luxurious, 
 Which these would produce. 
 
 Herein we have not drawn upon fancy for a single statement, for to us the 
 whole question is as matter of fact as the price of beans, and every proposi- 
 tion we have put is as demonstrable as a simple problem in mathematics. 
 
 Kern County Gazette. 
 
 Orgfanize Ag'ainst Riparianism. 
 
 The Legislative Committee of the State Irrigation Convention is about to 
 issue a call for a State Convention. The especial purpose of this Convention 
 will be to organize for active and relentless warfare against riparianism, at the 
 approaching election. The people of Southern California are now confronted 
 with a danger sufficient to excite the greatest alarm. A majority of the Su- 
 preme Court have decided that the English doctrine of riparian rights is law 
 in California. They have declared that water cannot be appropriated for ir- 
 rigation. A State Legislature ready to execute the will of the people, has 
 been throttled by combined and corrupt efi"orts of a small minority. We are 
 an agricultural community. We are blessed with a soil whose fertility and 
 productiveness seems incredible, almost marvelous to the stranger. We have 
 a mild, equitable and salubrious climate. But we look to the skies in vain 
 for water. The rainfall is so scanty, and the heat of the sun so intense, that 
 our only recourse is to the rivers. We must irrigate to produce and to live. 
 We must have the right to appropriate from the rivers, to irrigate. The 
 right of appropriation is to us as sap to the tree. The traveler of our earlier 
 days shunned the San Joaquin valley as the valley of death. Over its desert 
 area lay scattered the bones of men and baasts thirsted and hungered to 
 death. What has made it what it is now? How is it that the school houso 
 and the farm house now mark the grave of the famished wanderer? Whence 
 
197 
 
 springs the grain, the fruit and the flowers, where once rotted the carcasses 
 of starved cattle? From the appropriation of water from rivers, by virtue of 
 the doc trine that prior appropriation for a useful purpose establishes a right* 
 It is the purpose of the State Convention just about to be called, to secure 
 unity of action in order to maintain that right by which we came into exis- 
 tence as a community, and by which we live. "We want a Supreme Court 
 which will protect that right. We want a Legislature which will properly 
 secure and regulate the right to the use of water appropriated. We 
 want a Governor who is absolutely sound on this question. To 
 us the vital issue of the coming political campaign is, appropriation 
 or riparianism. All other considerations are secondary. Our people 
 must have it distinctly understood that no man, be his politics what 
 they may, can be elected to an office high or low, who leans favorably towards 
 riparianism. Let no man be supported who is not an outspoken and unquali- 
 fied friend of and believer in the doctrine of appropriation. Make hostility 
 to riparianism the price of a vote, irom Supreme Judge down to Justice of 
 the Peace, and from Governor to Supervisor. No half way policy can be 
 sure of success. The riparian swamp land preservers and cattle kings are 
 numerically few but powerful on their wealth, and politicians are said to 
 have itching palms. The friends of irrigation should organize at once all 
 over the State. Organized and united they can present a powerful front, and 
 can control the election of such officers as have executive or official duties 
 affecting this question. Not the least among the friends of irrigation should 
 be numbered the merchants and manufacturers of San Francisco and Los 
 Angeles. The sagacious man of business of a great commercial mart cannot 
 fail to see at a glance the business advantage to be gained in developing the 
 San Joaquin valley by irrigation. Instead of standing as spectators in our 
 contest, the men of those cities will be represented in our Convention, and 
 are expected to aid in organizing the fight, as well as in sharing the fruits of 
 our certain success. Every irrigator and ditch owner in the State should at- 
 tend or be represented in this Convention, as well as the business men of 
 every city in the State. The baleful principle of riparianism must go to the 
 wall. 
 
 Los Angeles Daily Herald. 
 
 The Herald proposes shortly to open the great irrigation question, which 
 is one of the vital issues of our current State politics. One of our townsmen, 
 Mr. J. de Barth Shorb, of San Marino, has been indefatigable in his raising 
 of this issue. It is of vital significance in the development of Southern Cali- 
 fornia. A single but momentous decision of the Supreme Court of California 
 has resurrected the old riparian law of England and made it applicable to Cal- 
 ifornia. This was au unfortunate departure in the jurisprudence of this 
 State which ought to be rectified by the Supreme Court itself, if the con- 
 sciences of its members admit of such a modification, and which in any event 
 ought to be met by the Legislature. In California, as in all lands where irri- 
 
198 
 
 :gation prevails, and in which the shallow volume of the waters of the streams 
 have little relation either to navigation or to water power, the old Spanish 
 Adage of "El eostambre del Pais" ought to prevail. There is no question 
 but that the approaching campaign, in its legislative aspects, will turn largely 
 upon the attitude of candidates upon this absorbing question. We shall re- 
 car frequently to it in subsequent issues of the Herald. We are pleased to 
 see that the San Francisco press appreciate the gravity of the situation, and 
 are standing in cordially with a development of the water rights of California 
 which make irrigation the paramount consideration in the premises. 
 
 Modesto Herald. 
 
 Will not Down. 
 
 It seems that the large quantity of rain in this valley has not dampened 
 the ardor of the friends of irrigation in Stanislaus county. The movement 
 now on foot is on the original plan, and the new company proposes to make 
 a success of it by tapping the Merced River. There has been new life in- 
 iused into the project, and it seems to have a financial backing which will 
 -carry it through without begging for support and assistance from those who 
 are not enthusiastic in the matter. The enterprise has taken a shape in a 
 more permanent manner from the actual figures presented during the last 
 summer effort on the part of the men who were engaged in the Tuolumne 
 river enterprise, and something is due those men for the present endeavor. 
 We understand that San Francisco capital has been enlisted, and that the 
 work will actually begin in a few weeks. There is something in running 
 water down hill, and the waters of the Merced will be easier handled on this 
 account, but there will be a lack of volume when it is considered that the 
 Crocker ditch taps the Merced far above the point to be tapped by the con- 
 templated ditch on this side. The Crocker ditch has a capacity of fully half 
 of the volume of the Merced, and at low water time there will be very little 
 to spare for the Stanislaus ditch. We hope, however, that the new enter- 
 prise may be carried through and that it may prove successful. It shows 
 that all are not blind to the best interests of the county, and that it will 
 produce both population and wealth, which is always a valuable consider- 
 ation in a community. 
 
 Alta California. 
 
 ••The circulation of the Alta California is rapidly increasing, especially in 
 the Southern part of the State. This is because it is in all respects a good 
 journal, and, moreover, is wise enough to see the evil of riparianism and the 
 vast benefits that would result to the State from a general and thorough sys- 
 tem of irrigation. If it can impress its views on the business men of San 
 Francisco, make them see that their interests will be greatly promoted by 
 the advancement, growth and prosperity of the country, so that they will 
 
199 
 
 ■use their influence to elect a respectable, honest and intelligent delegation 
 from that city to the next legislature, it will have accomplished a work, the 
 general benefit and importance of which will be beyond estimation." 
 — Bakersfield Californian. 
 
 The Alta sees the whole future of California in this question of Irrigation* 
 A State must remove all impediments which artificially restrain its progress. 
 There are certain natural limitations everywhere which must be respected 
 because they cannot be removed, but these are fewer in the path of Califor- 
 nia than of any State in the Union. 
 
 The natural conditions here are all favorable to a wonderful expansion, 
 and the hindrances are, as a rule, artificial. The greatest of these is the 
 doctrine of riparian rights, and application to the waters of the State of the 
 policy of the dog in the manger, who could not eat the hay himself, but 
 would not let the horse eat it. The waters are greatly more abundant than 
 suffices for their needs. The surplus runs to the sea, which needs no irri- 
 gation, while the lands that thirst for it stay parched. 
 
 A law that places the ownership of water in this State in men who have 
 no use for its abundant volume, is as inapplicable as would be a law denying 
 the benefit of sunshine to all but a few. The few benefited would not use 
 it all, and to deny the surplus to others would be an intolerable folly. We 
 know that it is hard to impress the importance of this question upon our 
 people, for the reason that it is a deal in futures. If the arid districts were 
 already irrigated and populated and the assertion of riparian rights should 
 suddenly stop the flow of their zanjas, there would be an outraged commun- 
 ity, deprived of the very waters of life, and by its numbers commanding a 
 hearing from the public men and legislators of the State. But the popula- 
 tion now in those districts is sparse and scattered. The most charming 
 oases in the world are planted here and there, where the water is still used 
 in defiance of the obstructive riparian law. So it is that a plea has to be 
 made in the interest of people to come, of homes that are to be. 
 
 When we strike down riparian rights we by the same blow end plantation 
 farming in California, whether the ]ars[e holdings be used for grain or stock 
 ranging. The plantation farmers are often blamed for adhering to a sys- 
 tem which robs the land and keeps out population, but is not wholly 
 their fault. Small grain farming does not pay, and without irrigation small 
 stock-raising is impossible, and the big ranchers have simply been putting . 
 the land to best present use that is possible. They own the land and some- 
 body else owns the water, and they must get all they can out of the unirri- 
 gated soil. 
 
 The San Joaquin Valley is the counterpart, largely, of Spain in phys- 
 ical features and production, and will repeat] the history of the devel- 
 opment of Spanish vineyards when a denial of riparian rights terminates 
 riparian wrongs. Formerly sheep ranged where now the choicest fruits of 
 Spain are grown, and in parts of California to-day the finest citrus orchards 
 ■and the best vineyards are on old sheep pastures. To pasture sheep and 
 
200 
 
 cattle at a profit one man had to own or control thousands of acres, but 
 when irrigation changed the production one man found twenty acres up 
 to his capacity to till and care for, while forty put him amongst the rural 
 princes. 
 
 The Modesto Republican, commenting upon our observations on the colony 
 plan of settlement, says: 
 
 " It is not absolutely necessary to operate exclusively upon the colony 
 plan, although it is the best way to settle up a community. But suppose 
 some of our large ranchmen were to put ten or fifteen thousand acres of 
 land on the market, cut up into ten and twenty acre lots, and let the people 
 of the Ej,st know, it before our county would be thickly settled with a thrifty 
 and prosperous people? Legislation, if properly applied, might help con- 
 siderably, but if land is put on the market at a reasonable figure, there will 
 be a demand for it, providing arrangements are made to get water to irrigate 
 the crops when they need it." 
 
 There is an element in the colony plan that makes it very desirable. It 
 enables the practical transplanliug of an entire Eastern neighborhood, 
 made up of good folk who have grown up together in the exchange of 
 neighborly kindnesses. In that way the Quakers of Ohio planted the Pee- 
 dee, and Springdale settlements in Iowa, of which so many people retain 
 pleasant recollections. By the same method the Dunkards of Pennsylvania 
 took foothold in the same State. Those same Quakers are repeating the 
 process in Southern California, and there is need of them on the raisiu- 
 prodacing plains of the San Joaquin. 
 
 We are glad to see the papers of the different counties speak up for what 
 they think can be done in their own locality. The Scripture simile of the 
 "New Jerusalem," with its streets paved with noble minerals and precious 
 stones, is the superlative, made necessary by the speckless streets of the 
 capital of Israel, and they were kept clean by every man sweepiug before his 
 own door. 
 
 If the papers referred to will hold the people of their localities up to the 
 high grade of this supreme issue, the net result will be a pressure that will 
 finally control their salvation. The Modesto Herald closes its faithful testi- 
 mony with this: 
 
 "The Alta is eminently correct so far as Stanislaus county is concerned, at 
 least. No richer soil exists anywhere under the sun. The only trouble with 
 it is, it has been too productive, and everything has been taken from it and 
 nothing put back upon it, to give it the necessary strength to retain the 
 moisture it receives during the rainy season, so as to impart it to the grow- 
 ing grain when it needs it most. There are plenty of men in this county 
 who have made independent fortunes by raising wheat, but they cannot do it 
 again unless they can get water on the land when they need it. This can be 
 done when the contempl ited canal is completed, which probably will be this 
 Bummer. When that is completed and decent water rates are established, 
 our growth in population and wealth will be marvelous, providing the large 
 
201 
 
 land-owners will cut np their ranches into small farms and put them on the 
 market, which is quite probable. Buyers will be plenty, and Stanislaus 
 county's population will more than double within the next five years, if we 
 will let the people know they can purchase homes, and that we want them to 
 come and settle here." 
 
 San Francisco Daily Examiner, 
 
 Irrigation. 
 
 The most important subject for consideration by the next Legislature is 
 that relating to irrigation. It is paramount to all other economic questions, 
 and involves in an essential degree the prosperity and development of the 
 agricultural resources of the State, It is not merely a question whether a 
 proprietor shall have the right to water his lands from the flowing streams;, 
 whether the dectrine of riparian rights shall be infringed and the traditions 
 of the common law set aside; whether a new law continuing all usages 
 should be adopted, but whether millions upon millions of the most prolific 
 fruitful lands in California shall be sacrificed to a feudal tyranny born in the 
 middle ages and as applicable to American civilization as the old J^orman. 
 trial by fire or battle. 
 
 The principle of riparian rights, as defined by the common law, applied 
 to a country where the necessity for irrigation was unknown and unheard, 
 of. It can possibly have no application to a country where irrigation is a 
 necessity. But conceding that the abstract question of right with the ri- 
 pariati proprietor, there is still another common law principle which goes 
 with it, and is of equal force and pertinence, and that is, that " the interests 
 of the few must yield to those of the many." This latter is superior to the 
 riparian doctrine, because it lies at the root of all organized society. 
 
 Had there been desert lands in Eugland that might have been rendered 
 fruitful by irrigation, the doctrine of riparian rights, as we now have it, 
 would never have been established. The doctrine was founded upon physi- 
 cal conditions of soil and climate that bear no relation whatever to those in 
 California. There were no deserts to fructify; no arid wastes to redeem— and 
 the question of irrigation could possibly have formed no consideration what- 
 ever in the judgments which settled the doctrine. 
 
 But there is still another aspect in which to view the question as it exists 
 here in California; it is the well understood principle of jurisprudence that 
 all laws, to be !ust, must be reasonable. No one will pretend that an unjust 
 law should endure. If this bo true, we ask, is it reasonable.that all the water 
 in California should be devoted to the us6 of a few riparian proprietors, 
 while all the rest of the State is denied its benefits? 
 
 Fifty men are together traveling across a desert. By some chance one gets 
 possessed of a barrel of water; the rest are destitute. Would it be reasonable 
 for this man to hold this water exclusively for his own use, although more 
 than he could consume, while his companions die of thirst? That is pre- 
 
202 
 
 «-<5iaeIy the attitude occupied by the supporters of riparian rights in California. 
 They rejoice in the possession of water which they cannot consume, yet hold 
 for their exclusive use, while the rest of the State dies of thirst. 
 
 Aside, however, from the legal aspects of the subject, there are questions 
 of public poliay which enter into it. Let us consider, for example, this 
 question of public policy in so far as it relates to San Francisco. We are 
 outside the pale of the controversy, but we nevertheless have an absorbing 
 interest in it. We have built up here a magnificent city of varied industries 
 and innumerable classes of business. It is a vast mercantile community, 
 which depends for its prosperity upon the progress and development of the 
 country which geographically is tributary to it. Lying between the Sierras 
 and the sea are vast areas of land containing the germs of prodigal wealth 
 which need only the quickening agency of water to stir into prolific life. 
 With this auxiliary agency the barren plains will bloom with harvests — the 
 
 "^ioh soil will yield wealth and beauty, which, poured into San Francisco 
 
 •^through tributary streams of commerce, will help to build up on the shores 
 of the Pacific a great commercial metropolis. The future of San Francisco is 
 therefore inevitably linked with the prosperity and development of the 
 State. If the State prospers and increases in wealth and population, so will 
 
 •San Francisco. If the State recedes — if her industries are contracted, if her 
 wealth diminishes — San Francisco must inevitably decline. San Francisco 
 is the heart to which the blood is sent from the extremities of the physical 
 body and is redistributed, giving life and animation to the whole system. 
 This life-giving essence is the commerce of the State. It is the restless 
 
 -agency which vitalizes everything. 
 
 That commerce is dependent upon production no one will deny. Neither 
 will it be denied that production in California is dependent upon irrigation. 
 
 •San Francisco cannot be supported by a few riparian proprietors. It cannot 
 see the rich lands of the State lie waste, without committing suicide. It is, 
 in fact, as much interested in distributing the water of the streams for irri- 
 gating purposes as the farmers who demand it as the means of existence. 
 All that San Francisco hopes to be — all that her merchants and tradesmen 
 hope from wealth — all that her labor looks to for employment — depends 
 upon augmenting the growth and productive capacity of the Slate — and the 
 
 •one essential thing to this consummation is irrigation. 
 
 Kern CcHjnty Californian. 
 
 The circulation of the Alta California is rapidly increasing, especially in the 
 southern part of the State. This is because it is in all respects a good jour- 
 nal, and moreover, is wise enough to see the evil of riparianism and the 
 vast benefits that would result to the State from a general and thorough sys- 
 tem of irrigation. If it can impress its views on the business men of San 
 Francisco— make them see that their interests will be greatly promoted by the 
 advancement, growth and prosperity of the country, so that they will use 
 
203 
 
 their influence to elect a respectable, honest and intelligent delegation froi» 
 that city to the next Legislature, it will have accomplished a work the general' 
 benefit and importance of which will be beyond estimation. 
 
 THE COMING CAMPAIGN. 
 
 We are upon the eve of a general election. All of the Slate officers 
 three Judges, a Legislature and county officers are to be elected. The con- 
 test between the two political parties bids fair to be a close one. The differ- 
 ence in principles professed by each in this State is scarcely discernible. 
 Any non-partisan question with powerful support and of public importance 
 can command the balance of power by proper organization of its supporters... 
 The Executive Committee of the Fresno Irrigation Convention have been 
 summoned to meet, with a view of calling a State Irrigation Convention. 
 It is expected that this convention will take a hand in the coming campaign. 
 The advocates of a complete and unqualified assertion of the doctrine of 
 appropriation of water believe its importance surpasses all party questions.. 
 They are ready to sacrifice political allegiance to any party, and fight any 
 politician or aspirant for office to the finish who is weak-kneed on this, 
 question. They propose to beat any man to death at the polls who is on 
 the fence. No candidate need talk about a fair compromise between ripar- 
 ianism and appropriation. The man who suggests it is against appropriation. 
 A compromise means that "one side takes the turkey and the other the- 
 huzz&rd," and the irrigators do not propose to take the buzzard! 
 
 Alameda Encinal. 
 
 Irrigation, 
 
 We perceive that J. DeBarth Shorb, Chairman, has issued a call for a meet- 
 ing of the Stat© Irrigation Committee on Monday, April 5th, to conside* the 
 date and location of a State Convention, and take other preliminary steps for 
 its meeting. This movement has begun none too early, in view of the 
 magnitude of the interests to be considered. It is to be hoped that, 
 the grangers, and all who are interested in the matter will make a strenuous 
 effort to secure proper action at the next session of the Legislature. No more 
 important matter will come before that body, and, in view of the probable 
 large increase of immigration this year the most decided action should be taken. 
 The San Francisco Chronide remarks very aptly that ' 'it was made evident at 
 the last meeting of the Legislature that something more than talk is neces- 
 sary to secure the legislation required. The Fresno Convention did much to. 
 educate the people. It settled the question that the waterways, like the 
 highways of the State, belong of right to the people, and that the old English 
 law of riparian rights is not applicable to California. But when the appro- 
 priators went to Sacramento with their bill they had to contend against three 
 Glasses of-opponents — ignorant members, who did not understand the subject;. 
 
204 
 
 corrupt members, who wanted to be bought, and members interested in other 
 bills which filled the calendar. It is now proposed to meet the Legislature of 
 1887 with a better equipped force." As our cotemporary further suggests, 
 with great force, the people of the State, and particularly the citizens of the 
 larger cities, should be impressed with the fact that their future prosperity, 
 and indeed the welfare of the entire State "largely depends upon the estab- 
 lishment of the doctrine of appropriation as the law of the State — to the end 
 that every drop of water in the streams which flow from the Sierra shall be 
 made to do its duty. Our well being, our growth, depend on the develop- 
 ment of our back country, upon the settlement of the lower Saoramento and 
 San Joaquin valleys by small farmers who cultivate twenty, thirty, fifty or 
 one hundred acres in diversified crops, and especially in grapes and fruit. 
 These small farms cannot be cultivated without water, and the water cannot 
 be had if the doctrine of ripariau rights continues to prevail, and in the com- 
 ing election not an ofl&ce should be neglected; not a county overlooked. This 
 fall no man should be nominated, or if nominated, should be elected, unless 
 he is not only sound, but awake to the vital importance of the subject. The 
 class of citizens who are interested in irrigation is large enough, if they com- 
 bine, to defeat any candidate of whom they are not sure; and to be sure, they 
 should endeavor to secure the nomination of men who are personally inter- 
 ested in the question, and so reliably safe that it would be unnecessary to de- 
 mand pledges from them. If the Convention does its works thoroughly, ap- 
 propriation will be the law of California by March, 1887. 
 
 Kern County Galifornian. 
 
 What Mugt Be. 
 
 It is evident that the irrigation interests of the State, represented by the 
 ■^tate Irrigation Convention, will engage in the fight during the coming polit- 
 ical campaign and the next session of the Legislature, with a spirit, vigor 
 and determination that will totally eclipse all their previous efi'orts. They 
 want the riparian doctrine, that fossilized precedent bound Judges are hesi- 
 tating over totally expurgated from the laws of the State, if it is there at all, 
 and they contend that it is not. Moreover, they must and will have a complete 
 system of irrigation laws — placing the waters of the State under so just and 
 thorough a system of control that the benefit may be extended to the widest 
 possible limit, both as to individuals assisted and lands fertilized. If neither 
 of the old parties think that irrigation deserves a place — the prominent place 
 — in their platforms, the irrigationists will organize a party of their own, nom- 
 inate State, Legislative and Judicial tickets and elect them. This time they 
 will be early in the field, with their strength ten times renewed, and will pat 
 •forth ever increasing efforts until victory is assured. 
 
205 
 Oakland Times. 
 
 The Appropriators. 
 
 One of the most important measures that was ever considered by onr State 
 Legislature will be brought before that body at its next session. California 
 has reached a period in her history when we must begin to prepare for the 
 Lirgest immigration that e ver flocked to any State in the Union. All eyes 
 are upon us, and at present we are not in a condition to accommodate even a 
 fraction of the people who will visit our shores during the next few years, for 
 the purpose of making rural homes. We are not ready for a large population, 
 for the reason that the large Upper Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys, 
 comprising the richest lands in the world, are not artificially watered, on ac- 
 count of our State law, as it now stands. Our law on water ways was ab- 
 sorbed from the English Kiparian Rights, viz: that water cannot betaken 
 from any stream if a single person owning land on said stream objects to 
 such a proceeding. This law might be applicable to England, but it most 
 certainly does not fit the case in California, for a large proportion of our 
 land in the above mentioned valleys is almost useless without irrigation. 
 And why? Simply because at present it will take at least one thousand acres 
 of the best land to support a family, and we know farmers in Stanislaus and 
 Merced counties who have a mighty hard time of it to make both ends meet, 
 even with farms of from one thousand to til teen hundred acres. Now by 
 taking a small portion of the water from the Toulumne, Stanislaus, Merced 
 and San Joaquin rivers, a country capabl-:! of supporting several millions of 
 people, is at once thrown open to our Eastern friends, who are anxious to 
 come here. "How can that be?" the thoughtless reader will ask. Simply 
 because, under the irrigation system, a tract of from twenty to forty acres of 
 land will support a family, and put a few hundred dollars in bank every year; 
 whereas at present, one thousand acres will hardly keep the wolf from the 
 door of the same family, "But that is guess work," some one will say. It 
 is not guess work. We have facts and figures to prove what we say. The 
 colonies of Fresno county are a living example of what irrigation will do for 
 the San Joaquin valley. In 1876 the writer visited that county and was 
 taken out to the first colony, by Tom Hughs, the projector of the scheme. 
 The first ditch had just been completed and settlers were coming in slowly. 
 They were not exactly discouraged, but they did not believe that they would 
 be able to make a living on their little forty-acre farms. The whole country 
 looked like a desert and land could be purchased for a few dollars an acre. 
 Hughs was confident, however, of what irrigation would do for the county, 
 and to-day one will find the same farmers, who looked blue in '76, and thou- 
 sands of others, who could not be induced to take one hundred and fifty 
 dollars an acre for their little ranches, for they have been able to make not 
 only a comfortable living, but can boast of a large bank account and other 
 property which would make them independent for the rest of life, without 
 doing another lick of work. This is what irrigation has done for them, and 
 proves what the rest of this large area of country would be if it were not for 
 
206 
 
 the detestable riparian rights, which is the friend of no man except the man 
 who owns large tracts of land along the watercourses, and wants to use it for 
 Btockraising only. For years these large cattle kiugs of Fresno, Kern, Tulara 
 and Merced counties have been fighting the irrigators in the courts, and the 
 people, seeing no chance lor relief so long as riparian rights blocked the 
 courts, decided to bring the matter before the Legislature. They called an 
 appropriator's convention at Fresno, shortly before the last session of the 
 Legislature, and prepared a bill, but the subject was new, to our Northern 
 law-makers, at least, and nothing was done during the session. The appro- 
 priators learned a lesson, however; they found that the cattle kings were 
 ready to meet them at every point and fight the measure with money and 
 brains. They have not been idle, however, since the Legislature adjourned, 
 but have strained every energy to make the people thoroughly acquainted 
 with the situation, and we are firmly convinced that nine-tenths of the entire 
 population now understand that without irrigation the largest and most fer- 
 tile portion of California must remain almost tenantless; whereas if the 
 riparian rights law is wiped off of our statute books, the San Joaquin valley 
 will soon become the prosperous home of several millions of people, and as a 
 natural consequence Oakland will be the distributing point. Therefore we 
 cannot afford to send a single man to the next Legislature who is not a square 
 up and up irrigation man. 
 
 Eesources of California. 
 
 Riparian Riglits. 
 
 The people of California are now entirely awake to the importance of irri- 
 gation, and the necessity for laws establishing and regulating the use of the 
 waters of the natural streams of the State for that purpose is generally con- 
 ceded. This sentiment is bound to find expression through the law-making 
 powers which will result in defining the rights of irrigators and riparian 
 claimants. This is a question in which the vital interests of our State are in- 
 Tolved, for without irrigation an immense area of fertile and valuable land 
 could never be cultivated, and would remain barren as the Desert of Sahara. 
 We are in favor of the condemnation of the rights of all riparian owners 
 under the old common law; an equitable compensation for such rights; and 
 the establishment by legislation of the right to use the waters of the natural 
 streams of this State for this purpose of irrigation, and such other regula- 
 tions as will prevent the monopoly of water and the unjust taxation of those 
 who make a lawful use of it. 
 
 Oakland Times. 
 
 We are glad to see that our contemporaries are beginning to study up the 
 irrigation question. The whole thing is in a nut-shell. Are we to live by the 
 old English riparian rights law, which holds that water is a part of the realty, 
 and a man living above us has no right to take the water from the stream which 
 
207 
 
 runs through our land than he has to absorb all the air about our premises, 
 or shall we distribute this water equally over the land and give every man a 
 chance to utilize what God has given him? The most of our streams are so 
 abundantly fed from the mountains that there is no danger of a scarcity of 
 water, and we know that there is a plenty for all; therefore we are in favor 
 of the irrigators first, last and all the time. They must have water — and 
 the sooner our legislature sees it in that light the better will it be for the 
 whole State. 
 
 Visalia Weekly Delta. 
 
 Irrigfatien. 
 
 The question taking precedence of all others to be considered by the next 
 Legislature, is that of irrigation. Time is being taken by the forelock this 
 year. The committee appointed by the last State Convention to take charge 
 of the matter, will meet in Fresno next week and arrange to have the mat- 
 ter brought before the people immediately. Conventions of the several 
 political parties will be held soon, and in order to know how prospective 
 candidates for the Legislature stand, and that the subject may be fully dis- 
 cussed before that body meets, it is necessary to commence work at once. A 
 determined effort was made by those in favor of appropriating water for irri- 
 gation to have enacted laws that could settle this vexed question, and an 
 opposition fully as determined on the part of the riparian proprietors suc- 
 ceeded in preventing legislation. The matter was not understood by people 
 outside of the irrigating districts of the State, and the support of the city 
 press and the non-irrigating counties was silent or lukewarm in its support, 
 with a few notable exceptions. Now all is changed. Every county in this 
 valley is heartily interested in irrigation, and among the latest to give the 
 matter increased attention is our neighboring mountain county of Inyo, in 
 which several irrigating canals are about to be constructed. 
 
 The large amount of literature concerning this subject which has been cir- 
 culated throughout the State during the past two years, and the discussion 
 in the San Francisco dailies recently, is having its effect, and people in 
 counties where irrigation is unnecessary, are learning that they will not be 
 injured in any way by allowing the southern and interior counties to divert 
 water from the streams in order to make millions of acres of otherwise dry 
 land habitable and productive. There is no reason why one person at the 
 mouth of a river should be able to prevent- hundreds and perhaps thousands 
 of others from making a living, wheji they may do so by using a part of the 
 waters that must, according to the common law of England, which a few 
 judges persist in blindly following, be allowed to run to the sea undiminished 
 in quantity and unimpaired in quality. There is no reason why the riparian 
 owner and the appropriator should be at daggers' points. If one quarter of 
 the money spent in litigation were expended in an endeavor to setilethe mat- 
 ter fairly, it would be found that the supply of water is amply sufficient for 
 14 
 
208 
 
 all. In Fresao county, the life-blood of which has been tbe water distributed 
 through its network of irrigating canals; it is now necessary to drain land 
 that was formerly a part of the "San Joaquin desert plaius." Tbe ground 
 has become thoroughly saturated, and is drained into the sloughs that empty 
 into the San Joaquin river. It is so also in those parts of Tulare county that 
 have been irrigated for a number of years. The water that has been poured 
 upon the dry lands of the valley are not lost, but are working their way in 
 the sandy sub-strata to the lake, and as a small amount of the water at first 
 used for irrigation is now necessary, a smaller quantity will be diverted from 
 the natural channels to irrigate the same land, and that which is diverted will 
 work its way back again. The supply is great enough for all riparian owners 
 and appropriators, and the chances for the passage of the bills framed by the 
 State Irrigation Convention, or others similar, are excellent. 
 
 Oakland Tribnne. 
 
 The Irrij^ation Issae. 
 
 The next Eepublican State Convention will have to deal with a new issue 
 which has not heretofore had political consideration. The irrigation inter- 
 ests, extending throughout the State, but mainly in the San Joaquin Valley 
 and the southern counties, have gradually attained a magnitude hitherto 
 unknown. They are organizing for efifective work in the next campaign 
 with the intention of forcing themselves into politics and demanding what- 
 ever their power will enable them to take in the way of measures for their 
 protection. 
 
 In view of this fact it vdll be well to consider who they are, what are their 
 claims, and why they venture into the domain of politics. 
 
 Irrigation is carried on all over the State, but the principal irrigating coun- 
 ties are San Bernardino, San Diego, Los Angeles, Kern, Tulare, Fresno, Mer- 
 ced, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin. Most of the land in these counties is of the 
 character known as desert land, and is unfit for cultivation without irrigation. 
 The population thrives by irrigation. Irrigation is carried on through canals, 
 diverting water from the various streams. The right to use the water is secured 
 by appropration long sanctioned by usage and custom and by the court?, and 
 embodied finally into the Code. So absolutely is irrigation dependent on the 
 right of appropriation that in a legal sense the words are almost interchange 
 able. Without appropriation water cannot be had for irrigation. 
 
 There is an old common-law doctrine that the waters of a stream must flow 
 within the banks without diversion, and under this doctrine the use of its 
 water for irrigation or any other than stock or domestic purposes, is for- 
 bidden. But no one imagined that this law was or would ever become a rule 
 ot property in this State because it was inapplicable to our dry climate and 
 meager rainfall. 
 
 A little over a year ago, however, three Judges of the Supreme Court held 
 for appropriation, whilst the majority, four of the Judges, resurrected 
 
209 
 
 the old English common law doctrine, holding that the water of a stream 
 cannot be used for irrigation if any one owning land upon its banks says no. 
 
 At this, a common fear seized every one connected with irrigation, lest 
 this shonld become the established rule of property in this State, to the utter 
 destruction of irrigation. 
 
 They immediately appealed to the Legislature for some protection, but ob- 
 tained nothing. Since then their alarm has increased almost to a panic. 
 They are arming for a fight. Their just demands have been denied, and they 
 are about to use their united power to take by political force that which they 
 are refused. 
 
 These irrigating counties poll about thirty-three thousand votes. They are 
 greatly exercised over this question. Irrigation is their bread and butter. 
 Politics naturally sink out of sight with a people under such conditions. The 
 Eepublican State Convention ought to recognize the justice of the irrigators' 
 claims and take a stand for the right of appropriation if it would secure the 
 the lion's share of this vote. Alameda county ought to send a delegation to 
 the Convention who are properly impressed wilh the importance of develop- 
 ing the interior by irrigation. A flourishing country builds up a populous 
 <rity. 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 The Irrigation Q,aestion. 
 
 Says the Record- Union: " The irrigation question is coming to the front 
 as one of the most important topics to command public attention in the 
 coming campaign, and the subsequent legislative session. We adhere to our 
 doctrine that a true policy is for the State to convert mountain canyons into 
 storage basins, where practicable, and save for irrigating uses the waste 
 waters of winters, and those from the melting snows of early summer. On 
 the basis of a storage system the irrigation problem can be greatly simplified. ' * 
 
 The irrigation problem could be still further simplified on the basis of erad- 
 icating all traces of the alleged English common law of riparian rights. More- 
 over a storage system cannot be established unless this is first done. Dams, 
 for reservoirs, must be built either on the streams themselves or their triba- 
 laries, and this the end men would object to. They claim, under the common 
 law of England, which they allege is in force in this State, all the water that 
 flows in the streams, at all seasons of the year, in flood time and drouth, and 
 they would object to impounding any portion of those waters if it were for 
 the purpose of keeping up the supply for diversion and not to flow down to 
 them. Every mountain canyon down which water flows in time of rain or 
 snow melting is the tributary of some stream. Before capital will engage in 
 reservoir building they must be assured of immunity from the obstructionists 
 referred to who have made so much trouble. For the present, with the ban 
 of riparianistn removed, there is water enough in the streams for all pur- 
 poses. Let it be used and the means would accumulate, now wanting, to 
 ■build a storage system when needed. 
 
210 
 
 Tulare Register. 
 
 "We are informed by one of our merchants who has just spent a week or 
 more in San Francisco, that the merchants in that city are really taking quite 
 an interest in irrigation matters. They make earnest inquiries in regard to 
 irrigation and begin to realize that their own prosperity as well as ours de- 
 pends upon a just solution of this problem. This question is new to the bus- 
 iness men of San Francisco and they hardly feel able to grapple with it 
 themselves, and look to the sections immediately interested for a solution of 
 the problem. This is as it should be. We, of the Valley, are capable of 
 evolving such a system as the State needs. We have been brought face to 
 face with irrigation, and experience has taught us what we want. But it is 
 not enough to know what is needed. We must have the thing needed, and 
 want assistance in procuring it, and therein our city friends can help us 
 materially. In fact, it is going to be well nigh impossible for us to obtain 
 what we need without the assistance of San Francisco. That the assistance 
 may not be rendered by their electing men to the "Legislature who know all 
 about the question and are themselves capable of drafting such bills as are 
 needed; but if they are so disposed they can haul off their coats and go into 
 the next campaign and send from San Francisco a delegation ot honest, 
 capable men, whose judgment will be more influenced by argument than by 
 money. It is the man who needs to be 'seen' before being convinced whom 
 -we most fear." 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 The Irrigationists. 
 
 The irrigationists have gone to work the right way. They propose to or- 
 ganize in every precinct in their portion of the State, and see to it that they 
 are duly represented in the county conventions. The measures which their 
 interest and the interest of the whole State demand would have become laws 
 in 1885 but for the factious opposition of a small knot of politicians whose 
 purposes were well known. The names of these men are no secret; they will 
 be found recorded in the journals of the Senate and Assembly; they were 
 published over and over again in the correspondence and editorials in this 
 paper. Several of these men will want a renomination; then will come the 
 time for the irrigationists to get in their work. No man who was faithless to 
 the cause of irrigation last winter should have an opportunity of visiting Sac- 
 ramento again as a public servant. 
 
 If the convention which meets here on May 20th maps out its work with 
 care, it can secure a solid body of members from the central and southern 
 counties pledged to irrigation first, last and all the time. No party conven- 
 tion will dare to nominate a man who is shown to have destroyed the cause in 
 1885; if it does, the duty of the people is clear; they should support his op- 
 ponent. Irrigation is the one all-important question for the southern coun- 
 ties. In choosing new men, conventions should require them to give pledges 
 
211 
 
 that they will make irrigation their first concern; that they will not allow the 
 bills framed by the committeo to be delayed or set aside by other measures; 
 that they will stand by them, in season aud out of season, till they become 
 laws. If the irrigationists tackle their work in this spirit, they cannot help 
 but succeed. 
 
 The Daily San Diegan. 
 
 Irrig^ation. 
 
 The English doctrine of riparian rights that has been judicially decided 
 by the highest court of resort in this State to be the law in California, will 
 not be accepted by the agricultural interests of this State as a final settle- 
 ment of the principle involved in the matter of irrigation. This decision 
 practically destroys not only one of the most valuable industries, but strikes 
 a fatal blow at the future prosperity of the State. In many counties the 
 right to irrigate by diverting and appropriating water from the natural water 
 ways of the State is all that gives value to a locality, or invests it with condi- 
 tions essential to human life. 
 
 Daily Examiner. 
 
 Irrigation, 
 
 We surrender an unusual amount of space this morning to the address of 
 the Executive Committee of the State Irrigation Convention. The over- 
 whelming importance of the question, however, fully justifies us in doing 
 80. No more important subject ever came before the people of California. 
 It lies at the root of all our prosperity and material development and ad- 
 vancement. It is neither sectional nor personal, but universal. It pervades 
 the State from end to end. It includes all classes of population, and over- 
 shadows in magnitude and importance every other issue. 
 
 It does all this because without irrigation, provided for bylaw and put 
 beyond the domain of question or dispute, California must stop in its career 
 of marvelous progress if, indeed, it does not have to return to the barren 
 conditions from which a part of the State has been rescued by tireless en- 
 ergy and enterprise. 
 
 The address we print this morning covers the whole ground in controversy, 
 and graphic as is the statement the Executive Committee submits, it is neither 
 too highly colored nor overdrawn. The question is one of progress against 
 decay; of the possibilities of a splendid future, in which the highest degrees 
 of enlightened and material development and the most profitable and pro- 
 ductive cultivation of the soil contrast with the desolation of utter barren- 
 ness. 
 
 The proposition that the soil of nine-tenths of the State cannot be culti- 
 vated without irrigation is too obvious for controversy, and that there is 
 water enough in the streams which can be rendered available for this pur- 
 pose is also beyond dispute. That every commercial, agricultural and basi- 
 
212 
 
 ness interest that we have already, or may have in the future, is dependent 
 upon the lawful diversion of the water from the streams is also obvious. 
 
 The question is, Shall the legislative assistance needed be given? The 
 people have it in their power to accomplish this great necessity. They are 
 the source of power, the tribunal from which there is no appeal. But, to 
 render their efforts intelligent and effective, they must have a specific organ- 
 ization and definite ends. These are provided for in the address, and the 
 plan proposed should command the very widest possible attention and the 
 thoughtful consideration of every man in the State. Every one is inter- 
 ested in the subject. The citizen of the city, equally with the citizen of the 
 country, will find in this question the hinge upon which the future of Cali- 
 fornia will turn. It embraces every vital interest, every hope and prospect 
 of the future, and the appeal which has been made addresses itself to the 
 patriotism of the individual and the sense of right of the public. 
 
 Pacific Rural Press. 
 
 The Irrig^ation. Movement. 
 
 On next Monday, April 5th, the executive committee of the Irrigation As- 
 sociation will meet in Fresno to fix upon a time and place for holding the 
 State Irrigation Convention. The idea is to hold a general assembly for sev- 
 eral days for the purpose of thorough discussion and action upon the matters 
 affecting the interests of those who grow products by irrigation water. Much 
 of the future growth and prosperity of the State depends upon the correct 
 solution of problems connected with irrigation. It is important that meas- 
 ures should be undertaken to secure a better understanding of these matters. 
 It is necessary that the coming Legislature should act upon the subject and 
 enact laws which shall meet the needs of the people and the growth of the 
 State. The subjects were brought before the last Legislature and a strong 
 effort made to secure legislation, but without effect. Much of the difficulty 
 laid in the ignorance of many of the legislators whose lives have been cast 
 beside city walks rather than beside running streams. By beginning early 
 this year it is hoped that men can be elected who have clear ideas upon the 
 subject and can be trusted to legislate intelligently. It seems to us that moat 
 good can be done by a convention in San Francisco, because here are the 
 most people who need a little hydroculture, and here, too, can be reached 
 the greater number of those who have influence in legislation. People living 
 in irrigated districts do not need instruction in their progress and their needs. 
 
 We are pleased to note indications that there is a better understanding of 
 the points at issue in the newspapers of the State and the need of legislation, 
 which shall settle the conflict between laws and precedents and conditions, 
 and give us a plain course for the development of our arid areas. Much will 
 depend upon the selection which shall be made this fall for State officers and 
 legislators, and there seems to be a disposition to make soundness on the 
 "water question a qualification for support by those in that interest. We do- 
 
213 
 
 not object to judging a man rather by his industrial value and wisdom than 
 by his political affiliations. There are many ways by which men who are 
 ready to work for the advantage of the greatest numbers can make themselves 
 useful in the coming Legislature. If both parties will bear these facts in 
 mind, they may both give us nominations which will be acceptable, but if 
 either candidate should be in doubt whether he should serve the few or the 
 many, the party which names him will have a heavy load to carry. The 
 floating vote promises to increase from year to year in our elections, and the 
 balance of power is already clearly in its wake. We trust the committee next 
 Monday at Fresno will issue a ringing address and make wise arrangements 
 for coming popular meetings. 
 
 Fresno Daily Evening Expositor. 
 
 On the Riglit Track. 
 
 The San Francisco Alia is on the right track. It espoused the irrigation 
 cause something more than a year ago, and has been consistently at work 
 ever since trying to interest the business men at the Bay City, and the people 
 generally, in the cause of irrigation. It sees that irrigation will build up and 
 fill with people the great valleys of the State, and that by so doing the busi- 
 ness interests of San Frencisco will be built up and an era of prosperity in- 
 augurated. Speaking of irrigation, in a late issue, it says: 
 
 " We want more people in California; we want more production, more 
 school houses, churches, Sunday schools, houses, homes, and the greatness 
 they join hands in bringing. We know that on the plains which can be irri- 
 gated when the doctrine of riparian rights is discarded, there will spring up 
 palm -shaded homes in the midst of vineyards and orchards, where there is no 
 Winter, and where the settler need not even pray for rain, for he will control 
 the'time and quantity of water that shall go upon his land, and his prayers 
 may go for other spiritual or temporal blessings of which men are always in 
 need. 
 
 "The irrigable districts, when so settled and tilled, will produce articles 
 that are staple the world over, and are nowhere produced as well, ^he Illi- 
 nois farmer who has dodged the frosts and showers to get in his corn, has 
 mashed nasty cut-worms with his fingers, poisoned squirrels and frightened 
 crows awaj', has run through the rows with a cultivator and laid the crop by 
 in July, with the temperature at 100^ and the leaves sawing across his sweaty 
 neck, who went out in the chill and stormy nights of early September and fig- 
 ured up the interest on his mortgage while he figured on the chances of frost 
 that would destroy the season's work — that is the man who will live forever 
 when he is transplanted to the Sacramento or San Joaquin valley, with water to 
 irrigate his land. He will prune his trees and vines, pick his fruits and dry 
 his raisins, and make more clear money off twenty acres than he ever did off 
 a quarter section in the Sucker State." 
 
 It is to be hoped that the Alia will be able to cram its good ideas in this 
 direction into the heads of the San Francisco business public, so that they 
 
214 
 
 may aid, this year and in future, in driving the California Legislature into 
 passing laws on the subject of irrigation which will enable districts to con- 
 struct canals,regulate the flow and distribution of water, aud stop the ever- 
 lasting lawsuits of the so-called riparian claimants. 
 
 San Francisco Daily Examiner. 
 
 Irrigfalion and tlie Common La'W. 
 
 The common-law doctrine of riparian rights was the outgrowth of peculiar 
 conditions. It is not a universal doctrine. It was fitted to circumstances, 
 just as irrigation is applied to conditions the reverse of those which sanc- 
 tioned the riparian doctrine. 
 
 The common law of England is the creature of custom. Custom made the 
 law. It arose from long-established usages. In the early daj^s of British 
 civilization the streams were used for navigation, to turn mills and for fish- 
 ing. The conditions of the climate rendered, irrigation an unknown factor in 
 agriculture. Water was diverted from the streams only for domestic and 
 mechanical uses, and in the latter contingency, statute, supplementing the 
 law of custom, required its return to the original channel after fulfilling the 
 mechanical functions for which it was diverted. But the fact, that under any 
 circumstances it could be taken from the stream, shows that the common 
 law doctrine of riparian rights, even in England, was not inflexible and ab- 
 solute. 
 
 The smaller streams were useful only, as we have said, as repositories for 
 fish, to turn mills located on their banks and to supply cattle in the field 
 with drink. When diverted to supply fountains or to turn inland machinery, 
 a general statute, in the reign of Edward the Confessor, directed its return by 
 an artificial channel to its native stream, •* so that the volume shall not be 
 diminished, except in so far as it is lost by unavoidable means." This statute 
 in itself demonstrates that the rule of the common law, which conQned water 
 to its original channel, was not inflexible. On the contrary, as the law was 
 the outgjowth of custom, so custom modified its provisions and diversified 
 the uses to which water might be applied. The common law being the out- 
 growth of custom, and custom being the creature of usage, the doctrine of 
 riparian rights was established simply in the absence of antagonistic interests. 
 Had there been a statute it would have usurped the domain of custom and 
 the uses of water would have been defined upon a basis that would have ex- 
 cluded the doctrine of riparian rights. 
 
 It must be also understood that the common law is a collection of customs 
 in so far only as the customs can be established and proved to exist. The 
 riparian interest is an established custom in England, and so becomes a part 
 of the common law of that country. But it does not follow that a directly 
 contrary custom would not be equally sound as a common-law right if found- 
 ed on established usage— the diversion of water, for example, for a particular 
 purpose. In fact, the legitimate application of the common-law doctrine of 
 
215 
 
 custom would make priority of right by priority of appropriation of water 
 for specific uses, such as the irrigation of land, an absolute right under the 
 common law. Riparian rights are simply customs. They were the usages 
 of the country. They are therefore recognized by the common law, not be- 
 cause of any intrinsic merit in the doctrine, but solely for the reason that 
 they were a recognized custom. If, then, it be the custom and not the prin- 
 ciple that gives vitality to the doctrine, the custom of using water from the 
 streams for irrigating purposes, as in California, overturns the absolete ripa- 
 rian claim and invests with the common-law sanction the custom made law- 
 ful by priority of appropriation. 
 
 The fault in our courts has been this: They have mistaken the spirit of the 
 common law. There are no recoguized principles in common law. It is 
 made up of customs. Use is custom. Therefore, when the farmers of Cali- 
 fornia diverted water from the streams for artificial irrigation, and no effect- 
 ual opposition was made to it, it became a custom and part of the common law. 
 Custom must precede the law of recognition. With the growth of the cus- 
 tom of diversion for irrigation purposes the riparian doctrine became obso- 
 lete as effectually as if this use had been proclaimed by statute. 
 
 Irrigation, then, is a custom established in California, and by all legiti- 
 mate rules of legal interpretation is a part of the common law of the laud. 
 Because the Courts have refused to recognize it, it becomes necessary for the 
 Legislature to pass upon it — not to create a new right, but to confirm an old 
 one. 
 
 Stockton Evening Mail. 
 
 Let Us Irrigate, 
 
 The San Francisco Alia has performed a valuable service to the whole 
 State by taking the lead in the advocacy of irrigation, and maintaining the 
 position with its accustomed vigor. 
 
 This should be considered the question of all questions affecting the vital 
 interests of California, with the exception of that of the expulsion of the Chi- 
 nese. Our State is not at present, take it all in all, developed up to more 
 than one-quarter of its possible productiveness. Nothing would develop it 
 80 rapidly, so completely and so permanently as irrigation. It is sufficient 
 for present purposes to consider only the region contiguous to Stockton. 
 Stockton ought to have a population equal in numbers to the present popu- 
 lation of the city and county, and the county outside of the city should be 
 sustaining to-day in active agricultural, viticultural and horticultural indus- 
 tries fully thirty thousand people, instead of its present fifteen thousand, or 
 less. Nobody questions the ultimate possibilities [of soil and climate. Old 
 citizens and recent acquisitions, pioneers and tenderfeet, are all agreed that 
 this will be a region of great productiveness some day. 
 
 The only question then is, how and when ia the change to be brought about. 
 As to the how, it is plain that the only thing needful to make this portion of 
 
216 
 
 the valley blossom like a rose the year round is water. Water, water, every- 
 where, nor auy drop for the famishing vegetable life seen everywhere during 
 the summer months, is what impresses a]l first observers. The rivers all run 
 wastefully to the sea, while the plains onto which they might easily be divert- 
 ed are parched and forbidding. 
 
 There are three sources from which this portion of the valley might be 
 abundantly watered during the entire dry season. One is the Stanislaus 
 river, on the south, another is the Mokelumne, on the north, and the third is 
 the Salt Spring valley reservoir, between the two. It has been estimated that 
 for $150,000 the Stanislaus river could be made to irrigate 30,000 acres of 
 land. The increase in the value of the land resulting from irrigation would 
 more than double the cost of the canal aud lateral ditches. This will be 
 done some day, and the Mokelumne will also be made to serve the farmer and 
 the orchardist. What a change will be on the face of nature hereabout then. 
 This county can produce anything that is grown in the State, if only the 
 plants and trees are watered. 
 
 Why then let the rivers mock the plains aud the soil withhold its most 
 precious bounties? The old riparian law might have been good enough for 
 England, but it is no more applicable to California than a law would be for- 
 bidding the navigation of our rivers by any sort of cra^fc but those propelled 
 by sail. 
 
 Daily Alta California. 
 
 The Executive Committee of the State Irrigation Convention met yesterday 
 at Fresno, and promulgated an address which will be found elsewhere in our 
 columns. It is a narrative of things past and a noble prophesy of things to 
 come. In its antitheses may be read the certain future of California. If our 
 laws are brought into harmony with our physical conditions and natural 
 necessities, this State at once opens her acres to the densest and most pros- 
 perous population in the world. If our laws remain at right angles to those 
 conditions and necessities, the desert now untouched remains bald aud bar- 
 ren, and invades the green oases which are now supporting a prosperous 
 people. 
 
 California is more talked and thought about in the East now than when she 
 shot into notice and notoriety upon the discovery of gold, for there are more 
 people to talk and think. 
 
 A land that produces the orange, grape, olive, almond and fig, appeals now 
 as powerfully to the fancy as did the production of gold thirty years ago. 
 The agricultural and horticultural possibilities of a winterless country, where 
 the palm waves its branches and the magnolia blooms the year through, lure 
 and allure and conjure with greater power than the promise of gold to be dug 
 from the hills. It opens up the prospect of a redistribution of population. 
 It promises a useful drain for the benefit of the older States, that leaves with- 
 in them better opportunities for all who stay, while there is no rale by which.. 
 
217 
 
 to measnre the certainties offered to all who come blessed with a willing spirit 
 and ready for the light toil which wins a competency. 
 
 Now is Califoruia's more than oolden moment. It is not worth while tO' 
 dally over details. Let the work outlined by this committee go forward to 
 success, and the processes for utilizing water and Storing it lor irrigation wiU' 
 unfold and keep pace with our necessities. 
 
 Bleak New England impoauds the flood water of her rivers to make power 
 for the mills. Ou the heads of the Mississippi the same process stores the 
 spring floods, to be released from dams in the dry summer to make the stream 
 navigable. In its first stage the ordinary flow of our rivers will be tapped for 
 irrigation, and f s we get ou the caiions will be dammed, and finally every 
 pearly drop of water in our State will be transmuted into grain or grass, it 
 •will sparkle in the wine bottle, it will tempt the palate in the juices of fruits, 
 it will shine in the nutty-fl.ivored oil. Transfiguring the desert, this water 
 will smile in the tints of the rose and in the verdure of the palm. 
 
 One wonders that we have dela3'ed so long in making this a foremost issue 
 and crowding it to a settlement. Southern California has shown what can 
 be done, the crops that can be raised, the colonies that can settled by irriga- 
 tion. Spain long awo taught the world the value of irrigated lands. There 
 those lands sell at $600 to $1,000 per acre, and irrigated lands rent annually 
 for a sum per acre equal to the selling price of lauds that are without water.. 
 There is nothing that those Spanish lands produce that cannot be grown in 
 equal excellence here. It was instinct that led the Spanish race to settle 
 along this Coast. Here, as at home, they began with flocks and herds, and 
 we succeed them to take the next step and force the soil to its noblest pro- 
 duction. 
 
 The committee's address draws a faithful picture for the benefit of San: 
 Francisco. It points out to the business men of this city the way to a future 
 that must command their interested sympathy. We have enough city popu- 
 lation now and to spare. We want rural recruits. We want the local back- 
 ing of five or six millions of people, and the coming five or six years can 
 bring them, if we offer tho rural certainties that lie in irrigation. Look at 
 Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, jumping forward iu population at the rate of 100 to 
 400 per cent, every decade! Yet the hospitality they offer is as the hand- 
 shake of a cold-blooded frog to the hot-palmed grdsp,of two lovers, compared 
 to what California can afford as an attraction to immigrants and an induce- 
 ment of their stay. 
 
 We need not necessarily rake Europe to find population. Our American 
 people have shown in Southern California a remarkable adaptation to the 
 conditions of profitable ownership and pleasant life on these irrigated lands. 
 If there is any situation to which an American is unsuited it must be in the 
 next world, for it is yet undiscovered in this. We like to see them come and 
 get the benefit of ownership in the choice and Eden-like spots in their own 
 country. 
 
 The committee puts upon this city the compulsion of considering this 
 question now and taking her part in its solution. The convention meets 
 
218 
 
 here. It will not only deliberate in the presence of our people, but they will 
 be expected to be something more than idle anditors. Our merchants and 
 bankers and manufacturers will be called to council with the country folk. 
 They will be asked to affirm their faith in irrigation by their works, and if 
 they have no faith they must stand up and tell why they have not. The best 
 thing in this movement is its conjunction of city and State interests. This 
 campaign is to be a severe case of confluent enthusiasm. It is an issue which 
 elevates politics and brings into the primary movements of parties the best 
 class of people. Readers of Bret Harte's ** Luck of Roaring Camp " remem- 
 ber how from the cradle of the motherless baby went out a softening influ- 
 ence that refined even the speech of the roughest men. So this question of 
 useful appropriation of the waters will refine our politics, for in it is all that 
 relates to hearthstone and roof tree, to the founding of homes and the 
 strengthening of every institution of civilization. 
 
 When the convention comes let it be welcomed by our commercial and 
 financial bodies, and let its best purposes be strengthened by the active sym- 
 pathy of every man who has a conception of the laws by which common- 
 wealths grow. When it declares its plans let them be the legend upon the 
 banners of parties, for in that sign we are to conquer the glorious future of 
 7 the greatest of all the States. 
 
 Oakland Evening Tribnne. 
 
 Irrigation to the Front. 
 
 The address of the State Irrigation Committee, published in another col- 
 umn, is food for political digestion. There is no announcement of the form- 
 ation of an independent political party, but there is an intensity of purpose 
 pervading the address foreshadowing a distinct political organization in the 
 not distant future. 
 
 Republican party leaders had best give the subject serious consideration. 
 Here is an organized movement of a whole community to be met in the field 
 of politics. Will the Republican party give it the cold shoulder, or will it 
 take up the cause of irrigation, and gain the gratitude and the votes of the 
 irrigators? The Committee says: "We must now make our force effective in 
 the politics of the State, since in politics the Legislature to which we appeal 
 is generated. We must demonstrate the fact that there are political triumphs 
 : greater than the conquest of spoils, and this is to be done by going unitedly 
 into politics to stay until our rights are secured." 
 
 The Republican party has ever been the friend of progress. Under the 
 wise and beneficent policy of the party for twenty-four years the internal im- 
 provement of the country by the settlement of the public lands has been with- 
 out pamllel in the history of nations. As a part of this policy a Republican 
 Congress passed the Act of 1866, which the National Supreme Court has held 
 to be recognition of the doctrine of appropriation of water, setting the seal of 
 disapproval upon the uncongenial and inapplicable riparian theory, in the 
 
219 
 
 Pacific States and Territories. This policy has reared civilization in a desert 
 waste of country. All the irrigators ask is that this policy of the past be 
 written into the ineffaceable law of the land. 
 
 The Republican party cannot hesitate to perpetuate the system of develop- 
 ment framed and perfected by the statesmen whose glory was born of the 
 troublous times of civil strife and whose names live in every heart. 
 > The party cannot afford to repudiate the right of appropriation and take 
 back what was ireely aud generously given as the reward of energy, enter- 
 prise and industry. 
 
 Colusa Sun. 
 
 The Irrigration Bills. 
 
 A correspondent, who is, by the way, a friend of irrigation measures, in- 
 forms us that some of the friends of some of the members of the last State 
 Legislature, who saw fit to oppose all for the furthering of irrigation projects 
 in the State, are asserting that the Fresno Committee's bills proposed to take 
 all the water away from the man at the mouth, or lower end of a stream, 
 without compensation; that it proposed to make arbitrary districts, and tax 
 all land within the boundary, whether it could be irrigated or not. There 
 were other stated misrepresentations to the bills proposed, but these are the 
 chief, and afford us an opportunity of explaining the scope of the "District" 
 bill, the most important bill presented, and about the only one in which the 
 people of the Sacramento Valley are interested. 
 
 To form a district, a certain number of land owners must petition the Board 
 of Supervisors of the county in which the largest amount of land is situated, 
 setting out boundaries, etc. The Board must then fix a day for the hearing, 
 and give proper notice. At the date of hearing, the Board is authorized to 
 take testimony, and to include land on the outside that may be irrigated by 
 the proposed work, or leave out all land that is shown cannot be irrigated, 
 although the same might be in the center of a district. Towns are thus left 
 out. After the district has thus been formed, it requires the written consent 
 of iwo-ihirds of the land owners, owning two-thirds of the land, to confirm the 
 district. It will be seen that this arrangement protects the small owners 
 against the large ones, and the large ones against small ones. After the dis- 
 trict has been formed, and Trustees elected by the people, it can go on with 
 ordinary work, but if it shall become necessary to go in debt and issue bonds^ 
 it must again have the consent of the two-thirds, as above set out. 
 
 The bill proposed to condemn and pay for everything that stood in the 
 way of the accomplishment of these ends. If every man on a stream below a 
 proposed canal had a right to fix the price of his own damage, or to refuse to 
 allow any water taken out, according to his whim, it is very evident that 
 there would never be any irrigation. 
 
 The gentlemen, who, at the dictation of a few cattle kings, threw themselves 
 across the path of California's progress, shall never escape the responsibility 
 of that act while we have the power to draw pen across paper. It is not a 
 
220 
 
 question of a difference of opinion. The men who acted in the Sr nite as the 
 attorneys for those who would rather see thousands of square miles of Cali- 
 fornia's most fertile lands — with water — a vast cattle ranch, feeding one cow 
 to forty acre.", than see it covered with vineyards and orange groves and 
 orchards and grass plots, supporting and making rich and happy a family on 
 each forty acres, admitted that it was a great question, admitted that legisla- 
 tion was necessary, but they stubbornly fought against time to keep the bills* 
 from reaching a position where they could be even amended. Thay fought 
 not like Senator?, but like attorneys; they fought to keep the bills from being 
 considered. It is no part of a Senator's duty to stammer and repeat^, and read 
 long extracts, and look back ut the clock, and remark how slowly it moves, in 
 order to keep a measure, he admits to be of vital interest to the State, from 
 being considered. 
 
 We are willing to stand by those Fresno bills, and believe we can defend 
 them against all the world, especially in the District bill, which is of more 
 direct interest to this section of the S'ate, and we shall be pleased to explain 
 to any one the provisions of the bill5\ We mast put this country in a condi- 
 tion where wo will not be dependent on a single crop. We must fix it so that 
 it can be depended upon for a crop each year of cereals, of grass, of fruit, or 
 anything the farmer may think at the time will be profitable. 
 
 Stockton Daily Independent. 
 
 The Irrigcators. 
 
 In Fresno, on Monday, the Executive Committee of the State Irrigation 
 Convention signed an aidress to the people in behalf of the movement they 
 represent. The address recites that the committee framed bills to be acted 
 on by the last legisl iture, and intended to place irrigation among the perma- 
 nent policies of the S:ate. 
 
 The irrigationists received vigorous support from many newspapers, and 
 -worked hard to obtain the aid of legislators. 
 
 The few riparian owners who oppose the use of water for irrigation, con- 
 trolling a small minority in the house, filibustered to hinder there the pass- 
 age of our bills. 
 
 The committee advises properly that the votes of irrigators be withheld 
 from these filibusters when they appear again as candidates for office, advice 
 which, if followed, will result disastrously to the ambitions of this county's 
 Democratic represntatives in the last senate. Attention is called to instruct- 
 ive figures showing the comparative settlement of Eastern and California 
 Talleys. Although thousands of acres of desert lauds have been reclaimed 
 and made to yield an export product, the total acreage so redeemed is insig- 
 nificant beside that remaining in its virgin poverty. 
 
 With the same density of population as the basin of the St. Lawrence the 
 Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys would contain 1,85G,000 souls; and in- 
 creasing until the valley of the Delaware rate were reached, the population 
 
221 
 
 -would be 10,208,000, or near ten millions more people than are here now. 
 That such a number of people sball be brought iuto these two magnificent 
 valleys; that their energies shall be given to cultivation of the soil, home 
 l)uildiug aud trade baildjug; that they shall invest in the vaUeys ten times as 
 many millions of dollars as their own numbers aggregate, contributing their 
 purchasing wealth to Stockton and other cities located convenienlly where 
 nature has afforded superior facilities for manufacture and commerce, and 
 adding to the State's single metropolis of San Francisco half a dozen interior 
 cities of metropolitan importance; that (his shall come about with the time 
 of one man's life, may seem a wild dream, but it is no less possible than the 
 building of San Francisco in as little time, or the greater advancement, dur- 
 ing an equal period, of the great cities and some of the valleys of the E.ist. 
 But it cannot be done without irrigation. 
 
 Only with irrigation can crops be raised on much of this bare land in the 
 valley areas, because ot the dry atmosphere and light and fickle rainfalls, but 
 with irrigation the desert " may be made to blossom like a rose." 
 
 Since the last session of the Legislature the irrigators have gained strength. 
 There has grown in their favor an intelligent and firmly established sentiment 
 that the bounty of nature should be used in the two great valleys of this great 
 State to bring the greatest good to the greatest number, and that, though the 
 law may now protect riparian ownership and the barrenness of the desert, it 
 should be made to declare for an irrigation policy, enabling the cultivation 
 on this now arid soil, of the generous crops water will assure, and the dis- 
 placement of desert dreariness by the cheerfulness and prosperity of an in- 
 dustrious and a loyal people who shall be to the State an additional element 
 of wealth and strength. 
 
 The further settlement aud development of the San Joaquin valley must 
 repound to the commercial growth of Stockton, and irrigation measures for 
 San Joaquin county itself could be pursued to decided advantage. 
 
 Sacramento Record-Union. 
 
 The vast importance of the irrigation question in California can scarcely 
 be over-estimated It is taking form now for new presentation to the next 
 Legislature, when it is to be hoped that it will receive more careful, dispas- 
 sionate and statesman-like consideration than it met with in 1884. It ought 
 not be entangled with slickens, politics, ambition and strife for place. It 
 must, if well considered and justly determined, be adjudged upon its own 
 merits and tree from any other influences. We have already expressed our 
 opinion as to the duty of the State. It has duties in the premises, and, 
 aside from the determination of the issues between riparianists and aporop- 
 riators, the least of these is to provide a storage system for the surplus waters 
 of winter, and the retention for use of the melting snows of the higher alti- 
 tudes. 
 
222 
 
 Kern County Gazette- 
 
 The advent of another political campaign, involving issues segregated from 
 questions of national interest, brings into prominence matters concerning the 
 State as a distinct community. We have already had occasion to advert to the 
 surpassing importance of the irrigation problem. Neither business men nor 
 politicians can afford to ignore it. The water question is forcing itself to the 
 topmost of all questions of the day. We have loug since endeavored to make 
 it evident to business men that we must populate and develop the interior if 
 we would create a wealthy commercial centre here. The southern half of the 
 State, composed largely of desert lands, is bsing rapidly settled and improved 
 by increasing irrigation. The existing controversy as to whether the riparian 
 law or the law of appropriation is to be the law of the land involves either the 
 discontinuance or perpetuation of irrigation. That the law of appropriation 
 ought to have been adopted originally both lor mining and agricultural pur- 
 poses, no intelligent person will question. Whether it was adopted, is for 
 the Court to decide. Whether it will be the law of the future will be for the 
 people to decide. Whatever may have been the intention of our first law 
 makers, and whatever may have been in the minds of our earlier judges, as to 
 the operation of the common law upon our water system, it is, nevertheless, 
 true that not only farmers, but lawyers, and even eminent judges, have from 
 the very earliest time, believed that the first in time was in right, and that 
 the ownership of the bank gave no right to water, without actual appropria- 
 tion and use. Acting upon this belief, whether right or wrong, thousands 
 and tens of thousands have settled in the State, and are to-day depending for 
 food, shelter and raiment upon water rights supposed to have been acquired 
 by appropriation. This state of affairs has grown out of the irresistible ne- 
 cessities of the people, and the condition of the country. Not a yard of ditch 
 would ever have been constructed, not of drop of water would ever have been 
 diverted if it could have been avoided. With the growth of population, 
 the necessity grows. Each day adds to its force. To the necessities of 
 a whole people everything must yield. A nation has never existed which 
 has not by revolution, either peaceful or otherwise, destroyed whatever 
 impediments to its necessary growth may have crept into its body of law. 
 In this country of popular elections the peaceful methods of righting public 
 wrongs are through the legislatures and the courts. With a judiciary nearly 
 evenly divided as to laws of water rights, each side pursuing a separate 
 process of reasoning in arriving at its conclusion, who shall say which is 
 right and which is wrong, so far as pure logic or technical construction is con- 
 cerned. Without invading the sacredness of the judicial conscience, now 
 advancing the control of the judicial mind by popular clamor, we venture to 
 precfict that the aggregated voice of the people, driven to unanimity by the 
 necessities oi the situation, will eventually determine this grave question. 
 No judge is to be censured or questioned for a decision rendered according 
 to the lights of his own intellect. No candidate for judicial office is to be 
 pledged to any policy or upon any legal question. But this much is to h& 
 
223 
 
 gathered from judicial history. When the two great political parties of the 
 country were divided upon great questions, involving opposite constructions 
 of the Federal Constitution, the great popular majority through its chosen 
 appointing power, selected the Supreme Justices of the United States, from 
 among those distinguished jurists who held well known views upon consti- 
 tntional policy and construction, in harmony with the popular demand. 
 
 We think, without violating the del'cacy due to candidates for judicial 
 office, that we may not only go to the polls and vote for Judges who are well 
 known to coincide with our views upon thj laws of appropriation, but we 
 may urge an(J influence others to do likewise. It is inevitable that the will 
 of the people expressed through the ballot box will sooner or latter determine 
 the question. There is no time like the present. 
 
 Kern County Gazette. 
 
 Tiie Hilon.tgom.evy Grant. 
 
 Nearly thirty years ago a scheme was put through the Legislature, which, 
 npon its face, promised to be a great public improvement, calculated to 
 reclaim and improve an immense body of land in the lower San Joaquin 
 valley at private expense. It was supposed at that time that the swamp and 
 overflowed lands in Fresno, Tulare and Kern, extending from Bakersfield 
 into Fresno county, were almost the only available agricultural lands in that 
 section of the State. A glance at the map of the State will show the immense 
 tract of land affected by an act passed in 1857, the State granting to private in- 
 dividuals the odd sections of all the swamp lands in Tulare valley, conditioned 
 upon their reclaiming the entire body of swamp lands. The act provided 
 for the construction of canals of sufficient width and depth to afford a con- 
 venient passage for boats of eighty tons burden. It also required that the 
 lands should be so drained and leveed as to make them susceptible of culti- 
 vation. Failure to comply with these conditions was to work a forfeiture of 
 the grant. The grantees of the State were not to have any of these lands 
 until they had completely reclaimed all of the land and constructed a navigable 
 canal, extending from Kern river to the San Joaquin river. In 1862 the 
 grantees obtained the passage of a supplementary act, which gave them more 
 favorable conditions by dividing the lands to be reclaimed into three districts, 
 upon the reclamation of either of which the title to odd sections thereon 
 should vest in the grantees. The act also extended other favorable conditions 
 to the grantees, not contained in the original act, but the leading conditions 
 being those which were stated to be the consideration, for the grant still 
 remained the same — namely, the reclamation of the lands, by so draining 
 and leveeing as to make them susceptible of cultivation; and the construction 
 of navigable canals of sufficient width and depth to afford passage for boats 
 of eighty tons burden. 
 
 Ten years passed. The ship canal remained, as it still remains, a creature 
 of the imagination, existing not even on paper. The entire body of laud 
 15 
 
224 
 
 was still an unclaimed wilderness of bog, water and tules. No attempt ha^ 
 been made at reclamation. The supplementary act of 1862 had provided 
 that the Governor and Surveyor-General should approve and certify to the 
 reclamation before any title should vest in the grantees. In order to obtain 
 this certificate a dam was commenced, designed to tempararily hold back the 
 waters of Kern river until a report could be secured, establishing the fact of 
 reclamation. Even this subterfuge was a failure. The dam would not hold 
 the water. After waiting vainly for a month or two for the grantees to secure 
 a temporary stoppage of the overflow, the person appointed to examine the 
 law and ascertain whether or not the law had been complied with, was 
 induced to make a dishonest report. This, combined with other influences, 
 more readily imagined than defined, procured the issuance in 1867 of a patent 
 for ninety thousand acres of land to the grantees. Not feeling secure in the 
 fruits of their fraud in 1873, the grantees secured the passage of an act reliev- 
 ing them from the construction of the navigable canals, but were unable to 
 avoid the insertion of a proviso requiring them to reclaim the land, and 
 making such reclamation the distinct and only consideration for the grant. 
 
 In 1878 the patent thus issued corruptly and fraudulently was set aside and 
 declared void by decree of the District Court, and after years in the Supreme 
 Court the decree of the lower court has been finally approved. In the mean- 
 while the grantees in 1878 resorted to the Legislature. They obtained the 
 adoption of a law giving them the lands described in the fraudulent patent 
 upon proof that they had expended one dollar per acre, instead of requiring 
 as originally contemplated, ship canals and complete and permanent recla- 
 mation. Even here the usual propensity of the grantees, to get something 
 for nothing, again crops out, in the provision that the one dollar per aere 
 expended should include State and county taxes. After the passage of this 
 Act the grand finale in this drama of thirty years' duration takes place, when 
 the State is defrauded of nearly a hundred thousand acres of land, by proofs 
 under the Act of 1878. But what is the epilogue? Why, instead of becom- 
 ing the owners of a body of reclaimed land susceptible of cultivation, and 
 threaded with navigable canals they suddenly became riparian owners. They 
 attempted to transform the gift of the State into a weapon of destruction. 
 Not only in Kern county, but in Tulare, and in Fresno, irrigation and recla- 
 mation go hand in hand. The irrigation of the desert reclaims the swamp 
 and renders it fit for cultivation. But those grants of the State are indepen- 
 dent of State law or State control. They know no law, except their own de- 
 sires. And what are their desires? No one can tell their limit. We know 
 some of them. They wish to stop the diversion of water from all the rivers 
 of Kern, Tulare and Fresno. They wish Kern, Buena Vista and Tulare lakes 
 declared navijgable, because such declaration would stop the diversion of wa- 
 ters from the rivers. 
 
 Every acre of the land given to these people was granted to the State, with 
 the expectation that it would be reclaimed. The good faith of the State is 
 pledged to that effect. The policy of the State, as shown by itts laws, for the 
 
225 
 
 disposition of swamp lauds, is to effectuate their reclamation. Are these 
 lands reclaimed? By no means. They are to-day in nearly the same condi- 
 tion in which they were thirty years ago. The floods of the rivers overspread 
 them from time to time, limited in some degree by the reduction of volume 
 of water caused by the diversion for irrigations above. To what base use is 
 the generous gift of the State now being prostituted? Why some of the 
 grantees now propose not to reclaim these lands, but to invoke the aid of the 
 State and of the United States, to make them a perpetual swamp, and to de- 
 clare Kern, Buena Vista and Tulare lakes navigable. The accomplishment 
 of their object, the success of their efforts involve the annihilation of every 
 farm watered from the tributary rivers. Water cannot be taken from streams 
 emptying into navigable lakes. The entire Tulare valley must cease irriga- 
 tion. Tulare, Kern and Buena Vista lakes must be maintained full to over- 
 flowing, All this is but another phase of the irrepressible conflict between 
 appropriation and riparianism. Appropriation means irrigation, develop- 
 ment and population for this valley; riparianism means an uncultivated des- 
 ert, surrounding a great malarial swamp, fit only for frog wallows. 
 
 The Colusa Sun. 
 
 The Irrigationists ]>Iove. 
 
 The committee having in charge the legislation marked out by the conven- 
 tion held at Fresno, in November, 1884, met at Fresno, last Monday, and 
 adopted an address to the friends of irrigation throughout the State, and 
 called a convention to meet at San Francisco on the 20th of May. It also 
 recommended the formation of clubs throughout the State, for the purpose 
 of making the political parties take up the question and place the friends of 
 the proposed measures on the State and Legislature tickets. The members 
 of these clubs will be pledged to support no one not sound on irrigation. 
 That is placed above politics. And why should it not be? What is there be- 
 tween the two parties so important as the fixing for the tens of thousands of 
 happy homes? Who of all of us has felt any difference between the adminis- 
 trations of George Perkins and George Stoneman? But we all feel a differ- 
 ence between half of the State lying waste and that half covered over with 
 pastures, and orchards, and vineyards, and gardens, and fields of golden 
 grain. We all feel a difference between having a State with a population of 
 five inhabitants to the square mile and a possible population of 105 to the 
 square mile ! In Southern California there are miles and miles, and millions 
 upon millions of acres of dreary wastes, which, with the water now running 
 to waste put over them, would support a dense population. The Sacramento 
 Valley, although capable of producing a fair crop of smaU grain on the aver- 
 age season, is subject to short crop, and at best, most of the land can be cul- 
 tivated but once in two years. With irrigation, it can be made to support al- 
 most one hundred times as many people as it can without it. Except along 
 the margins of the river, where winter flooding can be depended upon, our 
 
226 
 
 lands in this valley must be consigned to small grain. Fruit, it is true, can 
 be grown upon mogt of the land with good cultivation, but the production of 
 any orchard, year after year, can be more than doubled by once flooding dur- 
 ing the winter. If then, an orchard will net $100 an acre a year, without 
 flooding, it will net more than $200 with flooding, and does not this make it 
 worth while to work for some laws that will promote irrigation? What po- 
 litical party can give you a difference of $50 to $100 an acre in the produc- 
 tions of the soil? "Water can be put over about all the lands of the Sacra- 
 mento Valley for $3 or $4 an acre, if we had the proper kind of laws. We 
 mean that the canals can be made tor this amount, and it will take, perhaps, 
 as much more to fix the land for it; but what would be $10, or even $20, an 
 acre for land all ready to water at any season of the year? Look on the land 
 Roberts has been selling in the neighborhood of Colusa! It has sold as 
 high as $110 an acre, with the privilege of a ditch that will flood when the 
 river is^twelve or fifteen feet, without being prepared for the water! Does any 
 one suppose that it would have brought $80, or even $50, an acre with no pos- 
 sibility ot flooding it? We say, without fear of contradiction, that it would 
 not. We have proof, then, that the possibility of flooding at high water has 
 added at least $60 an acre to the value of land; and if so, how much more 
 would land be worth, fixed to flood at any time? 
 
 This is at home in'the Sacramento Valley, where we have a fair average 
 rainfall. There are portions of the State absolutely without water. It can be 
 made fully as valuable as we can make the lands of the Sacramento Valley. 
 We have some 64,000,000 acres of valley lands to be benefited i y water. A sys- 
 tem of irrigation will add $100 an acre on the average to the value of this 
 land, aside from improvements, or $6,400,000,000 to the value of the land of 
 the State. It would do more. It would give Colusa a population greater 
 than that of Sacramento at present; it would give Sacramento a population 
 greater than the present population of San Francisco, and give San Francisco 
 and Oakland a population greater than that of New York and Brooklyn, with 
 other cities increased in like proportion! This would add as much more to 
 the wealth of the State. Then the added improvements on farms, the added 
 orchards and vineyards, with the personal property thereon, would add as 
 much more, so that we can say that the irrigationists hold out to you an added 
 wealth to the State of $19,200,000,000, with a capacity to support 10,000,000 
 to 15,000,000 more people than it can otherwise support! 
 
 There are boys who will now read this and live to wonder how we, an en- 
 thusiast, fell so far short of the mark! 
 
 Go south and look at irrigated land selling for as much as $500 an acre, 
 and the same kind of land a barren waste. Look right back at Colusa to the 
 Boberts tract, and others to which we have alluded! Go, ask Judge Bridg- 
 ford. Dr. Belton, J. B. DeJarnatt, Dr. Gray, Jasper Ford, R. T. Powell, J. 
 H. Pope, L. L. Hicok, Capt. Ritchey, A. E. Potter, Oscar Robinson, Mrs. 
 Banks, and others, right around Colusa, how much they would take per acre, 
 and be forever barred from water! 
 
227 
 
 And when you have looked there, and when you have asked these people, 
 who have as yet a faint glimmering of what is ahead, then come and show to 
 us, if you can, that we have drawn on the imagination for a single figure set 
 down! 
 
 And why cannot all this go ahead without political action? 
 
 Our Courts hold that the common law of England, except where we have 
 statutory law to the contrary, is the law of this State. Under that law no 
 man had a right to divert water from a stream without returning it to the 
 stream as pure as he found it. Each bank owner had a right to demand that 
 the full volume of the stream flowed past his land. This put in practice 
 would, of course preclude the possibility of irrigation at all. Now about all 
 the bank owners— otherwise the riparian owners — favor taking the water out 
 of the streams, but there are a few end men — men who own land at the ends 
 of the same streams — who see big money in claiming that the water shall not 
 be diverted. There is no law for paying these end men a fair compensation 
 for what they have, and move on. They have the power to say, not only 
 that there shall be no further progress in California, but that the millions of 
 dollars invested in canals, the hundreds of millions of property dependent on 
 diversions of water already made, shall be thrown away— to say that the mag- 
 nificent orange groves, the orchards and vineyards and grass fields, depend- 
 ent on the water, shall once more become a desert! 
 
 No man shall stand in front of the car of progress! 
 
 The Contra Costa Gazette. 
 
 The Benefits of Irrig-ation. 
 
 A State convention composed of all who favor the platform and objects of 
 the Fresno Convention of Irrigators will be held in San Francisco on Thurs- 
 day, May 20th. No supporter of riparian ownership will be permitted to 
 participate in the proceedings. The convention will effect a permanent central 
 organization, to perfect the scheme of laws already prepared by the Executive 
 Committee and to urge them to success in the next Legislature. In their ad- 
 dress to the members of the Riverside and Fresno Irrigation Conventions, the 
 Executive Committee state that great areas are already made fruitful, and en- 
 terprising thousands under the protection of the doctrine of appropriation, 
 produce a generous livelihood for themselves and a great surplus for export, 
 which adds to the commonwealth. Millions of dollars are invested in canals 
 and ditches primarily devoted to irrigation, while the systems which were 
 built for hydraulic mining debouch upon plains that are athirst, and used for 
 irrigation, will create greater wealth than gilded the dreams of their projec- 
 tors. 
 
 But the acre age already subjected to irrigation is insignificant compared 
 with the desert still unreclaimed. Our great interior valleys contain a terri- 
 tory of 64,000,000 acres, which is one and a fourth the size of Great Bri- 
 tain with her 30,000,000 people, and yet this immense territory, an empire in 
 
228 
 
 itself, is inhabited by only 284,000 souls. The present unoccupied area of 
 these valleys should support over 10,000,000 people, a result which can be 
 brought about only by irrigation. 
 
 The conflict between riparian ownership and irrigation will doubtless be 
 stubborn and prolonged. Some individual rights will be trespassed upon, 
 and a certain amount of injustice will be done. But the people of California 
 see more clearly every day the necessity of irrigation in her great valleys if 
 they are to be built up and are to add to the population, wealth and resources 
 of the State. 
 
 Tulare Register. 
 
 Myrick vs. McKee, 
 
 Friends of irrigation will not soon forget the famous decision by the Su- 
 preme Court, rendered in the case of Lux vs. Haggin, on the eve of the elec- 
 tion two years ago, by which the ultra riparian doctrine was made, for the 
 time being at any rate, the law of this land. That decision was rendered 
 just in the nick of time to help the election of certain judicial candidates," 
 and designedly so rendered, we have no manner of doubt, and that that help 
 was most effective is beyond question. Now our Supreme Court consists in 
 seven fat, sleek and well paid judges, of whom three are wise, and four are 
 otherwise. As soon as we saw the text of that famous decision we telegraphed 
 to the Secretary of State to ascertain what judges went out of office soonest 
 and when. We received arswer that the terms of office of Justices M. H. 
 Myrick and S. B. McKee terminate next November. Of these two, Myrick 
 was found upon the side of eulightened and progressive jurisprudence, in 
 favor of the due appropriation of water for purposes of irrigation, and strong- 
 ly opposed to such a construction of the law of riparian rights as should ren- 
 der that law unsuited to the natural condition of soil and climate that- God 
 established on this Coast ages before man was created. On the other hand, 
 Mr. Justice S. B. McKee, holding in his hands the balance of power, the op- 
 portunity to decide what should be the law of this land, in a separate con- 
 curring opinion, more riparian if anything than that of his three liparian 
 associates, fixed upon this dry and parched State the riparian law of wet and 
 misty England, a law that has been obsolete at home for nearly a hundred 
 ye<trs. 
 
 In our very next issue after the rendering of this decision, we took the ground 
 that irrigators must make the election of Supreme Court Justices an issue in 
 the next campaign. We took the ground that when the highest authorities in 
 the courts of last resort disagreed as to what was law, the people had a right 
 to determine at the polls what they would have as law. We still adhere to 
 that proposition, believing in its wisdom and justice. It therefore follows 
 that Justice Myrick, having shown himself upon the right side of this all-im- 
 portant question, should be re-elected to the position he now holds, but Jus- 
 tice McKee having shown that he holds opinions most unfortunate for one in 
 
229 
 
 Tiis position to hold, should come down out of a place he is unfitted to fill, 
 and render it up to a more progressive and broader minded jurist. Justice 
 Myrick should get the vote of every friend to irrigation; Justice McKee 
 should not get a single one. 
 
 Oakland Times. 
 
 The irrigationists are evidently determined to win their fight in the next 
 legislature. They have gone to work in the right way by organizing in every 
 town and village in the southern and middle portion of the State, where irri- 
 gation is a necessity. They have men of brains at the head of their organi- 
 zation, and as these men know every law-maker who opposed the measure 
 during the last session, it is very certain that but few of them will be re- 
 elected and they should not be. 
 
 Dixon (Solano) Tribune. 
 
 There is no public question that is of more vital consequence to California 
 to-day, than that of irrigation. The development of a greater part of the 
 southern counties of the State, as well as Tulare, Fresno, Colusa, and other 
 sections; admirably adapted to fruit and grains, depend in a great measure 
 upon the proper solution of this question. Solano is only indirectly interest- 
 ed, but the Tribune will cheerfully lend its influence and support to that 
 large body of citizens who are interested in securing such legislation as will 
 promote the success of a practicable irrigation scheme. The water courses 
 of California now run wastefully to the sea. Every drop of water so wasted, 
 ought to be utilized in fertilizing and increasing the productiveness of a large 
 area of land that is now comparatively valueless. 
 
 Resources of California. 
 
 Riparian Rights. 
 
 The people of California are now entirely awake to the importance of irri- 
 gation, and the necessity for laws establishing and regulating the use of the 
 waters of the natural streams of the State for that purpose is generally con- 
 ceded. This sentiment is bound to find expression through the Jaw-making 
 powers, which will result in defining the rights of irrigators and riparian 
 claimants. This is a question in which the vital interests of our State are 
 involved, for without irrigation an immense area of fertile and valuable land 
 could never be cultivated and would remain barren as the Desert of Sahara. 
 We are in favor of the condemnation of the rights of all riparian owners 
 under the old common law; an equitable compensation for such rights; and 
 the establishment by legislation of the right to use the waters of the natural 
 streams of this State for this purpose of irrigation; and such other regula- 
 tions as will prevent the monopoly of water and the unjust taxation of those 
 who make a lawful use of it. 
 
230 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 A New Paper. 
 
 We have received the first number of the Irrigator, a paper published at 
 the new town, Selma, in Fresno county. It is respectable in appearance^ 
 and, in its journalistic merits, highly creditable to the editor and manager, 
 W. T. Lyon. Speaking of the name selected for his paper, he says: "After 
 considering all names suggested and consulting with some of the leading cit- 
 izens of the section, we concluded to give the paper a distinctive title, one 
 that would be suggestive of its surroundings, so we fixed on the name Irriga' 
 tor. Irrigation is the great backbone of our section. Without water our 
 land would be a desert waste, but with it it is a blooming garden. Every 
 farmer in the district is an irrigator, and every business man in town is inter- 
 ested in sustaining and extending the blessings to be derived from irrigation; 
 therefore, as the mouthpiece of the farmers and business men, what more 
 suggestive title could we have assumed for our paper? " 
 
 Stockton Mail- 
 
 Let us Irrig'ate. 
 
 The San Francisco Alia has performed a valuable service to the whole State 
 by taking the lead in the advocacy of irrigation and maintaining the position 
 with its accustomed vigor. 
 
 This should be considered the question of all questions afi'ecting the vital 
 interests of California, with the exception of that of the expulsion of the 
 Chinese. Our State is not at present, take it all in all, developed up to more 
 than one-quarter of its possible productiveness. Nothing would develop it 
 so rapidly, so completely and so permanently as irrigation. It is sufficient 
 for present purposes to consider only the region contiguous to Stockton. 
 Stockton ought to have a population equal in numbers to the present popu- 
 lation of the city and county, and the county outside of the city should be 
 sustaining to-day in active agricultural, viticultural and horticultural indus- 
 tries fully thirty thousand people, instead of its present fifteen thousand, or 
 less. Nobody questions the outside possibilities of soil and climate. Old 
 citizens and recent acquisitions, pioneers and tenderfeet — all are agreed that 
 this will be a region of great productiveness some day. 
 
 The only question then is, how and when is the change to be brought 
 about. As to the how, it is plain that the only thing needful to make this 
 portion of the valley blossom like a rose the year round is water. Water,, 
 water everywhere, nor any drop for the famishing vegetable life seen every- 
 where during the summer months, is what impresses all first observers. The 
 rivers all run wastefully to the sea, while the plains on to which they might 
 easily be diverted are parched and forbidding. 
 
 There are three sources from which this portion of the valley might be 
 abundantly watered dming the entire dry season. One is on the Stanislana 
 
231 
 
 River, on the south, another is the Mokelumne, on the north, and the thircf 
 is the Salt Spring valley reservoir, between the two. It has been estimated 
 that for $150,000 the Stanislaus River could be made to irrigate 30,000 acres 
 of land. The increase in the value of the land resulting from irrigation 
 ■would more than double the cost of the lateral ditches. This will be done 
 some day, and the Mokelumne will also be made to serve the farmer and the 
 orchardist. What a change will be on the face of nature hereabout then. 
 This county can produce anything that is grown in the State, if only the 
 plants and trees are watered. 
 
 Why then let the rivers mock the plains and the soil withhold its most 
 precious bounties? The old riparian law might have been good enough for 
 England, but it is no more applicable to California than a law would be 
 forbidding the navigation of our rivers by any sort of craft but those pro- 
 pelled by sail. 
 
 Los Angeles Express. 
 
 Org'anize for Irrigation. 
 
 The living, burning question of the day in Southern California is the sub- 
 ject of irrigation. Upon this problem turns the future of our fair land- 
 Whether we shall continue to prosper and progress; whether the soil shall 
 continue to yield its crops; whether our population shall continue toincrease,^ 
 or whether our vast valleys shall be relegated to a desert state and the happy, 
 prosperous homes of our people be broken up, depends upon the issue be- 
 tween irrigation and ripadanism . Unless the waters which flow down to us 
 from the mountains are justly and equitably distributed among the people 
 who inhabit the lands, to which it belongs, instead of being held as a monop- 
 oly by a few riparian owners, these great agricultural and fruit-growing coun- 
 ties will perish. 
 
 Until the Supreme Court of the State announced the astounding doctrine 
 that the rule of the common law in England that running streams must be 
 allowed to flow unvexed to their mouths, must be enforced in California, 
 none but a few cattle kings and their retainers questioned the right of the 
 people to appropriate water for irrigation. Our condition in this regard is as 
 dissimilar to that of England as our mild and luxurious climate is to that of 
 Labrador. We had supposed that the common law of a country which the 
 courts should enforce is that body of customary law which has grown up 
 from the especial circumstances and necessities of the surrounding physical 
 conditions. But no, our court says the common law of England is the rule 
 of decision, and that therefore there shall be no irrigation. It is true that 
 the statute adopting the common law as the rale of decision provides that 
 such shall be the rule only when the laws of the State do not provide other- 
 wise; and it is true that the customary law of the State and many of the stat- 
 utes recognize the right of appropriation of water for irrigation, nevertheless 
 the broad proposition is laid down in Lux vs. Haggin that water cannot be 
 diverted from a running stream. 
 
232 
 
 Our readers will remember the action of the Kiverside and Fresno Irri- 
 vgatine: Convention, They will remember the labors of the committee ap- 
 pointed by the latter body to secure relief from the Legislature, and the fail- 
 ure owing to corrupt influences in the State Senate. 
 
 The Legislative Committee of the Fresno Convention have again met and a 
 -State Irrigating Convention has been decided upon. A plan of organization 
 has been agreed to whereby the great end may now be attained. 
 
 We repeat that the prosperity and the very life of Southern California is at 
 stake in this burning issue. Therefore let the people organize. We have 
 the power to enforce our demands upon both political parties. This is not a 
 political question, but it is a question that politicians dare not ignore. 
 
 Merced 'Express. 
 
 The Irrig-atien Convention. 
 
 It is probable that the proposed Irrigation Convention will noieet at San 
 Francisco, and will be composed of all classes interested in the development 
 of the interior of the State, whether directly engaged in irrigation or not. We 
 understand that the purpose of this convention is to exercise the consolidated 
 influence of those in favor of the right to appropriate the waters of 
 streams for agricultural purposes. We hope, in issuing a call for this con- 
 vention, that the committee will make it plainly understood that the contest 
 is against riparianism. The convention is to be essentially and emphatically 
 anti-riparian. A riparianist has no more place in this convention than a 
 •Republican has in a Democratic Convention, or vice versa. The convention 
 will represent those who look for a basis of action to the irrigation bills pre- 
 sented to the last session of the Legislature by the committee from the irriga- 
 »tion conventions, and who propose to be represented and served by officers 
 elected at the next election, holding views in harmony with them. Strong 
 legislative action is required. A constitutional amendment is needed to assert 
 the doctrine of appropriation and to pronounce the common law rule of ripa- 
 rian rights unsuited to our conditions and necessities as well for agricultural 
 as for mining purposes. Efl&cient legislation for the just regulation of the 
 use and distribution of water is of great importance. Wherever the water is 
 insuflBcient for all, economy in its use is a necessity, which should be en- 
 forced by legislative direction. And the towering necessity of all, is a gradual 
 change from election to election of the personel of the Supreme Court, so 
 that in time, instead of having a bench not in accord upon the great contro- 
 'Versy over the law of water rights, we shall have a unanimous court. A di- 
 vided court unsettles old law without establishing new. There is a remedy 
 for this. Make the court unanimous either upon one side or the other of the 
 •question. When the judges cannot agree upon great questions, how are they 
 to be finally determined? We are not now advocating the overthrow of a 
 <50urt in order to obtain one which will make law or usurp the powers of the 
 legislature. But what the law is, must be settled. Only a unanimous court 
 
233 
 
 <3an well establish it. The people are called upon to select the judiciary. 
 They are expecting to take part not only in electing them, but also in select- 
 ing the candidates of the great political parties. Party lines are not now, as 
 they were formerly, very strictly drawn in voting for judges. Learning, 
 ability and experience in a judicial candidate command support without re- 
 gard to partisan predilections. All other things being equal, however, party 
 ties have great control, and no man can justly be taken to task for voting in 
 such a case for his own party's candidate. Likewise without impropriety a 
 voter who believes that the future of the State lies in the establishment of 
 irrigation and putting an end to the present judicial delusion as to riparian 
 rights, will select from candidates for judicial position those who are not 
 tainted with riparian views. 
 
 Fresno Daily Evening Expositor. 
 
 The Lieaven Working^. 
 
 The leaven stirred into the body politic by means of the Irrigation Conven- 
 tion held in this city in 1884, and the Executive and Legislative Committees 
 appointed by it, is working finely, and the subject of irrigation is being in- 
 telligently discussed all over the State. The leading journals of the coast are 
 urging it as the leading issue before the people, and it seems now certain that 
 the political parties will recognize it as the dominant issue when their party 
 platforms are made. Even the close-fisted and stolid-headed money-bags and 
 merchants of San Francisco are beginning to see that it is to their interests 
 and the interest of their city to have the doctrine of riparianism wiped out, 
 and the people left free to divert the water over the barren, dry and treeless 
 plains to enrich and render it productive. They have been slow to learn, but 
 now that the light of truth has dawned upon their vision, we may safely 
 count upon at least their silent influence. 
 
 The wonderful results that have been accomplished in Fresno county by 
 irrigation has done much to bring about this revolution of sentiment. In 
 spite of opposition of all kinds, this county has continued to thrive, growing 
 from an unpopulated barren sand plain in 1874 to the proud position it now 
 holds, with its hundreds of thousands of acres under cultivation, embracing 
 thousands of acres of orchards, vineyards and alfalfa fields; peopled by thou- 
 sands of contented and intelligent families, all of whom are well on the high- 
 way to affluence. 
 
 A few at first were induced to try what could be done by the use of water. 
 They found that our apparently worthless soil could be made to produce 
 abundantly, and that this section was the natural home for the favorite fruits 
 of the world; that the vine thrived and yielded in quantity and quality fruit 
 that could nowhere on the globe be excelled, and that under the influence of 
 our cloudless summer skies, raisins rivalling those of Spain could be produc- 
 ed; that from the fruit of the vine, wines not excelled by the product of 
 France could be made, and that here were to be found all the elements need- 
 ed to maintain a dense population of thrifty people. They noised about their 
 
234 
 
 discovery, and others oame aud also succeeded, and they in turn induced^ 
 others to come, until Fresno county has become known to all the civilized 
 nations of the earth. 
 
 But the claim of the ranch owners on, the banks of the streams that they 
 owned all the water of the rivers sprung up. Common Law Judges held their 
 claims to be valid, aud a cloud was cast over water titles, and the appropria- 
 tion of water in other counties for irrigation purposes was stopped. 
 
 But the Fresno farmers paid no attention to these decisions. They felt 
 that they were unjust and not in accord with the fundamental principles of 
 our Government, so they took the water and prospered; but other localities,, 
 under the injunctions of the courts, were not so united, and not so well pre- 
 pared to defy the legal tribunals, so they have not progressed. 
 
 The Fresno Convention endeavored to secure the passage of laws that 
 would enable the people elsewhere to reap the benefits that were to be derived 
 from irrigation, but corrupt representatives and an indifferent public made 
 the effort a failure; but the seed then sown is producing fruit, and it is now 
 certain that the needed laws will soon be enrolled in the statutes of the State, 
 and then an era of prosperity will dawn that will culminate in making San 
 Francisco the second commercial city of the land, and the Sacramento and 
 San Joaquin valleys the richest and most populous portions of the country. 
 The elements are at hand to accomplish these ends. 
 
 Los Angeles Express. 
 
 A Stirrings Irrig'ation Address. 
 
 The call issued by the Legislative Committee of the State Irrigation Con- 
 yention is worthy the attention of every citizen. The question involved is 
 of vast importance to the producers of the State, and through them to all 
 other classes. Upon the water supply depends almost wholly the prosperity 
 and future development of Southern California. A few years ago State Engi- 
 neer Hall devised a system of reservoirs, which if adopted would render it 
 unnecessary to depend almost wholly, as now, upon the streams. But even 
 if a reservoir plan was adopted by the Legislature, and carried out by aid of 
 State funds, the rights of the people in relation to the waters of the streams 
 would remain the same, and these should never be surrendered. The Su- 
 preme Court may sustain the English riparian law (which is wholly inappli- 
 cable to the peculiar condition of the^water supply of California), but the 
 people can put on the bench and in the Legislature, men who will be govern- 
 ed by the needs of California rather than by the common law of England ^ 
 and to do this it is necessary to organize. 
 
235 
 Los Angeles Express. 
 
 Tlie Q,uestion of tlte Hour. 
 
 The right of the people to the use of the water of our rivers and streams 
 ■for the purpose of irrigation is not a political question. It is one that con- 
 cerns all parties, and which virtually affects all the material interests of the 
 State. If the demands of the riparianists are to prevail, the majority of the 
 producers of this State will be in a pitiable condition. They will in many 
 cases be deprived of the use of water now appropriated by them, and be 
 forced to develop, at great expense, other sources of supply, and this in some 
 localities, if not impracticable, will involve expense greater than the value of 
 the land to be irrigated, a result equivalent to financial ruin. 
 
 Southern California has shown what can be done in the way of reclaiming 
 arid lands by means of irrigating ditches. All the prosperous colonies of this 
 county have been built upon the right of the people to divert the water of 
 running streams for the purpose of irrigation. The whole country would be 
 a desert to-day were it not for the exercise of this right. The water of the 
 rivers has made the dry soil fruitful and has changed a treeless and unpro- 
 ductive region into one of the garden spots of the earth. 
 
 California is just entering upon an era of great prosperity. The thoughts 
 of thousands of people at the East are now turned towards this Coast, and if 
 the question of water supply is settled in favor of irrigators' rights we will 
 soon have a very great increase of population. Dakota, notwithstanding its 
 winters of bitter cold, has doubled its population in five years; certainly Cal- 
 ifornia, with its genial warmth and clear skies, should be able to do as well. 
 When the laws of the State in relation to the rights of irrigators are brought 
 into harmony with the needs of the people, and a feeling of security as to 
 water rights is established, the inducements offered to settlers will be greatly 
 augmented. 
 
 It is probable that the nominees of both parties for legislative and judicial 
 positions at the coming election will favor the early settlement of this ques- 
 tion in accordance with common sense rather than common law, and as the 
 interests of the people require; but this is a matter that cannot safely be left 
 to chance. The people must organize irrespective of party, so as to be in a 
 position to demand the nomination of men known to be in the interests of 
 the people. It is not a question that need to bring distraction into politics; 
 on the contrary, it should have the effect of toning down political asperities 
 and making the campaign a contest between parties which, on one of the 
 leading questions at least, hold each other in mutual respect. 
 
 Oakland Tribune. 
 
 Iriigratien to tbe Front. 
 
 The address of the State Irrigation Committee, published in another col- 
 umn, is food for political digestion. There is no announcement for the 
 formation of an independent political party, but there is an intensity of pur- 
 
236 
 
 pose pervading the address foreshadowing a distinct political organization in- 
 the not distant future. 
 
 Republican party leaders had best give the subject serious consideration. 
 Here is an organized movement of a whole community to be met in the field 
 of politics. Will the Republican party give it the cold shoulder, or will it 
 take up the cause of irrigation, and gain the gratitude and the votes of the 
 irrigators? The Committee says: "We must now make our force effective 
 in the politics of the State, since in politics the Legislature to which we 
 appeal, is generated. We must demonstrate the fact that there are political 
 triumphs greater than the conquest of spoils, and that is to be done by going 
 unitedly into politics to stay until our rights are secured." 
 
 The Republican party has ever been the friend of progress. Under the 
 wise and beneficent policy of the party for twenty-four years, the internal 
 improvement of the country by the settlement of the public lands has been 
 without parallel in the history of nations. As a part of this policy a Re- 
 publican Congress passed the act of 1866, which the National Supreme 
 Court has held to be recognition of the doctrine of appropriation of water, 
 setting the seal of disapproval upon the uncongenial and inapplicable ripa- 
 rian theory, in the Pacific States and Territories. This policy has reared 
 civilization in a desert waste of country. All the irrigators ask is that this 
 policy of the past be written into the ineffaceable law of the land. 
 
 The Republican party cannot hesitate to perpetuate the system of develop- 
 ment framed and perfected by the statesmen whose glory was born of the 
 troublous times of civil strife and whose names live in every heart. 
 
 The party cannot afford to repudiate the right of appropriation, and take 
 back what was freely and generously given as the reward of energy, enter- 
 prise and industry. 
 
 Oakland Evening Tribune. 
 
 Tlie Irrigation Issue. 
 
 The next Republican State Convention will have to deal with a new issue 
 which has not heretofore had political consideration. The irrigaton interests 
 extending throughout the State, but mainly in the San Joaquin valley and 
 the southern counties, have gradually attained a magnitude hitherto unknown. 
 They are organizing for effective work in the next campaign, with the inten- 
 tion of forcing themselves into politics and demanding whatever their power 
 will enable them to take in the way of measures for their protection. 
 
 In view of this fact it will be well to consider who they are, what are their 
 claims, and why they venture into the domain of politics. 
 
 Irrigation is carried on all over the State, but the principal irrigating coun- 
 ties are San Bernardino, San Diego, Los Angelais, Kern, Tulare, Fresno, 
 Merced, Stanislaus and San Joaquin. Most of the land in these counties is 
 of the character known as desert land, and is unfit for cultivation without ir- 
 rigation. The population thrives by irrigation. Irrigation is carried on 
 through canals diverting water from the various streams. The right to use 
 
237 
 
 the water is secured by appropriation loDg sanctioned by usage and custom- 
 and by the Courts, and embodied finally into the Code. So absolutely is ir- 
 rigation dependent on the right of appropriation that in a legal sense the 
 ■words are almost interchangeable. Without appropriation water cannot be 
 had for irrigation. 
 
 There is an old common law doctrine that the waters of a stream must flow 
 within the banks without diversion, and under this doctrine the use of its 
 water for irrigation or any other than stock or domestic purposes is forbidden. 
 But no one imagined that this law was or would ever become a rule of prop- 
 erty in this State, because it was inapplicable to our dry climate and meager 
 rainfall. 
 
 A little over a year ago, however, three Judges of the Supreme Court held 
 for appropriation, whilst the majoritj^ four of the Judges, resurrected the 
 old English common law doctrine, holding that the water of a stream cannot 
 be used for irrigation if any one owning land upon its banks says no. 
 
 At this a common fear seized everyone connected with irrigation, lest this 
 should become the established rule of property in the State, to the utter de- 
 struction of irrigation. 
 
 They immediately appealed to the Legislature for some protection, but ob- 
 tained nothing. Since then their alarm has increased to almost a panic. 
 They are arming for a fight. Their just demands have been denied, and 
 they are about to use their united power to take by political force that which 
 they are refused. 
 
 These irrigating counties poll about thirty-three thousand votes. They are 
 greatly exercised over this question. Irrigation is their bread and butter. 
 Politics naturally sink out of sight with a people under such conditions. 
 The Eepublican State Convention ought to recognize the justice of the irri- 
 gators' claims and take a stand for the right of appropriation if it would se- 
 cure the lion's share of this vote. Alameda county ought to send a delega- 
 tion to the Convention who are properly impressed with the importance of 
 developing the interior by irrigation. The flourishing country builds up a 
 populous city. 
 
 San Francisco Examiner. 
 
 Irrigation. 
 
 The necessity for a well-ordered and thorough system of irrigation cannot 
 be too forcibly impressed upon the minds of the people of California. Nor 
 is any section of the State more deeply interested in reclaiming the desert 
 lands and extending the benefits of profitable cultivation of the soil than San 
 Francisco. This city is absolutely dependent on the prosperity of the inte- 
 rior of the State for its own advancement. It cannot maintain its position as 
 a commercial metropolis, or widen and extend its influence as a center of 
 trade, without, a populous and prosperous community to back it. Nor does 
 it require any argument to demonstrate to intelligent minds that irrigation is 
 the life and soul of industrial progress in California. Without it the area of 
 
238 
 
 our vineyards, orchards and wheat fields would be much reduced. This is so 
 evident that even a child can appreciate the fact. 
 
 Under these circumstances the Examiner has felt that it is unnecessary to 
 Apologize to the people of this city for so frequently recurring to the subject. 
 It would be greatly in fault had it omitted to do so. The business of a news- 
 paper is to put before the public questions of urgent necessity and impress 
 upon the people engrossed in their own personal affairs, matters which vir- 
 tually affect the welfare of the community. In previous articles we have 
 shown that it is impossible for California to advance in her career of marvel- 
 ous prosperity, or even maintain her present conditions of development, 
 without an irrigation law annulling the obsolete doctrine of riparian rights. 
 It follows, as a logical demonstration, that if the State should recede in ma- 
 terial wealth, or stop short in its career of progress, San Francisco must 
 share in the decline and abandon forever all hopes of realizing those grand 
 possibilities which appear so alluring in her future. 
 
 To make San Francisco a city rivaling in all the essential elements of 
 progress the great cities of the East, every acre of the rich lands of California 
 must be subjected to profitable cultivation. It must be the distributing point 
 for all the magnificent area which sweeps in waving grain fields and bloom- 
 ing orchards between the mountains and the ocean. To accomplish this, 
 the waters of the rivers and streams must supply the arid lands for the fruc- 
 tifying influence of production. A well-regulated and lawfully provided sys- 
 tem of irrigation can alone do this, and a Legislature thoroughly alive to the 
 importance of this imperative necessity can alone assure such a system. No 
 greater duty, therefore, devolvos upon the people of this city than the selec- 
 tion of representatives to the next Legislature who will make it their especial 
 business to co-operate with the movers for a plan for the general irrigation of 
 the lands of the State. The subject should enter into all political considera- 
 tions and should be borne in mind in all calculations and discussions having 
 for their 6bject the well-being of California and the growth and permanent 
 prosperity of the city of San Francisco. 
 
 Oakland Tribune. 
 
 Storaipe Reservoirs for Irrigfation. 
 
 It is asserted by some of the newspapers of the State that a compromise 
 may be effected between the riparianists and the irrigators by the construc- 
 tion of huge reservoirs in the mountains and foot-hills for the storage of the 
 surplus waters of winter floods and the melting snows of summer, and thus 
 the war of extermination now raging between the two contending factions be 
 brought to a peaceful termination. Compromise measures sometimes effect 
 great good, but this is an emergency where no compromise is possible. The 
 suggestion of the storage dams as a relief and a remedy for the difficulty 
 would seem to imply a division of the water between riparianists and irriga- 
 tors, the natural flow of the water to g5 to the former and the contents of the 
 
239 
 
 reservoirs to the latter. But aside from the fact that on many of the most 
 important irrigation streams of the State no suitable sites exist for the con- 
 struction of impounding reservoirs, and on other streams it would be imprac- 
 ticable to build reservoirs of sufficient capacity to supply the lands already 
 irrigated, not to speak of the vastly greater area of dry land yet to be irri- 
 gated, such a suggestion of division implied by the proposed compromise 
 measures is utterly impracticable and untenable. Take, for example, a stream 
 like Kings River, from which over one hundred thousand acres is irrigated, 
 requiring the application of at least two feet of water per annum over the 
 whole surface, the volume of water required to be stored would necessitate 
 reservoirs covering an area of five thousand acres with &n average depth of 
 forty feet. Those who are familiar with the watershed of that stream know 
 that there are no such sites to be found, and, except at a cost utterly beyond 
 the reach of the irrigators of the State, that amount of water cannot be im- 
 pounded on that stream or any of its tributaries. The same may be said of 
 the Kaweah and other streams equally important to the irrigation districts 
 already partially developed. Such a compromise would imply that the 
 greater proportion of the water now flowing must be wasted, and that no 
 further extension of the irrigated area be permitted, but that only a portion 
 of the lands already under irrigation shall be allowed the privilege of continu- 
 ing to enjoy water, and that only after the expenditure of large sums of money 
 in storage dams. The irrigators claim, and with justice, that all the waters 
 in the streams belong to the lands on either side that can be reached by them, 
 and that storage reservoirs, when built, shall be built for the purpose of ex- 
 tending the usefulness of the streams, and increasing the irrigable area, and 
 not to permit the continuance of waste. Otherwise the money expended in 
 reservoirs might as well be thrown into the sea at once, as the result would 
 exactly be equivalent to it. 
 
 Santa Cruz Daily Sentinel. 
 
 Irrigation. 
 
 The believers in the doctrine that the waters of this State belong to those 
 who will appropriate it to some useful purpose, and not to those who happen 
 to own land past which it flows, are organizing for the purpose of making 
 their wishes respected in the next Legislature. The vote in the last Legisla- 
 lature showed that the irrigationists had a majority of its members. But the 
 riparianists, owing to their better organization, and their better command of 
 parliamentary filibustering, succeeded in preventing the passage of proper ir- 
 rigation laws. We have no doubt that these smart obstructionists thereby 
 injured California more than can easily be estimated. The representatives of 
 the irrigationists do not propose that there shall be a repitition of thig per- 
 formance if timely organization can prevent it. The Committee of the State 
 Irrigation Convention, in whose hands the matter was left, have called a 
 meeting of the Convention in San Francisco for the 20th of next month. A 
 stirring address to the people of California has been issued, in which the 
 16 
 
240 
 
 principles and objects of the irrigationists are vigorously set forth, and which 
 advises the early formation of local clubs with the express object of making 
 the water question a vital issue in the election of members of the next Legis- 
 lature. 
 
 The address is able, and makes its points with clearness and vigor. Every 
 disinterested person who has investigated the subject and is capaple of form- 
 ing an opinion upon it, will agree with the Committee when it says: "The 
 English common law doctrine of riparian ownership is repugnant and inap- 
 plicable to the physical conditions of this State, because it permits no use of 
 water outside the banks of a stream, unless by assent of the abutting owner. 
 The streams which traverse the great interior valleys have their heads in per- 
 petual snow. Riparian ownership denies their flow to the thirsty earth, and 
 condemns it to evaporate and emission in the thankless sea. * * * Shall 
 the streams be legally open to appropriation, or shall the law of riparian 
 ownership lock the water within the banks? Shall the flow be useful or use- 
 less? The intelligence and enterprise of the State have already answered 
 these questions: 'The water shall be for irrigation.' " The Committee say 
 "the efforts of the last two years have recruited the ranks of the irrigators 
 until we are an army." It is to be hoped that the army will prove to be bet- 
 ter disciplined and led than were the irrigation forces in the last Legislature. 
 
 This address advises that political partisanship be subordinated to this 
 great question in the next election, and that the irrigationists vote for no can- 
 didate for legislative honors who cannot be relied upon to advance the desired 
 legislation. We believe an overwhelming majority of California voters are 
 on the side of the irrigationists, and that the irrigation question overshadows 
 all other issues in importance to the State. We hope to be able next winter 
 to chronicle a different result from that which was reached in the last strug- 
 gle on this momentous question. 
 
 Los Angeles Daily Times. 
 
 Anti- Riparian. 
 
 The importance of prompt, determined and decisive action in the war 
 "which the people of the State are called upon to make against the aggressive 
 forces of riparianism is set forth in the address to the members of the River- 
 side and Fresno Irrigation Conventions, which we publish in another col- 
 umn. It is a strong and forcible appeal to those who have the future 
 interests and prosperity of this great State at heart. The picture of future 
 desolation, of discouraged and decaying industries and languishing pursuits 
 which would result, were riparianism to succeed, is not a pleasant one to 
 contemplate. Abundance of water for the irrigation of our vast orchards 
 and vineyards and our fruitful acres must not be denied us, if we would see 
 the industries that we have planted, the commerce that we created, continue 
 in success and prosperity, and also make beautiful the thousands of acres 
 •tye tnnoccupied and unimproved. An ample supply of water for all needed 
 irrigation will assure to Southern California a future of unlimited pros- 
 
241 
 
 perity and growth. Without it the opposite condition must be anticipate^. 
 Oar industries must languish, and immigration in this direction receive 
 serious check. 
 
 Los Angeles County, with the vast interests which she has at stake, should 
 not be backward in organizing an anti-riparian association. She should hold 
 a convention in which every anti-riparian should have a voice, whatever his 
 political faith or creed. The first object of such a convention of the people 
 should be to declare, and to have their declaration embodied in the written 
 laws of the State, that superior to and more inalienable than the right of 
 riparian proprietors, is the sovereign right of the people of the State to use,, 
 for necessary agricultural purposes, the waters of our streams and rivers. 
 No power should be suflficient to lock their waters within their banks and 
 withhold them from the thirsty soil. 
 
 Tulare Register. 
 
 Another Irrigation Convention* 
 
 The executive committee of the Fresno Irrigation Committee of last year 
 held a meeting at Fresno Monday. There were present J. DeBarth Schorb, 
 of Los Angeles; Will S. Green, of Colusa; R. Hudnut, of Bakersfield; L. B. 
 Ruggles, of Mussel Slough; D. K. Zumwalt, of Visalia; E.H.Tucker, of 
 Selma; J. F. Wharton and H. S. Dixon, of Fresno. Mr. L. M. Holt is ab- 
 sent in Chicago. An address to the people of California was prepared, and 
 a State Irrigation Convention called to meet at San Francisco on the 20th of 
 May. 
 
 We look for much good to come from this convention, and we are heartily 
 glad that it has been called to meet at San Francisco. The city by the Golden 
 Gate holds the political scepter in this State. VVhatever she decides to do 
 will be done. If the San Francisco delegation to the next legislature goes in 
 for an enlightened system of irrigation laws, such a system will be forthcom^ 
 ing next winter. If, on the other hand, the itch that ever itches and never 
 can get scratched enough, gets into the palms of the San Francisco legisla- 
 tors, we may as well hang our harps on willow limbs and cease to sing of 
 verdant fields, orchards of luscious fruit, of the raisin and of wine. 
 
 The more thoughtful men of San Francisco now realize that the material 
 prosperity of that city depends as much upon irrigation as do the business in- 
 terests of the towns of the valley. But it is one thing to see a truth and quite- 
 another to act upon it. It is hardly to be supposed that merchants, bankers^ 
 manufacturers and professional men should Isnow just what manner of irri- 
 gation system the agricultural sections need. This the irrigation convention* 
 and the press of the city must teach them. But even that is not enough.. 
 The local politics of the metropolis are in such a state, that the business in- 
 terests must be aroused to effective action, in order to keep political sharps, 
 from making every needed reform a tool with which to extort money fronk 
 one combatant or the other. The convention will have a two-fold purpose^ 
 
242 
 
 to enlighten and to arouse the business men of San Francisco upon the all 
 important subject of irrigation. 
 
 San Francisco Chronicle. 
 
 Tlie Irrffi^ation Q,uestion. 
 
 It would seem hardly necessary at this date to enlarge upon the manifold 
 benefits to be secured to the vast interior valleys cf California from the con- 
 struction of extensive and intelligently managed systems of irrigation canals. 
 One would think that by this time every intelligent person would have be- 
 come so well acquainted with the principal points in the matter that no 
 further enlargement thereon would be necessary. Judging from the tone of 
 much that is being written just now on the subject, however, there must be 
 thousands of voters and many newspaper writers who have yet to learn the 
 a b c's of the irrigation alphabet. They are just awakening to the fact that in 
 this they have been far outstripped by sections where a much later beginning 
 was made in the matter, and that while in such a comparatively "new" State 
 as Colorado the fundamental laws have been made to conform with the de- 
 mand for the use of streams for irrigation, here we are still floundering along 
 in the slough betwixt the doctrines of appropriation and riparian rights, with 
 a strong leaning towards the enforcement of the latter. 
 
 Lest there be any who as yet have not learned the distinction between the 
 two — and it is evident that there are many such — a brief statement of the 
 points involved may not be out of place. The old Mexican law from which 
 our statutes regulating the right of appropriation are derived, was founded 
 on the recognized fact that the waters in many of the streams, being abso- 
 lutely essential to the successful cultivation of the soil adjacent thereto, be- 
 longed by right to the persons so making use thereof, regardless of any 
 assumed riparian rights either above or below such locations. Under these 
 laws the first-comer in any given section where irrigation was necessary had 
 the right to tap a stream and take out so much thereof as was needful for 
 purposes of irrigation. When all the water in the stream was thus appro- 
 priated there was nothing left for the new-comer, though he might purchase 
 land on the bank of the stream, but to buy a water right from the prior appro. 
 priatore. Here is where many abuses crept in and where some regulation by 
 law would seem to be called for. Under the easy-going Mexican system there 
 was water enough and to spare, and no one thought of monopolizing more 
 than he had use for to the exclusion of a needy neighbor. 
 
 But with the American occupation a different state of affairs at once 
 prevailed. With that unlovely characteristic so often met with here, as 
 elsewhere, of "wanting everything in sight," the first comers in many of 
 those sections where irrigation was found to be necessary, "took up "the 
 natural flow of the streams in such quantity that very soon none was left 
 for any one else, and this regardless oi the fact that it was impossible for 
 them to make good use of a tenth part of their appropriation. The plan 
 
243 
 
 adopted was for a dozen or more of settlers to claim all the water running in 
 a given stream and then apportion it among themselves at so many hours or 
 days to each ranch. This gave the claimants an assumed title to all the 
 waters running, whether they utilized it or not, and effectually cut off any 
 outsider from participation therein. To be sure, one locating on the stream 
 below the original appropriators might be allowed to use the waste water 
 which was graciously allowed to flow down after all had been used that the 
 most wasteful manner could suggest, but he was liable at any time to have 
 such precarious supply cut off by the sale of water rights above him. What 
 right one man, or a set of men, had to claim any more water than they could 
 possibly utilize on their land, to the exclusion of others, is not apparent, 
 and if by a shadow legal, still it is by no means just. Yet that is the way in 
 which many fortunes have been made in this State. Men have for years 
 "claimed" the entire flow in certain streams, though not utilizing a tenth 
 part of it, and then have sold such claims Jor prices as high as $1,500 and 
 $2,000 an hour for a portion of their assumed rights. 
 
 Many most flagrant instances of persecution and injustice have sprung up 
 under this system of allowing a man's greed to be the only gauge by which 
 should be measured the amount of water claimed by him. This is where 
 the most stringent regulation by law is necessary, and while it is now a 
 rather late day to talk of such regulation, it is nevertheless necessary in 
 order to prevent future "hogging " operations of like nature. 
 
 The riparian doctrine, which is the exact contrary to that of appropriation, 
 is based on the old English common law. This is founded on the customs 
 and necessities of a country where irrigation is unnecessary and unknown 
 and where running streams have but two uses— navigation and furnishing a 
 means of power for mills, etc. Under the riparian law every owner of land 
 on the banks of a stream has the right to have the natural flow of that stream 
 pass by his door undiminished and unchanged in either quantity or quality 
 by any one above him. Under this law the owner of an acre of ground near 
 the mouth of a river has the same right as the owner of a thousand acres 
 near the source. He who takes out a portion of the stream to furnish power 
 for a mill must carefully provide for the return of that water to the parent 
 stream. The enforcement of this doctrine is seen to be at once fatal to any 
 system of irrigation, since water so applied is forever lost to the stream 
 whence it is tp,ken. By its enforcement no one but the owner of the land at 
 the mouth of the water-course could by right divert any portion upon hia 
 land. In the first settlement of the State the water of many streams was 
 conducted by ditches to a considerable distance from the location of the 
 original river-bed, and in some instances none of it was used on lands 
 contiguous thereto. Under the riparian doctrine this is a wrongful diver- 
 sion, and none of the original claimants have a right to the use of the 
 water. What hardship the enforcement of this doctrine would work, only 
 those familiar with the affairs in the irrigated sections of the State fully 
 know. 
 
244 
 
 "The riparian doctrine was never meant to apply to an irrigating country 
 and sooner or later the laws of California mast be made to conform to the 
 necessities of the situation. In Colorado this was long since recognized, and 
 tinder their intelligent system of laws on water rights, that State is having a 
 most gratifying growth. 
 
 About the only argument that is urged against the substitution of appro- 
 priation for riparian rights is that under the former men will claim large 
 bodies of water for purposes of speculation, and that immense monopolies 
 will spring up. This is a matter for after consideration, and is one that may 
 be very easily regulated by law after the change demanded in the fundamen- 
 tal laws shall have been made. 
 
 The establishment of irrigation systems, even under the uncertain status 
 of our present laws, has worked a transformation in many localities, but by 
 far the larger part of the State is still undeveloped, though abundantly sup- 
 plied by streams, because capitalists are loath to risk their money where a ri- 
 parian right decision is Uable to checkmate their plans at any time. 
 
 The objection is sometimes met that by the adoption of extensive irrigation 
 systems the navigation of some of the streams will be injured or ruined. 
 This of course can only apply to the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers. 
 Whether this is a danger to bo feared or not, an example in the southern part 
 of the State may show. The Santa Ana River, which traverses the counties 
 of San Bernardino and Los Aneieles, is one of the principal sources of supply 
 for irrigation purposes, many of the most thriving colonies deriving their en- 
 tire sustenance therefrom. It is tapped by numerous irrigation ditches at 
 various points, and here a singular fact exists. Although within a short dis- 
 tance of the point where it debouches upon the plains from its mountain 
 «ource, every drop of water in the channel is diverted into a number of 
 oanals, and the bed may be crossed dryshod, still ten or twelve miles farther 
 •down there is again an abundance of water flowing, which is in turn diverted, 
 a,nd the same phenomenon is repeated two or three times more before the 
 sea is reached. This is due to the underground flow which finds its way to 
 the surface, and shows on a small scale what might be expected were a num- 
 ber of large ditches taken from the two navigable streams mentioned. 
 There is no probability that it would in any way affect their navigability for 
 the worse, and even if did, the growth of the section traversed by those 
 ditches would in a short time warrant the construction of railroads, which 
 would quickly replace any facilities that might be injured by the use of the 
 water for irrigation. 
 
 San Bernardino Daily Times. 
 
 We have received from the Irrigation Committee a form of the articles of 
 association, by-laws, and pledge for anti-riparian irrigation clubs, which 
 though drawn in highfalutin language, filled with buncombe and twaddle 
 that detract from its strength, nevertheless presents in its verbiage some facts 
 which are of direct interest to the whole people of this Coast, and es- 
 
245 
 
 pecially to us of Southern California, to whom irrigating water is life. The 
 application of the common law of England, as it applies to water courses, to 
 our section, where the conditions are so opposite, is an absurdity of law, and 
 a foolish observation of musty precedent. We would guarantee that English 
 •courts themselves, in their colonies where the conditions are different to 
 those in the mother country, would not be bound by rules that applied to 
 the latter. In a country where water is only useful for manufacturiug and 
 navigation, where irrigation is never dreamed of, the rule that water should 
 not be diverted from a stream unless it was returned in undiminished quantity, 
 is correct. But in Southern California where the streams are not naviga- 
 ble, where the water is not used for manufactures, where it has either got to 
 be diverted from its natural channels and consumed, or the country be an un- 
 inhabitable waste, such a ruling based on common law precedents, is an ex- 
 treme absurdity. 
 
 Los Angeles Weekly Mirror. 
 
 Anti-Riparian. 
 
 The importance of prompt, determined and decisive action in the war 
 -which the people of the State are called upon to make against the aggressive 
 forces of riparianism is set forth in the address to the members of the River- 
 side and Fresno Irrigation Conventions, which we publish in another column . 
 It is a strong and forcible appeal to those who have the future interests and 
 prosperity of this great State at heart. The picture of future desolation, of dis- 
 couraged and decaying industries and languishing pursuits which would result, 
 were riparianism to succeed, is not a pleasant one to contemplate. Abundance 
 €f water for the irrigation of our vast orchards and vineyards and our fruitful 
 acres must not be denied us, if we would see the industries that we have 
 planted, the commerce that we created continue in success and prosperity, 
 and also make beautiful the thousands of acres as yet unoccupied and unim- 
 proved. An ample supply of water for all needed irrigation will assure to 
 Southern California a future of unlimited prosperity and growth. Without 
 it the opposite condition must be anticipated. Our industries must languish, 
 and immigration in this direction receive serious check. 
 
 Los Angeles county, with the vast interests which she has at stake, should 
 not be backward in organizing an anti-riparian association. She should hold 
 a convention in which every anti-riparian should have a voice, whatever his 
 political faith or creed. The first object of such a convention of the people 
 should be to declare, and to have their declaration embodied in the written 
 laws of the State, that superior to and more inalienable than the right of 
 riparian proprietors, is the sovereign right of the people of the State to use, 
 for necessary agricultural purposes, the waters of our streams and rivers. No 
 power should be sufficient to lock their waters within their banks and with- 
 hold them from the thirsty soil. 
 
246 
 
 Santa Cruz Daily Sentinel. 
 
 Irrigfation. 
 
 The believers in the doctrine that the waters of this State belong to those 
 "who will appropriate it to some useful purpose, and not to those who happen 
 to own land past which it flows, are organizing for the purpose of making 
 their wishes respected in the next Legislature, The vote in the last Legisla- 
 ture showed that the irrigationists had a majority of its members. But the 
 riparianists, owing to their better organization, and their better command of 
 parliamentary filibustering, succeeded in preventing the passage of proper 
 irrigation laws. We have no doubt that these smart obstructionists thereby 
 injured California more than can easily be estimated. The representatives 
 of the irrigationists do not propose that there shall be a repetition of this 
 performance if timely organization can prevent it. The Committee of the 
 State Irrigation Convention, in whose hands the matter was left, have called 
 a meeting of the Convention in San Fiancisco for the 20th of next month. A 
 stirring address to the people of California has been issued, in which the 
 principles and objects of the irrigationists are vigorously set forth^ and which 
 advises the early formation of local clubs with the express object of making 
 the water question a vital issue in the election of members of the next Leg- 
 islature. 
 
 The address is able, and makes its points with clear aess and vigor. Every 
 disinterested person who has investigated the subject and is capable of form- 
 ing an opinion upon it, will agree with the Committee when it says: " The 
 English common law doctrine of riparian ownership is repugnant and inap- 
 plicable to the physical conditions of this State, because it permits no use of 
 water outside the banks of a stream, unless by assent of the abutting owner. '^ 
 The streams which traverse the great interior valleys have their heads in per- 
 petual snow. Riparian ownership denies their flow to the thirsty earth and 
 condemns it to evaporate and emission in the thankless sea. * * ^ Shall 
 the streams be legally open to appropriation, or shall the law of riparian 
 ownership lock the water within the banks? Shall the flow be useful or use- 
 less? The intelligence and enterprise of the State have already answered 
 these questions: ' The water shall be for irrigation.' " The Committee say 
 "the efforts of the last two years have recruited the ranks of the irrigators 
 until we are an army." It is to be hoped that the army will prove to be bet- 
 ter disciplined and led than were the irrigation forces in the last Legislature. 
 
 The address advises that political partisanship be subordinated to this 
 great question in the next election, and that the irrigationists vote for na 
 candidate for legislative honors who cannot be relied upon to advance the 
 desired legislation. We believe an overwhelming majority of California 
 voters are on the side of the iirigationists, and that the irrigation question 
 overshadows all other issues in importance to the State. We hope to be able 
 next winter to chronicle a diS'erent result from that which was reached in the 
 last struggle on this momentous question. 
 
247 
 
 Martinez Daily Item.* 
 
 The Irrigation Q,ne8tion. 
 
 At a meeting of the Legislative Committee of the State Anti-Kiparian Irri» 
 gation Association, held at Fresno on Monday, it was resolved to hold a con- 
 vention at San Francisco on Thursday, May 20th, for the purpose of eflfect- 
 ing a permanent central organization, for the purpose of formulating plans to 
 perfect the irrigation laws at the next session of the Legislature, and also to 
 lay plans for action during the coming campaign. This question will enter 
 largely into party councils, and will cause no little discussion. We have re- 
 ceived a supply of documents from the Committee, and shall refer to the 
 question occasionally. 
 
 Santa Cruz Daily Sentinel. 
 
 The Irrififation Convention. 
 
 Santa Cruz should be represented in the Irrigation Convention which will 
 meet in San Francisco on the 20th of next month. The object of the con- 
 vention is to organize and properly direct the efforts of those who approve of 
 the principles of the irrigation measures introduced in the last Legislature. 
 It is desi ned to make the irrigation question a controlling issue in the next 
 State election. The manifesto of the Executive Committee of the Fresno 
 Convention says: "Through this organization it is proposed to inform both 
 parties that we know no politics but irrigation, and that our battlefield is on 
 the irrigable plains upon which the future of California is to be exploited. "^ 
 It is impossible to exaggerate the supreme importance of this irrigation ques- 
 tion to our State. California will be a hobbling cripple if the riparian doc» 
 trine prevails; she will be a robust giantess of unrivalled powers and queenly 
 mien if the irrigation doctrine is established. That doctrine is already es- 
 tablished in the will of a vast majority of our people. All that is needed is 
 to give that will a legal form and direction. This is the object of the pro- 
 posed convention. 
 
 The position of the Sentinel on this great question is well known. From 
 the beginning of the agitation we have repeatedly and earnestly pleaded for 
 the principles contended for by the irrigationists. Before the last session of 
 the Legislature we called attention to the legal and constitutional principles 
 underlying the ^iscussion, and advised the members of the Legislature to 
 study those principles before they went to Sacramento. And we predicted 
 that unless the members studied the question for themselves beforehand, they 
 would find themselves all at sea and involved in fogs and uncertainties by 
 the legal technicalities of the riparianists when the contest came. The pre- 
 diction was amply fulfilled. The dilatory filibustering tactics that defeated 
 the irrigation measures would not have succeeded had it not been for sophis- 
 tical appeals based on alleged injustice to the riparianists — appeals which 
 were baseless, and would have been vain, but for the ignorance of the prin* 
 ciples involved in the discussion on the part of those members who, though 
 
248 
 
 favorable to irrigation, were too conscientious to inflict a possible injustice by- 
 hasty action. When at length the light of reason dissipated the fogs of 
 sophistry, it was too late in the session to break the parliamentary tangle in 
 which the bills were purposely involved by their enemies. 
 
 Santa Cruz county, owing to her peculiar topography and favorable loca- 
 tion, will not be benefited to as great an extent as most other counties by the 
 proposed irrigation laws. But, if she would reap no benefit at all from them» 
 that would be no reason why she should not do all she can to further the 
 cause for irrigation. Our county will prosper in proportion as the rest of 
 the State prospers. Each of our citizens who possesses a spark of State 
 patriotism takes pride in the general advancement of California, and should 
 he ready to do his share in the work of pushing on the car of progress. 
 Therefore, our county should send representatives to the San Francisco Con- 
 vention next month. The plan proposed by the committee is the formation 
 of one or more irrigation clubs in each county, the object being to effect the 
 purposes above indicated. These clubs will send delegates to the convention, 
 and thus every locality in the State will intelligently co-operate for the accom- 
 plishment of the common object, by carrying the irrigation issue vigorously 
 into the next general election. There can be no more worthy or patriotic act 
 by our citizens at this time than the formation of an irrigation club. 
 
 Tulare County Traver Tidings. 
 
 \iriiat Will Win- 
 
 Of the meeting of the Executive Committee of the State Irrigation Conven- 
 tion, which convened at Fresno last Monday and promulgated an address 
 narrating things past and prophesying much good to come, the San Francis- 
 co ^Z<a says: lu its antitheses may be read the certain future of Califor- 
 nia. If our laws are brought into harmony with oar physical conditions and 
 natural necessities, this State at once opens her acres to the densest and most 
 prosperous population in the world. If our laws remain at right angles to 
 those conditions and necessities the desert now untouched remains 
 bald and barren, and invades the green oases which are now support- 
 ing a prosperous people. California is more talked and thought about in the 
 East now than when she shot into notice and notoriety upon the discovery 
 of gold, for there are more people to talk and think. A land that produces 
 the- orange, grape, almond and fig, appeals now as powerfully to the 
 fancy as did the production of gold thirty years ago. The agricultural and 
 horticultural possibilities of a winterless country, where the palm waves its 
 branches and the magnolia blooms the year through, lure and allure, and con- 
 jure with greater power than the promises of gold to be dug from the hills. 
 It opens up the prospe3t of a redistribution of population. It promises a use. 
 f ul drain for the benefit of the older States, that leaves within them better op- 
 portunities for all who stay, while there is no rule by which to measure the 
 certainties offered to all who come blessed with a willing spirit and ready for 
 
249 
 
 the light toil which wins a competency. Now is California's more than gol- 
 den moment. It is not worth while to dally over details. Let the work out- 
 lined by the committee go forward to success, and the processes for utilizing 
 water and storing it for irrigation will unfold and keep pace with our necessi- 
 ties. 
 
 A good system of irrigation will do more to enhance the value of real estate, 
 says the Modesto Republican, and give larger returns in fruits and cereals than 
 any other artificial means that can be adopted. This year crops will be abund- 
 dant, for the reason that the rains have been plentiful, which is all the evi- 
 dence necessary to prove to the farmer that he needs water to irrigate his 
 land with. There are plenty of small fruit and vegetable farmers who irri- 
 gate by means of windmills and artesian wells. They find it profitable be- 
 cause they are enabled to raise and market fruits and vegetables every season 
 of the year, and with our soil and climate millions of small, comfortable 
 and happy homes can be made in California. 
 
 Stockton Independent. 
 
 The irrigation counties are credited with about 33,000 votes. The irriga- 
 tion issue will be one of the strongest in the fall campaign, and the Republi- 
 can Convention will be called upon to consider it as affecting vitally the 
 prospects of its State nominees. The fight of the irrigators has justice on its 
 side, although their panicky fear of disasters to follow upon a possible con- 
 firmafion of riparian laws may lead them into occasional exaggerations of the 
 wrongs sufi'ered from their opponents. Riparian owners are not to be thrust 
 aside without just regard for rights they have acquired under legal rulings in 
 this State, but the needs of the majority of the people in the irrigation coun- 
 ties demand that the law shall be revised and riparian rights abridged. The 
 support of the Republican Convention should be given to the irrigators by 
 all means. 
 
 West Oakland Sentinel. 
 
 Irri£'ation. 
 
 No more important ([question has ever come before the people of California 
 than that which relates to the irrigation of arid and so-called desert land. 
 These lands, which lie in the great valleys, comprise a large portion of the 
 State. They are susceptible of the highest condition of cultivation and, with 
 water, are perhaps the most productive on the continent. The question is, 
 shall they have such necessary water? 
 
 The fact that the running streams and reservoirs in the mountains are 
 capable of. supplying this essential requirement of agriculture, if properly 
 distributed, is unquestionable. But there is an impediment, constructive or 
 real, to the utilization of this water. A few of the proprietors of lands bor- 
 dering on the streams claim that under the English common law doctrine of 
 
250 
 
 riparian rights, which they say has been recognized by our Supreme Court, 
 they have the exclusive use of the water, and that it cannot be diverted, from 
 its natural channel for any purpose whatever. 
 
 It is not claimed that the riparian proprietors can have any use for this 
 natural outflow from the mountains. Indeed, their right to use water flow- 
 ing by their banks, in any way that will reduce the volume, is denied under 
 the authority of the same common law doctrine. It must simply pass 
 through their lands on its way to the sea, to be lost in the waste of waters, 
 or to be swallowed up in the tule swamps. Meanwhile the desert lands, so 
 prolific under the influence of irrigation, are dedicated or relegated to ste- 
 rility. 
 
 Shall such conditions as these continue to exist? Will the Legislature 
 refuse to annul the application of the common law by a declaratory statute, 
 and give the thirsting land its imperative need and to California a widely 
 increasing development and prolific production? Will it condemn the great 
 valleys to barrenness? This is the issue without exaggeration and without 
 coloring. 
 
 Santa Barbara Daily Independent. 
 
 To the Anti-Riparian Voters of California. 
 
 The Independent cannot give space to the long address of the Executive 
 Committee of the State Irrigation Convention. It is not a matter which 
 greatly concerns this section. But all persons interested will find it in any 
 of the principal San Francisco dailies. There is no doubt that it is a matter 
 of absorbing interest to the State at large, if not especially to us. The Exam- 
 iner comments upon the address as follows: "The proposition that the soil of 
 nine-tenths of the State cannot be cultivated without irrigation is too obvious 
 for controversy, and that there is water enough in the streams which can be 
 rendered available for this purpose is also beyond dispute. That every com- 
 mercial, agricultural and business interest that we have already, or may have 
 in the future, is dependent upon the lawful diversion of the water from the 
 streams is also obvious. The question is, shall the legislative assistance 
 needed be given? The people have it in their power to accomplish this great 
 necessity. They are the source of power, the tribunal from which there is no 
 appeal. But to render their efi'orts intelligent and efi'ective, they must have 
 a specific organization and definite ends. These are provided for in the ad- 
 dress, and the plans proposed should command the very widest possible at- 
 tention and the thoughtful consideration of every man in the State. Every 
 one is interested in the subject. The citizen of the city, equally with the cit- 
 izen of the country, will find in this question the hinge upon which the future 
 of California will turn. It embraces every vital interest, every hope and pros- 
 pect of the future, and the appeal which has been made addresses itself to the 
 patriotism of the individual and the sense of right of the public." 
 
251 
 
 Marin County Tocsin, 
 
 Irri£fation. 
 
 The subject of irrigation is a living, burning issue in the southern counties 
 of California, and indeed throughout the whole State. It is not less import- 
 ant to the mercantile and manufacturing interests of San Francisco than to 
 the farmers, fruit growers and viueyardists. Their products are the safe basis 
 of our wealth and prosperity. If the thirsting land is refused water; if the 
 waving grain fields, the umbrageous orchards and the vineyards of the plains 
 are left to perish, in order that long horned Ciittle may wallow in the swamps, 
 our merchants and local manufacturers will soon be without customers. In- 
 deed the very life of the State depends upon a victory for irrigation. 
 
 There will shortly convene in San Francisco an Irrigation Convention. It 
 will not be extravagant to say that the future of California for prosperity or 
 poverty will be determined by the success or failure of the movement which 
 this convention has been called to further. 
 
 The decision of the Supreme Court to the effect that water can not be law- 
 fully appropriated and diverted from the non-navigable streams for the useful 
 and necessary purpose of irrigation, must not become the settled law of the 
 State, or else the great plains and valleys must be abandoned. The rains of 
 heaven which belong to these lands are precipitated in the mountains, and 
 the inhabitants demand the right to recla'm the water as it descends in the 
 streams. The cattle men and other ripariauists insist that the water is not 
 to be used. The mass of the people are for devoting it to useful purposes. 
 We will see who is the most powerful. 
 
 This, in a nut-shell, is the signifi ance of the irrigation movement. Let it 
 be distinctly understood by all, irrigation means prosperity, riparianism 
 means a parched land and poverty. 
 
 The Resources of California. 
 
 Let ns Have Water— The most Important Interegtg of the State In 
 Dangler. —Some Facts for the Consideration of the People. —Shall oar 
 Fertile Lands be consi^rned to Eternal Sterility?— The Atrocious Doc- 
 trine of Riparian Rin^hts. 
 
 If there is one thing in which the people of the State of California are in- 
 terested more than another, it is the question of water appropriation vs. ripa- 
 rianism. Beside this, all other questions dwindle into comparative insignifi- 
 cance The wealth and prosperity of a large portion of our State is involved 
 in this question, and no one can truthfully deny that the material wealth of 
 California would be greatly multiplied by a practical system of irrigation. 
 But, barring the progress to this much desired consummation, stands the 
 bugbear of riparian rights, like a lion in the pathway, shutting off all ad- 
 vance, and condemning to perpetual sterility millions of acres of the most 
 fertile land the sun ever shone upon, while the water which would render it 
 
v/ 
 
 252 
 
 invaluable runs idly and uselessly by to the sea. Such a condition of 
 things is not and cannot be right; it ought to be clear to the most superficial 
 observer that irrigation will bring the greatest prosperity and result in the 
 greatest advantage to the State. Nature has provided the means in the rivers 
 and streams which furnish an abundance of water, were it properly distribu- 
 ted, to irrigate every acre of arable land in the State. The counties more 
 particularly interested 'in this question are Fresno, Tulare, Kern, Merced, 
 Mariposa, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles; but every county in the State, 
 from Siskiyou to San Diego is more or less dependent upon irrigation for the 
 cultivation of the soil. The prosperity and growth of the counties named, 
 depends principally upon their facilities for agricultural pursuits. In order 
 to encourage and foster these, irrigation is absolutely necessary; indeed, it 
 is the one thing needful to continue these counties in their present path of 
 progress. As an indication of that progress, we will instance the counties of 
 Fresno, Tulare, and Kern. Through the two former counties runs Kings 
 Kiver. In 1870, less than one thousand acres were irrigated artifically from 
 this river. In 1880, there were about sixty-five thousand acres, and in 1834, 
 about ninety-five thousand acres. The average flow of water in Kings River, 
 during the irrigating season, if properly saved and distributed, would be 
 more than sufficient to irrigate five hundred thousand acres of land, at the 
 rate which is now found sufficient in the older irrigated parts of the county. 
 It will thus be seen that, by proper legislation, regulating the distribution 
 of the waters of this river alone, it is capable of irrigating six times the area 
 now cultivated, and at an average value of $100 per acre, would give an ag- 
 gregate value to these lands of $55,000,000, and support a population of one 
 hundred and thirty thousand. On the Kern River, which runs through 
 Kern County, in 1867 less than one thousand acres were cultivated. 
 
 In 1880 there were about 40,00 acres under cultivation, and in 1884 the 
 area of cultivated land had increased to about 50,000 acres. This increase 
 occurred, despite a continued, harassing litigation on the part of riparian 
 owners against the appropriators of the water. This litigation has retarded 
 the growth of the county and prevented the investment of capital and the im- 
 provement of lands. The lands at present under cultivation form but a 
 small part of the arable lands which could be irrigated by a proper distribu- 
 bntion of the waters of the Kern river. Land in Kern county, with a proper 
 supply of water for irrigating purposes, is worth at least one hundred dollars 
 per acre, which would amount to $30,000,000 for the lands in that county 
 which are susceptible of being irrigated by the waters of Kern river. Irri- 
 gated districts support, at a low average, one hundred and fifty people to the 
 square mile. As there would be about 460 square miles in this tract, it 
 would support a population of 70,000. As to the effect of irrigation upon the 
 growth and prosperity of a county, we may cite Los Angeles as an example: 
 Lands in this county which now find a ready sale at from $100 to $200 per 
 acre, in an unimproved state, could not have been disposed of at $5 per acre 
 until canals and irrigating ditches were constructed for irrigating them; they 
 "Were comparatively worthless for purposes of cultivation, and a jack rabbit 
 
253 
 
 woald have found it difficult to obtain a subsistence upon them during the 
 dry season; and this change in values has been brought about solely by the 
 introduction of water. In 1879 some 57,000 acres of land were under culti- 
 vation and irrigated by the waters from natural streams, which yielded only 
 4803/^ cubic feet per second during the irrigating season, which gives an av- 
 erage of about 200 acres to each cubic foot of water flowing per second through 
 the irrigating season. Here the water is under municipal regulation, and is 
 distributed in such a way as to obtain the best results from the supply. No 
 one is permitted to waste; each person takes as much as is needed and no 
 more. No miasma-breeding, stagnant pools are allowed to accumulate, and 
 the argument, so often used, that artificial irrigation engenders malarial dis- 
 eases, is refuted by the report of a well-known and skillful physician, for 
 many years a resident of Los Angeles — Dr. H. S. Orme — who, after a careful 
 and thorough investigation of the subject, gave it as his opinion that the sys- 
 tem of irrigation as adopted there was in no wise detrimental to health. The 
 increase in the acreage cultivated since the introduction of water, the en- 
 hancement in the value of real estate and the wonderful accession of popula- 
 tion in that section of the country is well known to all. 
 
 In Kern, Fresno and other counties, we find lands, which, before irrigation 
 was resorted to, were regarded as desert lands, inhabited only by reptiles, 
 and considered as not worth the Government price of $1.25 per acre, now 
 worth all the way from $100 to $250 per acre. The reference to these locali- 
 ties is quite sufficient to show and establish the effect of irrigation, and that 
 this wonderful increase in values is attrtbutable solely to the fact that the 
 waters were diverted from their natural channels and poured upon the land. 
 Such, then, is the effect of the doctrine of appropriation for a beneficial pur- 
 pose, as contrasted with that of riparian ownership. The former condition 
 of the country was not due, it is true, to riparian doctrine alone, but it is 
 nevertheless certain, that under riparian law, which would require the waters 
 of the rivers to flow in their natural channels, there could be no progress. 
 The residents of the San Joaquin valley and Southern California are now 
 menaced with a danger which may well cause the liveliest alarm. A majority 
 of the Supreme Court have decided that the English common law doctrine of 
 riparian rights is the law of this State. The court has in effect declared that 
 no one but a riparian owner can touch the water in the streams. That is to 
 say, he cannot put it to any practical use. If the genius of recession had la- 
 bored to devise a plan by which the development of our fair State might be 
 most effectually retarded, he could have hit upon nothing more likely to ac- 
 complish his object than this abominable doctrine of riparianism. Here ia 
 an agricultural community, blessed with a soil whose fertility and produc- 
 tiveness cannot be excelled; with a climate, equable and salubrious, with all 
 the conditions necessary to health, wealth and prosperity fulfilled, save in 
 the one fact, that the clouds of heaven do not dispense their aqueous treas- 
 ures in sufficient abundance to moisten the parceled earth, and bring forth 
 the fruits and flowers and grain in their season. Throughout this parched 
 and arid region, flow rivers and streams, whose life-giving waters are abund- 
 
 / 
 
254 
 
 ant to make the desert "blossom as the rose;" yet, under this atrocious law, 
 not a drop can be taken from the streams, except by one whose land borders 
 upon its banks, and the poor farmer who is not so fortunate as to possess ri- 
 parian rights, must sit quietly by and see his laud parch, his crops wither, 
 his cattle die of starvation, and utter ruin stare him in the face, while the 
 water which would save him, runs to waste, conferring benefits upon no one. 
 Surely such a state of affairs cannot long continue. Legislation must be had, 
 aud a contemptible minority must not again be allowed to defeat the will of 
 the people as was accomplished in the last Legislature. 
 
 The right to appropriate the waters of the streams for purposes of irriga- 
 tion, under wise and judicious restrictions must be accorded; this right is 
 vital to the interests of the State. It is no local issue; the merchants and 
 manufacturers of the cities and towns are interested as well as the agricultu- 
 ralists; we must irrigate to produce, we must produce to live. Where agri- 
 culture is crippled, commerce and manufactures decline. No State can afford 
 to have a vast area of fertile agricultural land shut out and rendered useless 
 by a few riparianists who agparently would sacrifice the best interests of the 
 State to ensure their own pecuniary aggrandizement. A State Convention is 
 about to meet, the object of which is to secure united action on the part of 
 those interested, in ensuring legislative action which will protect and regu- 
 late the right to the use of water appropriated for purposes of irrigation. To 
 the agriculturists, the vital issue of the coming political campaign, is appro- 
 priation vs. riparianism ; all other considerations are secondary, Let the 
 Convention take hold of this matter vigorously, and adopt such measures as 
 will secure a united and determined effort at the polls to elect to ofl&ce only 
 those who are absolutely sound on this important question. It is purely a 
 non-partisan issue, and all men who have the interest of the State at heart, 
 should see to it that no man is elected to office, from Governor down, who 
 has the slightest leaning towards the pernicious doctrine of riparian rights; 
 withdraw support from every man, whatever may be his politics, who is not 
 an outspoken, unqualified advocate of the doctrine of appropriation. 
 
 The friends of irrigation should organize at once in every portion of the 
 State; by united effort they can win the battle; disorganized, they are power- 
 less. The result in the last Legislature should furnish a lesson not soon to 
 be forgotten. The riparianists are few in number but powerful in their 
 wealth. Money, we all know, is a most effective weapon in politics, and this, 
 without doubt, will be freely used. This influence, powerful as it is, can be 
 and must be counteracted. The great masses of the people in the large cities 
 and towns do not understand the merits of this question; they must be in- 
 structed. Agitate the matter in the newspapers, flood the State with circu- 
 lars, explaining the nature and discussing the merits of the case. Let speak- 
 ers be employed to address the people during the campaign and spare no 
 effort to keep the question before them. The merchant and the manufacturer 
 cannot fail to see the importance of developing the agricultural resources of 
 the great San Joaquin valley and other portions of the State by irrigation. 
 The one thing needful for these classes is an active, home market for their 
 
255 
 
 wares and products. In order to secure this we must have population; in. 
 order to secure population we must offer some inducements to settlers. Men 
 will not come to California to settle in a desert. IShow them the great valley 
 of the San Joaquin, parched and arid, then point them to some orchard or 
 vineyard on the river bank and tell them, by irrigation you may make this 
 apparent desert as bright, beautiful and productive as yonder garden ; and the 
 first question naturally is: how are we to obtain the water? "Aye, there's 
 the rub;" the land is fertile and productive, the water is close at hand, the 
 settler may look upon it, Tantalus like, but he cannot touch one drop to 
 moisten the parched earth and make it smile with vegetation; it must flow 
 through the lauds of the riparianist, undiminished in quantity or quality, and 
 the rich and fertile lands around are condemned to eternal sterility. The 
 battle between the irrigator and the riparianist must be fought out in the 
 Legislature. There the laws must be made which will determine the correla- 
 tive rights of owners along a natural water-way, and we want, and must have, 
 a Legislature which will enact laws guaranteeing the greatest good to the 
 greatest number. This done, individual enterprise will do the rest, and pro- 
 vide irrigation where it can be practically and successfully used for the far- 
 mer's benefit, and open up to cultivation millions of acres of land, which, 
 under riparian rule, would remain forever uncultivated. The doctrine of 
 riparian rights must be stamped out, or our best and most productive lands 
 must be relegated to the desert; to the occupancy of the coyote, the jack rab- 
 bit and the rattlesnake. 
 
 Alameda Encinal. 
 
 Irrigfatlon. 
 
 The Executive Committee of the State Irrigation Organization has called a 
 Convention to be held in San Francisco on the 20th day of May, and re- 
 quests that clubs be organized in every county and send delegates. The pur- 
 pose of the convention will be to perfect a central organization and adopt a 
 line of policy that will secure proper action on this all-important subject by 
 the next Legislature. The idea is a good one, and the work has begun none 
 too soon. Sach an efi'ort should be made as will secure to our farmers their 
 rights in the application of our water ways to their legitimate use. Both of 
 the political parties should appreciate the fact that our husbandmen are alive 
 to the protection of their interests, and that no candidates will receive their 
 support who are not in favor of reclaiming the large area of desert land in 
 the State, and bringing those lands lying near to the water courses to that de- 
 gree of cultivation that their inherent fertility is capable of reaching. This 
 is one of the most important issues that can come before the Legislature, and 
 the efforts of the friends of irrigation should receive the hearty support of 
 both the press and the people. As a cotemporary remarks, "The settlement 
 of the irrigation question is of vital importance to the future welfare of the 
 State, and it is to be hoped that the appeal of the Committee will receive gen- 
 eral attention and eventually lead to a reform of the evils which now exist." 
 17 
 
256 
 Vacaville (Solano County) Judician. 
 
 Among all the questions in which California is vitally interested, none 
 equal in importance Ihe problem presented by the decision of the Supreme 
 Court of this State, by which irrigable lands of the interior are dominated 
 and made subject to the procrustean processes of the English common law 
 doctrines of riparian rights. A state of things which produced the English 
 system of laws cannot be found in California. With essentially different 
 conditions here, it must follow that the Legislature will make provision by 
 which the plains possessed by the cattle king may be bathed in the crystal 
 waters of the Sierras, and hundreds and thousands dwell happily when, but 
 for its benign influences, there would be but a barren range. Here, in Vaca- 
 ville, where without irrigation the grape of France, the olive of Spain, the 
 orange of Sicily, aye, and the date palm of Egypt, repay lavishly the toil of hus- 
 bandry, the question has not an immediate local application; but our concern 
 in it is by no means less than in the counties of the San Joaquin Valley. The 
 interests affected are so great, and involve consequences so momentous in 
 their effects on the future progress and greatness of California, that the mind 
 becomes dizzy as it contemplates the vista of possibilities which reach out 
 before this State when once a wise and beneficent Legislature breaks asunder 
 the shackles imposed on her by the narrow rules of the common law, and 
 bids her revel in the glorious possibilities of her nature. The problem which 
 will come before the next Legislature will call for statesmanship which can 
 contemplate the possibility of denying to the otherwise barren plains of the 
 San Joaquin a population as teeming as ever lived on the banks of the Nile. 
 Population is what this State needs to give it the prestige her wealth de- 
 mands and her future necessities in the National Congress. The party which 
 takes up this question and makes it the leading one of the next political cam- 
 paign, will deserve well of California . 
 
 The Resources of California. 
 
 Riparian Communiain. 
 
 The attempt to establish the doctrine of riparian rights to the waters of the 
 streams of California, whose climate is such that all her future growth is de- 
 pendent on irrigation, and the diversion of the waters from their channels 
 upon her arid plains, is as abhorrent to every principle of justice and right, 
 law and order, public polic)^ and private equity, as is the attempt of the fan- 
 atics of France, Germany and Kussia to foist upon the world the ideas of 
 communism, socialism, nihilism and anarchism. Were the socialists in 
 power, anarchy would reign supreme; no rights of property or person would 
 be sacred, and the ruin and desolation that marked the horrors of the com- 
 mune of Paris would become widespread and general. The growth of such 
 ideas, within the past few centuries, has resulted doubtless from the laxity of 
 government, or diminution of despotism, combined with ignorance. That 
 
257 
 
 state of society, in which shall prevail among all its memberp, the highest in- 
 telligence joined with the greatest independence of thought and action, will 
 render the prevalence of such ideas impossible. We have not as yet attained 
 such an absolutely Utopian condition in the United States or in California, 
 and it is still necessary for us to combat ideas and principles whose tendency 
 is to revolutionize society and establish a reign of anarchy. 
 
 To appreciate the force and application of this remark to the question at 
 issue, let any one visit the principal irrigation regions of the State and see 
 the many millions of dollars invested in irrigation canals and works, the 
 thriving towns, the thousands of prosperous homes, the vast acreage in vine- 
 yards, the extensive orchards, the unbounded fields of alfalfa, supporting 
 thousands of cattle and sheep, where formerly a single grasshopper could eke 
 out but a scanty existence, all maintained by irrigation, and imagine the ruin 
 that must follow the closing of the canals and the cessation of irrigation by 
 the enforcement upon our people of a doctrine of law which declares that the 
 waters of the streams must be allowed to flow in their beds, undiminished in 
 volume, and unutilized, except for the watering of live stock and the turning 
 of machinery. There are a few favored places in the State where irrigation 
 from springs and artesian wells may be practiced without fear of interference 
 from the riparian doctrine, but they are as a drop in the bucket compared to 
 the hundreds of thousands of acres irrigated from streams on which it is 
 sought to enforce the riparian principle, and the millions of acres that are yet 
 to be irrigated before the State is prepared to receive the dense population 
 she is capable of supporting. That the people of this State are to accept a 
 doctrine of law which will sweep out of existence the greater portion of the 
 improvements made by irrigation, and prevent all future development in that 
 direction is too monstrous for belief. It is on a par with anarchism, for it 
 means ruin and anarchy to the secticms now dependent for life upon irriga- 
 tion canals, and is to be combatted with the same vigor as the dangerous doc- 
 trines of communism, nihilism, or any other ism where tendency is to throw 
 all organized society into confusion and destroy property. 
 
 Fresno Daily Evening Expositor. 
 
 Another Convert. 
 
 • 
 
 The Bakersfield Gazette which has hitherto been counted against the irri- 
 gation interests, has come out squarely against riparianism, and is now in a 
 position to do its section of the valley much good. That it fully compre- 
 hends the question at issue is demonstrated in a recent article on the doc- 
 trine of riparianism. It says that the so-called advocates of riparianism do 
 not urge the doctrine because they believe it right, but because they, them- 
 selves, desire to become appropriators. Pointedly it remarks: 
 
 '• The truth ia that the riparian rights doctrine, as advocated by its chief 
 exponents in California, is used by them as a cloak for the monopolizing of 
 water and its use in a manner totally at variance with the principle of law, 
 
258 
 
 under which they seek to acquire it. The people should begin to understand 
 that no irrigation is possible under riparian law, and that those who advo- 
 cate it to obtain water for the purposes of irrigation, do so solely to trample 
 upon the rights of those who have-forestalled them in appropriating the water 
 and to destroy the result of their labor and capital, expended by the appro- 
 priators in utilizing the water in cultivating the land, and in establishing thrifty 
 homes and wealthy irrigation communities." 
 
 The Gazette exactly states the situation and the people should be shown 
 the true animus of the so-called riparianists, that they may not be led into 
 giving aid and comfort to them. The Anti-Kiparian Irrigators' Clubs should 
 take particular pains to show up this phase of the question. There is no 
 honesty in the cry of the riparianists. Selfishness is at the bottom of their 
 claim. 
 
 The Placer Republican. 
 
 The irrigation problem is looming up again, and promises to be one of the 
 foremost questions in this State until it is satisfactorily settled. 
 
 Press and Horticulturist. 
 
 Irrigfation Problem, 
 
 The Irrigation Convention at Fresno last week has issued an address to 
 the people, which we print entire, as there is not a word too much in it. It is 
 a plain statement of facts bearing on the water question that concerns every 
 citizen of this State. Our future progress and welfare depend upon heeding 
 the warning here given. If our lawQ are brought into harmony with the 
 views thus expressed, the prosperity of our State is assured, and millions of 
 acres of now waste and barren land will be thrown open to the world ; but if 
 4he riparian law is allowed to rule, the growth of the State will be stunted 
 ^nd its fair proportions curtailed ^of much of its beauty. Thirty years ago 
 Tihe gold fields of California opened up to the world unbounded wealth and 
 *t)rought to this hitherto unknown land a horde of men whose only aim was 
 •not to produce and add to the wealth of the State, but to carry off millions of 
 ^treasure to other lands, leaving^^ nothing, in return. The gold is gone, and 
 most of those who disemboweled the earth to obtain it have passed away. 
 The land now offers other millions to the new comer in the shape of the 
 orange, grape, olive, almond and fig— a wealth far surpassing all its former 
 golden trophies. It offers him a land of perpetual summer, where the palm 
 waves its branches, the magnolia blooms, and nature puts on its most gor- 
 geous apparel at a time when our neighbors at the East are shivering with the 
 cold, waiting for the few months of the year when they can go forth and till 
 the soil. 
 
 When they come here they are confronted by the law of the riparianist, 
 which says that because England, a century ago, did thus aud so, the Califor- 
 
259 
 
 nia of to-day must be hampered in its growth, bound down by the iron rule 
 of that far-off island. There no irrigation exists, and the only use they can 
 put the streams to is navigation and to turn their mills. Here there is oom» 
 paratively no navigation and but few mills, but irrigation is of paramount 
 importance, and we should as soon think of using our grandfather's love- 
 letters to do our courting with as to tie ourselves down to the use and adop- 
 tion of such a law. Every stream should be compelled to do duty in making 
 the land valuable; every canyon that can be dammed to hold the winter rain 
 and melting snow should be made into an immense reservoir for the same 
 great purpose, until every drop of water in our State be transmuted into lus- 
 cious fruit or waving grain, to bring back for our use the gold we so freely- 
 yielded Tip to our neighbors. 
 
 It is strange that the people of C ilifornia have neglected so long to seo 
 where their interest lay and have allowed the riparian system to get such a 
 foothold on our coast, when it should have been made the foremost issue with 
 all political parties, or rather one issue above all others, regardless of party 
 and politics. It is no mere theory, but this section of California has showD 
 what can be done by irrigation; it is the life-blood, not only of Southern 
 California, but will prove the same of nearly every portion of the State. The 
 success of riparianism means a retrograde step in our prosperity and discour- 
 agement to the principal industries and pursuits of the State. Thousands of 
 people from the East are turning their eyes and thoughts to this fruit eldora- 
 do, and when they come they must find righteous and beneficent laws to 
 assist them in building up their future homes. 
 
 The address from the Executive Committee of the Irrigation Convention is 
 timely and right to the point. Prompt, determined and decisive action is 
 needed. The people must organize at once, irrespective of party, so as to 
 demand the nomination of men for the coming Legislature who are known to 
 V^e in accord with the interests of the people on this question. Let the dif- 
 ferent political parties know all over the State that to secure support they 
 must nominate only such men as will command the support of 'the irrigation- 
 ists. The people should demand of all candidates coming before them for 
 their suffrage, that there should be embodied in the written laws of the State 
 the inalienable and sovereign right of the people of the State to use, for agri- 
 cultural and horticultural purposes, the waters of our streams and rivers, and 
 that any attempt to keep such water from its legitimate use of cheering the 
 thirsty soil, should be severely punished. Every section of the State should 
 proceed to organize at once to carry on the good work and see that the right 
 men are sent to represent them, and require such men to give pledges that 
 they will make irrigation their first concern; that they will not allow the irri- 
 gation bills before the next Legislature to be set aside and delayed by other 
 measures; that they will stand by them firm as a rock till they become laws. 
 With such action on the part of the people they cannot help but succeed. 
 
260 
 
 The Placer Republican. 
 
 Irrig'ation. 
 
 The people of the valleys, and of Southern California in particular, have 
 begun the usual agitation of the irrigation problem. The subject is equally 
 interesting here and almost as vital to our interests as it is to those of any 
 other section. The State Committee having in charge what is called the 
 Fresno plan, has issued an address to the friends of irrigation and called a 
 convention to meet in San Francisco on the 20th of May. It should not be 
 understood that the words, " Fresno plan," are applied to a system peculiarly 
 adapted to advancing the interests of Fresno aloue. They are used because 
 an important convention to consider the subject happened to be held at that 
 place in November, 1884. It might with more justice be called the common 
 sense plan, because the material interests of the State depend largely on 
 adopting the principles there declared as opposed to the doctrine of riparian 
 rights. 
 
 The principle contended for by the irrigationists may be briefly stated to 
 be, that all water shall be utilized for the good of the greatest possible num- 
 ber, instead of being allowed to flow uselessly to the sea at the whim of those 
 who own the land along its channels. According to our present law the com- 
 mon law of England is the rule of the decision in all the Courts of the State. 
 In England riparian rights are as sacred as the throne; but the law of Eng- 
 land was made for England, a land of landlords and boundless estates, where 
 the necessities of irrigation beyond what can be accomplished with a water- 
 ing-pot are unknown. We can leave to lawyers the task of discoursing on 
 the desirability of conforming to the English law in general, but to make the 
 English system of water rights the rule in a climate like this is not common 
 sense. It would show better judgment to adopt the '• common law" of 
 Asia, It would indicate more common sense to follow the usage of the Spanish 
 colonies, which made the use of water a public use. Our own Constitution 
 declares that "the use of all water now appropriated, or that may hereafter 
 be appropriated for sale, rental or distribution, is hereby declared to be a 
 public use, and subject to the regulation and control of the State, in the man- 
 ner to be prescribed by law." To adopt the English rule in the face of this 
 provision seems like the extreme of absurdity. There can be no such thing 
 as ownership of running water. It is on one man's land one minute and on 
 another's the next. It is the means given by nature to reclaim thousands of 
 acres of otherwise barren land. The right to use it should not be confined 
 to a few, nor should a few have it in their power to say that it shall run to 
 waste unused. 
 
 It is said that the plans of the irrigationists will destroy the internal navi- 
 gation of the State. Few believe that, but if it does, the latter interest will 
 bear no comparison with the good that will result from wise irrigation laws. 
 A very small percentage indeed of the produce of the State goes to market by 
 water. People do not travel much by water, and the importance of naviga- 
 tion on three hundred miles of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers is as 
 
261 
 
 nothing compared with the prosperity of all the valleys, plains and foothills 
 from Shasta to Lower California. 
 
 The irrigationists propose to carry this contest into the campaign this fall 
 regardless of party, and candidates for office will have to trim their sails to 
 navigate this dry land question. We hope to see the irrigationists win. 
 
 Modesto Herald. 
 
 Th.e Irrigation Q,aegtion. 
 
 Eventually California will be irrigated from the north end of the Sacramento 
 valley to the extreme southern part of San Diego. There need be no fears as 
 to that. The demand for just such products as require irrigation will compel 
 this work. During the past three months over 100,000 people from the East- 
 ern States have visited California with the intention of buying homes and 
 engaging in the culture of fruits, raisins and wines. They have become con- 
 vinced that there is a market for all that California can produce, and they 
 come well informed on the subject. They have in view the culture of the 
 orange and lemon as well. They have witnessed the enthusiasm with which 
 California fruits of all kinds have been received in the Eastern cities, and 
 particularly California wines, which they consider more pure and wholesome 
 than any foreign product that finds its way to our shores. They have not 
 large fortunes to spend for small farms, but they have the enterprise and the 
 muscle to carry them forward to success. The cut rates in railroad fares and 
 freights have been a god-send to California. More people are in San Francisco 
 to-day, and have been each day for the past month, than were present during 
 the conclave. Hundreds are turned away from the prominent hotels every 
 evening, and every lodging house in the city is full. These are not tramps 
 and adventurers. They are men of enterprise and means who have a desire 
 to locate in this State, and now is the opportunity for this State to secure an 
 increased population of hardy husbandmen. That is the character of the 
 people who are coming to-day. 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 A Misapprehension. 
 
 We observe that there are some papers in the State that, while disposed to 
 be friendly to the cause of irrigation, misapprehend the meaning of the doc- 
 trine or law of appropriation. They take it to mean that whoever diverts 
 water from a stream becomes the owner of that water, to do with it as he 
 pleases, thus having it in his power, by running it to waste, to bring about 
 as much injury as an end man, provided the opposite, or riparian doctrine is 
 confirmed and made the law of the State. But nothing is further from the 
 fact. The appropriator is entitled to the water he diverts, so long only as he 
 applies it to a beneficial use. For example, after he has irrigated his crop, 
 he no longer has right to the water. It then becomes common property 
 
262 
 
 until he again requires it for that purpose. It must be returned to the chan- 
 nel to be taken up by the ditches and canals of other appropriators, to be used 
 in like manner. This is the law of all countries where irrigation is recog- 
 nized, encouraged and protected by law, aud the preferred use of water is for 
 that purpose. For this reason, in all such countries, streams used for irriga- 
 tion are under police control — under an authority that promptly and arbitra- 
 rily decides all questions respecting diversions from them; complaints of 
 waste and misuse of the precious fluid being those which most frequently 
 come under such cognizance. To establish this necessary police control in 
 all the irrigated districts of the State, and especially to prevent appropria- 
 tors from continuing control over their diversions of water after they had 
 ceased to need it, and waste it as they would then necessarily do, was 
 the purpose of one of the bills before the Legislature at the late session. It 
 expressly provided that no appropriator could take any more water, or for a 
 longer time, than his needs required. Its purpose was to provide for the 
 economical use of water, and to extend its benefits to the greatest number 
 possible. To this end, and to carry out other purposes that long experience 
 had proved essential — all looking to the economical use of water and divert- 
 ing it to the greatest good of the greatest number, and reducing the cost of 
 conveyance to the minimum, the bill proposed to create certain officers to 
 bear all complaints relating to water, redress wrongs, and work generally for 
 the interests of those within the irrigating system they controlled, according 
 to forms and processes prescribed. 
 
 Daily Examiner. 
 
 Irrig^ation and tlie Lavr. 
 
 In the economy of modern civilization, under democratic representative 
 governments, all popular and political "movements," so called, are simply 
 efforts of the people to bring the law into harmony with their righls and in- 
 terests. It is difficult to change the laws. They are crystallizations, so to 
 speak, of past customs and opinions, and are often thickly incrusted with 
 prejudices and fortified with established interests that antagonize the just de- 
 mands of the masses. Hence it is that it frequently happens, even in the 
 most free countriep, that the changes in the law demanded by the people can 
 only be effected by popular uprisings that would amount to revolutions un- 
 der monarchial and less pliant forms of governmont. 
 
 This idea finds an apt illustration in the contention now goirig on in our 
 State over the question of water for irrigation. The masses of the people un- 
 derstand clearly that their future material prosperity depends in an eminent 
 degree upon the establishment and maintenance of a thorough system of irri- 
 gation for the arid plains which stretch for hundreds of miles along the great 
 valley of California. Much the greater part of the arable land of the State is 
 not sufficiently watered by the annual rainfall and the riparian acreage is a 
 small fraction of the whole. And yet many millions of acres of land in the 
 
&63 
 
 vast basin, which are naturally too arid for vegetation, are susceptible of the 
 highest cultivation when irrigated. This is known, as we say, to the people. 
 And they know, too, that it is the universal custom, and, therefore, the com- 
 mon law of all dry countries, that the water in running streams is public 
 property and subject to appropriation and diversion for the necessary pur- 
 pose of irrigation. 
 
 The first immigrants who came to California from the States beyond the 
 mountains found such customary law among the few Spanish-Mexican inhab- 
 itants of mission lands and grants. The Americans adapted themselves to 
 the physical condition of the country and to the laws and customs in that re- 
 gard imposed thereby. Hundreds of thousands of fortune-hunters came. 
 Gold mines first attracted them, but these becoming rapidly exhausted, they 
 turned their attention to the soil, so rich and productive. The marvellous 
 growth of the new State proceeded, and visions of imperial greatness began 
 to arise in the imaginations of the people. 
 
 But being Americans of English origin, we brought with our language and 
 with our grand principles of liberty and justice, the body of the common law 
 of England. By statutory enactment we made this the rule of decision in our 
 Courts, except where changed or modified by the Constitution and laws of 
 the United States and of the State. And now we are told by a few lawyers, 
 speaking for a few clients who own the banks of some of the streams, that it 
 is unlawful to divert water from running streams for the purpose of irrigating 
 the land. Such was the law of England — of humid, saturated, fog enshroud- 
 ed England — and is therefore the law of California. 
 
 Neither space nor patience will permit our discussing the proposition. It 
 rather merits denunciation and derision. And indeed the irrigation move- 
 ment now rapidly progressing throughout this State is too likely to partake 
 of these characteristics. 
 
 There is no doubt whatever of the result of this movement. It will effect- 
 ively bring the laws of California, in respect of water rights, into full harmo- 
 ny with the rights and interests of the people. Hereafter it will be entirely 
 lawful, as well as absolutely necessary, to irrigate. 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 The Supreme Court and Irrifgation. 
 
 The decision of the Supreme Court of California in the now celebrated 
 irrigation case, cannot be too often noticed. Not that the people are partic- 
 ularly interested in the parties to the suit, nor in the decision, so far as it 
 merely relates to the immediate litigants. The plaintiffs are swamp land 
 proprietors and cattle kings, and the defendants are extensive ranchers and 
 canal owners. The public care nothing about their individual interests and 
 quarrels. But when the highest judicial tribunal in the State, in assuming to 
 settle a private controversy, takes the occasion to announce a rule of law for 
 other cases — a rule of public law, which is calculated, in its far-reaching 
 
264 
 
 effects, to destroy half the wealth of the State and to throttle the agricultural 
 interests of the people, then the individual interests of the parties to the suit 
 sink into insignificance and the power of the Court for evil becomes a matter 
 of public concern. 
 
 Until the decision in this water case was rendered, the great mass of the 
 people of California had never doubted that the water which flows down from 
 our mountain ranges into the great valleys, mostly in non-navigable streams, 
 might be diverted and appropriated for irrigation. This had been done in all 
 arid and comparatively rainless countries throughout the whole world from 
 the earliest ages. Several hundred millions of the population of the world 
 have subsisted for time, whereof the memory of man runneth not to the con- 
 trary, upon products raised upon irrigated land. American pioneers came to 
 California. They came from the saturated valleys and dripping hillsides of 
 the East. They found a great arid and seemingly desert region. But they 
 soon discovered that the great valley of California could sustain a population 
 of fifteen or twenty million souls if the soil could be watered and the luxuri- 
 ant vegetation started. They began to irrigate, as other people had done in 
 other arid lands. Witness the marvellous results! Immense grain fields, 
 extensive vineyards, innumerable orchards, thousands of lovely and happy 
 homes, where but yesterday the grasslesa plains knew only the cayote and 
 the prairie dog. 
 
 But suddenly, and entirely unexpectedly, comes the announcement from 
 the highest Court of the State that all this is against the law ! The water 
 must not be taken from the beds of the streams; it must be allowed to "flow 
 unvexed to the sea" (swamp), because, forsooth, the common law of England 
 is the rule of decision in our courts, and, according to the common law of 
 England, every owner of any portion of the banks of a stream had the right 
 to have all the water flow past him. 
 
 It is not our purpose, now, to argue against the absurdity of this conclu- 
 sion. Perhaps it would be better to say against the wrongness of this con- 
 clusion. It is enough to say that it is wrong, because it will work immeas- 
 urable injury to the State and incalculable injustice to the people. 
 
 It is not necessary that we should assert nor that any one should suppose 
 that the Judges of our Supreme Court were actuated or controlled by any but 
 the purest motives. "We concede that they are above reproach. They have 
 simply blundered, perhaps. In that case, since the question is one of public 
 concern, let the representatives of the people correct the blunder. Or it may 
 be that the fault is with the letter of the law, although frankly, we think not. 
 If that is so, change the law. Law must serve the public good and not in- 
 justice; it is not to destroy but to subserve and conserve. 
 
 The remedy is with the people. In the end they have the power to make 
 all law, whether it be legislation proper or Judge made. The general election 
 is approaching. A new Legislature is to be chosen. Other Judges are to be 
 elected. Let the people speak their will. 
 
 While there can be no question as to the propriety of early action, we find 
 contrary to what we feared, that there is, likewise, no word of disapproval of 
 
265 
 
 their course in calling the next meeting of the convention at San Francisco, 
 insleadfcf at one of the large towns or cities of the southern part of the 
 State. The press and people have been more quick to see than we imagined 
 they could be that San Francisco, as the metropolis, and because of its rela- 
 tion to the great central valleys, the development of which will give the local 
 population, it must have to become one of the great leading cities of the 
 world, like New York or London, is more deeply interested in wiping out 
 all suspicion of riparian law from our legal system and the enactment of 
 proper irrigation legislation than any part of the State. From that point 
 all work in this direction should receive its main impetus and come as from 
 some great controling center. With irrigation protected and promoted in 
 this State, as it is in every other part of the earth where the same climatic 
 conditions prevail, the great interior valleys, that convey toward San Fran- 
 cisco in our narrow commercial channel would have a prosperous population 
 of ten or twelve millions of people, within a period short even in relation to 
 a lifetime, and the city be sustained by the largest contiguous population 
 and resources of any in the world. No city ever became great through the 
 possession alone of a fine harbor and an extensive trade in transit. In addi- 
 tion to this, it must be the trade, financial and manufacturing center of a 
 large population. San Francisco has been slow to realize this; but it has 
 done so at last. The press of that city are now the most earnest champions 
 of the irrigation interests, and from its merchants, business men, property 
 owners and capitalists will come the most strenuous representations in favor 
 of necessary legislation to the next Legislature. 
 
 Accordingly the committee have established their headquarters at San Fran- 
 cisco, in the Merchants' Exchange, and from that point will labor strenuously 
 to enlighten and influence public opinion in every part of the State in relation 
 to the great work they have in hand — of such vital importance to San Fran- 
 cisco and the entire State. The opposition they have to contend with is the 
 most contemptible and unworthy, considered in itself, that could be imag- 
 ined. As far as it showed itself at the late session of the Legislature, it 
 consisted only of five or six cattle men — former opponents of the no fence 
 law — and owners of swamp lands at the ends, or sinks of the streams of the 
 Tulare valley, to which they obtained title because the water was taken away 
 and they were made dry. But these men are powerful because of their 
 wealth, their close alliance ^d the harmony with which they work together. 
 In these days, the justice of a cause, while a powerful support, is by no 
 means sure of sustaining itself against corrupt influences. These men with, 
 out a wrong to complain of — in face of a proposed provision of law to pay them 
 for the infringement of any right or loss they might sustain through the use of 
 the water of the streams aforesaid for irrigation— were yet able to make a 
 winning fight, taking their stand on the allegation that such and such was 
 law, that being so, it must stand superior to the interests of civilization and 
 to the welfare of the State, and that the interests of several hundreds of 
 thousands of people were of no moment if they collided with any alleged 
 lawful right of theirs. But as was exemplified in the case of the no fence 
 
266 
 
 law, against which these men, or those they represent, long waged a suc- 
 cessful contest, the committee believe that right and justice will pr^ail in 
 the end. They, or men equally persistent and determined, will continue the 
 fight until the resources of their opponents are exhausted — until, if neces- 
 sary, their swamp lands represent to them values equal to lots along the great 
 business thoroughfares of London. 
 
 Oakland Morning Times. 
 
 The irrigation problem is being unravelled in such a way that the next leg- 
 islature cannot fail to consider it favorably. The whole country is waking 
 up to the fact that we must have our river water properly distributed in the 
 large valleys or give the land up to cattle ranchers, who will forever keep it 
 in a desert state with but a few shanties here and there. The only objection 
 that has been made to the irrigation scheme so far, is that it will injure our 
 navigable streafns. This is simply bosh, for the reason that the water will 
 soon be returned to its channel. It is a well-known fact among irrigators, 
 that after a few years the land irrigated becomes so saturated that but a very 
 little water is needed, and the ditches have to be used only once or twice dur- 
 ing the year. Around Fresno the land for miles back from the ditches is so 
 saturated that one good flooding at the proper time will guarantee a fine crop, 
 whereas when the di'ches were first brought into the valley they had to keep 
 them full all summer. The riparian rights' men will spring all kinds of 
 traps for the unthinking lawmakers between now and the next session; hence 
 the friends of prosperity will have to be wide awake all the time, and work 
 like beavers until their bill passes both houses and is signed by the Governor. 
 
 Kern County Californian. 
 
 TKe Irrigation. Issue, 
 
 A considerable part of our space last week was devoted to the work of the 
 Executive Committee of tlie State Irrigation Convention, which convened at 
 Fresno on the 5th inst. They have not only outlined a vigorous course of 
 action, but have taken the field early. One of the mistakes of the Irrigation 
 Convention was, that its last session at Fresno did not take place early 
 enough, and when it adjourned the Executive Committee appointed by it to 
 carry into effect its views had less than three weeks to prepare before the 
 session of the Legislature commenced. Their bills should have been the 
 first presented in both Houses, as they doubtless would have been if the 
 committee had been given three months for preliminary preparation instead 
 of the totally inadequate period that remained to them between the adjourn- 
 ment of the convention and the meeting of the Legislature. As it was, not- 
 withstanding the unavoidable delay in the preparation of the bills, their im, 
 perfections consequent upon hasty work, the deadlock and the mistakes 
 made because of the impossibility of due deliberation on all the steps that 
 
267 
 
 were taken, they came very near to the successful accomplishment of all they 
 had in charge to do. Their bills passed the Assembly by majorities of more 
 than two-thirds, and would have passed the Senate by large majorities except 
 for the obstructive tactics of a few Senators who considered themselves at- 
 torneys for the five or six end men of the streams of the Tulare Valley, and as 
 such, forgetting that they had duties to perform as legislators, devoted all 
 their time, ingenuity and pettifogging skill to the work. The committee will 
 render an account of their stewardship to the State Convention which, pur- 
 suant to their powers, they have called^ together in San Francisco on the 
 20th proximo, and whether tney are continued in place or their succssors 
 appointed, time at least for the accomplishment of what the irrigation inter- 
 ests of the State require will not be wanting — time, the want of which was so 
 disastrously felt before. 
 
 The Contra Costa Argus. 
 
 Tlie Irrigation Q,ue8tion. 
 
 At a meeting of the Legislative Committee of the State Anti-Riparian Irri- 
 gation Association, held at Fresno on Mondav, it was resolved to hold a con- 
 vention at San Francisco on Thursday, May 20th, for the purpose of effect- 
 ing a permanent central organization for the purpose of formulating plans 
 to perfect the irrigation laws at the next session of the Legislature, and also to 
 lay plans for action during the coming campaign. This question will enter 
 largely into party councils, and will cause no little discussion. We have 
 received a supply of documents from the committee, and shall refer to the 
 qaestion occasionally. 
 
 Daily Alta California, 
 
 Th absurdity of attempting to apply the modern English doctrine of "ri- 
 parian rights," in its full extent, to the streams, and alleged streams, of Cali- 
 fornia has often been pointed out. In England it is quite possible for every 
 stream to be utilized to the utmost without having its natural flow substan- 
 tially impeded or diminished from its source to the sea. Aside from domestic 
 use, and from the fertility imparted by the stream to the adjacent land, the 
 principal private benefit to be derived from a water-course there, is that it is 
 a source of power for mechanical purposes. It is right enough, too, that this 
 benefit should be appropriated wholly to the use of those through whose lands 
 the stream runs. If it were diverted from its natural channel it could not, 
 ordinarily, be devoted to a more extended or beneficial use. Irrigation by arti- 
 ificial methods is not, in that country, a necessity or even a benefit. The 
 streams are so plentiful and the atmosphere so humid, that it is impossible 
 for any tract of land to be deprived of necessary moisture; in fact there is 
 everywhere a surplus of moisture. Hence the doctrine that every owner of 
 land upon a water-course is entitled to have the water flow in its natural 
 
268 
 
 channel through or past his land without substantial hindrance or diminu- 
 tion is there manifestly, just and appropriate, and injures no one. 
 
 But in California it is far otherwise. Here the rule is that the streams are 
 more useful when direrted than when confined to their natural channels. 
 Irrigation is here one of the principal and most important uses of a water- 
 course. There are vast tracts of land lying at a distance from any natural 
 streams which, by artificial irrigation, may be converted into vineyards, 
 groves and gardens of surpassing richness and bewildering bloom, but which, 
 without such aid, must remain mere arid wastes. Besides this, many of the 
 streams, while confined to the tracts through which they run, if they may be 
 said to run at all, so sink beneath the surface of the ground or run so far 
 below the surface of the adjacent ground, that even the riparian owners can- 
 not use them for irrigation and restore them to their channels before leaving 
 their own lands. If the modern English common law is to prevail here, 
 therefore, the value of these streams can never be realized, and large areas of 
 the most valuable lands in the State must remain uncultivated. 
 
 There is no rule or reason, nor, as we think, of law, which is said to be 
 " the perfection of reason," justifying the application to such a condition of 
 things as we have here of the churlish doctrine that the owner of land bor- 
 dering upon a stream may, without employing its waters for any useful pur- 
 pose himself, insist upon keeping them in their channel, while his neighbor's 
 thirsty fields parch and blister in the sun, and are condemned to hopeless 
 sterility. The obviously just and reasonable rule with respect to property in 
 water to be applied here is the rule already sanctioned by the immemorial 
 practice of our people, by numerous judicial decisions both of the Supreme 
 Court of the United States and by the Supreme Court of this State, and by 
 express statute law, the distinctively California rule of" priority of appropri- 
 ation." The rightful owner of the water of a stream, where streams are so 
 few, and those who need to use them are so many, is in natural justice he who 
 by his energy and enterprise first appropriates it to some beneficial purpose, 
 to the extent that he does so appropriate it. Water has been describe! as a 
 *• wandering thing," and therefore, like the air, incapable of ownership apart 
 from the soil upon which it rests or runs, but certainly if there can be any 
 property in it, he should be deemed its owner who first captures the wanderer 
 and tames it to be his servant. There is no more reason why the owner of 
 land over which a stream runs should own the stream, without making any 
 use of it, so as to prevent another from appropriating it before it reaches his 
 land, than there is why he should own the wild animals that roam through 
 bis forests or the free birds that perch upon their branches. 
 
 There is no hardship in this rule of prior appropriation. It leaves the ripa- 
 rian owner every reasonable right and privilege. He may make the water in 
 the stream coursing through his land his own by using it; and he has a bet- 
 ter opportunity than any one else to make the appropriation, because the 
 water is already on his land. He has but to stoop and take it. Any compet- 
 itor with him for its use is compelled to turn it into a channel and carry it 
 
269 
 
 many miles, perhaps, to reach the laud, at an expenditure of much time, 
 labor and money. The riparian owner, therefore, has, by his position upon 
 the stream, every advantage over his neighbors which he can justly claim, 
 and if he suffers himself to be outstripped in the race for priority, it can only 
 be by his own want of dilij^ence and enterprise. If he sits and dreams upon 
 his bank until another has appropriated the water he has only himself to 
 blame. 
 
 The inapplicability of the English doctrine to most of the so-called water- 
 courses in California, and the justice of the rule of prior appropriation as 
 respects them, are further manifest when we come to consider that they are 
 not in fact watercourses at all, with " bed, banks and water," as required by 
 the definitions in the books. The water confines itself for a short distance 
 only to some semblance of a defined channel, and as soon as it leaves the 
 mountains and reaches the plains, it spreads itself out over the land into a 
 mere marsh, standing here and there in sluggish, brackish pools, unfit for 
 any use, or loses itself entirely in the porous soil, to reappear at some dis- 
 tant point, with nothing to mark its course between. It has a general slow 
 tendency seaward, which can scarcely be dignified with the name of "cur- 
 rent." Indeed, it has none of the characteristics of those well-defined 
 streams to which the English doctrine was meant to be applied. These 
 pretended watercourses in California are utterly incapable of any beneficial 
 use, except to nourish a few coarse marsh grasses until they have been gath- 
 ered into defined channels and distributed to points where they are needed 
 by the labor of man. They become useful by artificial means, and justice 
 demands that he who, by his money and labor, makes them beneficial, should 
 own their waters. 
 
 It is a notable and significant fact that most of the stoutest champions of 
 riparian rights in California are claimants under the Swamp Land Act. This 
 is notably so in Fresno, Tulare and Kern counties. These people bought 
 their lands as mere swamps; but now they claim them to be watercourses, 
 and that they are riparian owners. They undertook, when they purchased, 
 as a part of the consideration of the purchase, to drain their lands of their 
 sluggish, miasma-breeding waters; but now they claim that they have a right to 
 keep them forever as they are, and not only not to drain them themselves, but 
 to prevent others from doiDg so. That this is a breach of faith which ought 
 not to be tolerated by the people of California goes without saying. The 
 purpose of the swamp land legislation of the Federal and State Governments 
 was a wise and beneficent one. If that purpose were faithfully carried out, 
 it would add immensely to the productive area of California soil. It would 
 convert these pestilential bog-pastures into fruitful fields. And, besides, the 
 collection of these stagnant waters in ditches and canals would furnish the 
 means of irrigating countless acres of desert lands and of making them 
 valuable. It may be true that the owners of these bogs find it more profita- 
 ble not to drain them, but it was not for Iheir profit that drainage was re- 
 quired. In selling the lands to them, it was not left to their option to drain 
 them or not. They bound themselves by their contracts to drain them, and 
 
270 
 
 the good of the whole State requires that they should fulfill their contract. 
 At all events, they have no right to object to others draining their swamps 
 for them for the purpose of using the water upon other lands. The ludi- 
 crous pretense of riparian ownership by these swamp land purchasers, who 
 have thus deliberately broken the contracts under which thoy purchased, 
 ought not to be permitted to stand in the way of the prosperity of the State. 
 We need the lands which are left to lie waste by the surly greed of these pur- 
 chasers, for homes for the new population now flocking to the State, and in 
 order to irrigate those lands and bring them into cultivation, we must have 
 the surplus water which now goes to fill these swamps, whether the bog- 
 owners like it or not. 
 
 Oakland Morning Times. 
 
 The irrigation boom is getting under headway once more. The oflBcers of 
 the last Irrigation Convention will meet in a few days at Fresno, and a call 
 will be issued for a convention to take place very soon. They will proba- 
 bly decide on meeting in Oakland, as one of the head men was in this city a 
 few days ago, and seemed to be anxious to have the Appropriators come 
 here. If the gentlemen wish to educate the prospective law makers of this 
 part of the State, we don't know of a better place for them to meet than in 
 Oakland. It is near the centre of the State, and besides, the people of Oak- 
 land and San Francisco are very anxious to be enlightened on the question of 
 irrigating the San Joaquin valley. Let us have the convention here by all 
 means. We will guarantee to make it the biggest success of the kind ever 
 held in California. 
 
 Kern County Galifornian. 
 
 Navigfation and Riparianism. 
 
 The riparian poll-parrot at Sacramento is screaming to save the navigation 
 of the Sacramento river, falsely asserting that unless the riparian law is sus- 
 tained, river navigation will be destroyed. 
 
 The navigability of the rivers is protected by a diflferent principle of law. 
 Riparian rights have not the remotest relation to navigation. Navigable riv- 
 ers are public highways of commerce, the obstruction of which is a public 
 nuisance. A riparian owner has no higher right than any individual of the 
 community in maintaining navigable waters. 
 
 Oakland Morning Times. 
 
 Every Man. 
 
 The Secretary of State Bayard says that the growth and exports of wheat 
 from India during the past few years has been wonderful, and he anticipates 
 great damage to the industry in this country from that quarter. This is no 
 
271 
 
 more than what the people of California might have expected since it was 
 learned that two crops of wheat can be raised yearly in India, and the yield 
 per acre is about three times greater than it is here, and the cost of seeding 
 and harvesting fully a half less. If this be true, and we have no reason to 
 doubt its truthfulness, for Mr. Bayard can be relied upon on such matters, 
 then it is high time for the people of the United States, and California espe- 
 cially, to cast about them for some other use to put their land to. Ever since 
 California was settled, a majority of its people have held to the belief that 
 our rich valley lands cannot be used for anything except the production of 
 cereals. They have fallen into this way of thinking on account of the scarcity 
 of water and the uncertainty of the rainy season. We can very distinctly re- 
 member the time when it was firmly believed that the great San Joaquin val- 
 ley would not even produce grain, but it is a well-known fact now]that almost 
 anything will grow on the once arid plains, if an abundance of water is fur- 
 nished. Under such circumstances we are in a condition to let India raise as 
 much wheat as she pleases, and we will furnish the world with fruit and 
 wines. There is "no money" in the production of cereals, and there never 
 will be again, so we must turn our attention to a more pleasant and profitable 
 business. We have the only country in the world that will yield fruits of all 
 kinds at all seasons of the year, and with such great advantages on our side 
 there is no reason why we should not furnish the entire globe with fruits and 
 wines that never could have been produced except in the Garden of Eden. 
 But before this state of affairs is brought about we must settle the irrigation 
 question. There must be a plenty of water and that water must come from 
 the numerous waterways of our great valleys, in spite of the big cattle kings. 
 We cannot depend on wheat in the future, therefore we must have irrigation 
 and fruit, and it is the duty of every man in the State who is not a cattle 
 king to join the appropriators and see that the next Legislature does its duty 
 in this matter. 
 
 Oakland Enquirer. 
 
 The Irrigation Qaestion, 
 
 For many years past the irrigators of the State, men who have capital in- 
 vested in land and water-rights, have been striving to get recognition before 
 the Legislature. They want to have the irrigation interest placed on such a 
 permanent basis that those who buy irrigated or irrigable land may do so . 
 with the assurance that their rights to water are as fixed and tangible as their 
 title to the land. Owners of dry land, not yet irrigated, do not want to un- 
 dertake large investments in the line of irrigation canals, until the question 
 of riparianism is settled. They do not wish to risk confiscation until tbey 
 are sure that it is out of the power of any one to ruin them by shutting off 
 their water supply. Irrigators who have their money already invested, who 
 have planted orchards and vineyards, and have built up prosperous homes, 
 surrounded by verdant meadows, and embowered in roses and vines, in the 
 18 
 
272 
 
 midst of arid deserts, through the agency of water, are even more deeply in- 
 terested in having a code of laws which will guarantee them the perpetual en- 
 joyment of the wealth they have created. They want laws which will protect 
 thelDQ from mutual encroachment, whose administration will give to each ap- 
 propriator the quantity to which he is entitled by proscriptive right, and 
 which will prevent strife, or worse, in the division of the supply among the 
 consumers. 
 
 In all previous efforts of attaining such legislation, the representatives of 
 San Francisco and Oakland, with the exception of Senator Whitney, and one 
 or two others perhaps, have taken no very active interest. To them it has 
 seemed to be a fight which did not greatly concern their constituents, and 
 they have either held aloof or given it lukewarm encouragement, if not posi- 
 tively opposed to the measures proposed. They have not risen to an appre- 
 ciation of the fact that thoy are as deeply interested as any one else. They 
 do not see that if all the waters that now flow to the sea, through our great 
 unutilized valleys, were spread upon the lands, our State would suppjprt sev- 
 eral millions of people in addition to its present population, and that San 
 Francisco and Oakland would increase in business, in wealth, and in popula- 
 tion, in a proportionate degree to the general growth of the State. But the 
 earnestness and persistence of the advocates of irrigation is beginning to have 
 its effect, and there is evidence that the merchants and property-holders of 
 our two great seaboard cities are awakening to the situation. The coming 
 convention, to be held in San Francisco, May 20th, should arouse their inter- 
 est. They will learn from the men who will be present, and who understand 
 the situation^ the story of their grievances, the trials and the perils of the 
 irrigators, and they will then see in a clear light one of the causes of the slow 
 growth of our State, and why Kansas, Nebraska, Dakota, Minnesota, and 
 other Western States and Territories, with soils less fertile, and climate bleak 
 and severe, have so far outstripped our beautiful land in population and agri- 
 cultural developments. The explanation is simple. Our valleys need irriga- 
 tion to produce the varied crops required to support dense populations, and 
 we are allowing the wealth of the land to flow by to the sea unused, because 
 timid capital fears to invest in the necessary works without protective legisla- 
 tion. We must start with the square principle, embodied in our constitution, 
 if need be, that the waters of our streams belong to the State, and are to be 
 utilized, and that every encouragement must be given through beneficent 
 laws for their utilization. 
 
 Livermore Valley Review. 
 
 The Irri£fation Q,ae8tion. 
 
 The address of the Executive Committee of the Fresno Irrigation Conven- 
 tion, recently published, appears to have met universal approval throughout 
 the State. And the action of the Committee in calling a mass convention to 
 meet in San Francisco in May, has also been generally commended. If we 
 
 J 
 
 i 
 
273 
 
 can judge from the tone of the newspapers, both city and country, the vital 
 subject of water rights discussed by the Committee and to be considered by 
 the convention next month is attracting merited attention in every direction. 
 And this is well. There is no more important question before the people of 
 California. Just now we have been having in most parts of the State copious 
 rains. But with the experience of forty years we know that this grateful 
 downpour is exceptional. Next year and perhaps for several years to come, 
 the soil of the great valleys will be parched and too arid for cultivation unless 
 an artificial supply of water is afforded. The vast grain fields and extensive 
 vineyards and orchards in the end depend, and must ever depend, upon irri- 
 gation. It is the essential requirement of the physical conditions of the 
 great valley of California. 
 
 It is only surprising that there should be any question at all, in this State, 
 about the propriety, the necessity and the legality of diverting water from the 
 running streams for the purpose of irrigating and fructifying the richly pro- 
 ductive lands which, when watered, so willingly Hoom and bear fruits be- 
 neath our sunny skies. In all other lands so situated, lauds which support 
 hundreds of millions of the human race, the waters of heaven are dedicated 
 by custom and by law to general use. Here only, of all the arid countries, 
 the claim is set up that the waters in running streams belong to the riparian 
 proprietors — the owners of the banks. And our highest court has so decided, 
 basing its conclusion upon the fact that the common law of England has been 
 made the rule of decision in California and that in England such is the law. 
 
 The irrigation question or issue, now before the people of California, can 
 be stated very briefly : A few riparian owners claim a monopoly of the water 
 which descends to and traverses the great valleys and which is absolutely 
 necessary tor irrigation. The people contend that this water is public prop- 
 el ty and subject to be diverted and used for the general good under proper 
 governmental regulations. The monopolists say that the law, as held by the 
 Court, favors their pretensions. The people say that the laws were not in- 
 tended to destroy but to conserve and that if the letter of the law can be so 
 construed as to ruin the agriculture of the State it must be changed and made 
 so clear that in the future there can be no question of the right to divert 
 water for irrigation. 
 
 The Pleasanton Star. 
 
 Importance of IrrigatioTk, 
 
 The irrigation problem which is now exciting and receiving so much atten- 
 tion is of vital importance to the State. And not only to the agricultural 
 districts, whose aridity of the land renders an artificial supply of water abso- 
 lutely necessary, but also to the two great cities on the bay. San Francisco 
 and Oakland are dependents for their prosperity upon the tributary country 
 which lies in the immense valley between the Sierras and the Coast Range, 
 This valley of California, comprising more than fifty million acres of land, in 
 
274 
 
 its climatic and physical characteristics and in its capacity for luxuriant and 
 varied prodactiveness, is entirely unlike any other portion of the United 
 States beyond the Rocky Mountains, and as different from England, whence 
 our laws and civilization came, as are the steppes of Asia. The soil in this 
 vast basin, when fructified by sufficient moisture, is as productive as any on 
 earth. The cereals, vines, fruits, all the products of the temperate zone and 
 many of the semi-tropics thrive. Could the arable laud iu this valley be 
 brought under cultivation, it would sustain a population of from ten to fifteen 
 millions. And if this were done; if this population could be secured by im- 
 migration of those of our own race, what mighty cities would be bujlt and 
 sustained on the bay whose Golden Gate invites the commerce of the world. 
 
 The future of California in this rpgard turns upon the question of a suffi- 
 cient supply of water for land. The annual fall of rain is not sufficient in 
 many and most parts to enable it to be cultivated. Over large regions the 
 yearly precipitation does not exceed on an average four or five inches. Hence 
 we say an artificial water supply is absolutely necessary to agriculture. 
 
 In this respect the country is not particularly peculiar. It differs strikingly 
 as we have said, from the Atlantic States and from England, but in many 
 ^ther parts of the world dense populations subsist upon arid lands in compar- 
 atively rainless regions. But the experience of man from the earliest ages 
 taught him to utilize water found in natural reservoirs and running streams 
 and so to irrigate the dry soil as to produce luxuriant vegetables. And in all 
 such countries the right to take water from the streams for irrigation was, in 
 the nature of things, recognized and enforced as the customary law of the 
 land. 
 
 And such everybody supposed to be the law of this arid region until a few 
 riparian owners along the streams which descend from the surrounding 
 mountains and traverse the valley set up a claim of ownership to the running 
 waters. And then the highest court of the State suddenly announces that the 
 existing laws warrant and sustain the claims of such riparian proprietors. 
 
 Space will not here permit our discussing these remarkable pretensions nor 
 the extraordinary decision upholding them. 
 
 Whatever the law may be or may have been, it is certain that the people of 
 California are now aroused to the necessity of enacting such laws, and of 
 obtaining Judges who will enforce them, that the lands which produce our 
 wealth and which are the source of our prosperity shall not be made a desert 
 for want of the water which belongs to the soil. 
 
 This is the signification of the irrigation movement. 
 
 Berkeley Advocate. 
 
 Water is Wealtb for AU. 
 
 There is no subject receiving more attention throughout the State, at this 
 time, than the irrigation question. Our country contemporaries are discuss- 
 ing it in all its phases, especially since the recent call lor an Irrigation Con- 
 
275 
 
 ▼ention to meet in San Francisco in May. And we learn that the suggestions 
 and advice of the Committee of the Fresno Convention, in respect to organ- 
 ization, are being carried out, especially in the southern counties, and that 
 "Anti-Riparian Irrigation Clubs" are being rapidly formed. These clubs 
 will; it is understood, send delegates to the May convention. 
 
 It is not at all surprising that this matter should receive so much attention 
 and consideration. California is essentially an agricultural State, at least 
 agriculture, including wine making and fruit growing, is the basis of our 
 prosperity and wealth. Merchandizing and manufacturing are, for th© 
 present, and will be for a long time to come, subsidiary pursuits. Even our 
 mining interests are of small importance when compared to the value of 
 the products of our soil. And when we take into consideration the fact that 
 the great valleys which are already producing so much, and which are capable 
 of sustaining a population of many millions of people, are naturally arid and 
 comparatively rainless, and that without an artificial supply of water from 
 irrigation the land must remain in a desert state, the almost paramount 
 importance of this movement is seen. 
 
 It seems incredible that any one should have the temerity to oppose the 
 proposition that the waters of our running streams should be taken to irri- 
 gate the most productive soil, in the most genial clime, beneath the fairest 
 skies on earth. And yet so it is that as a legal proposition, as a matter of 
 public economy, it is an open question whether water may be diverted from 
 the streams. It is this question which the people have now taken up and 
 which they will speedily settle in favor of irrigation and prosperity. 
 
 Let it not be forgotten that the merchants and manufacturers of San Fran- 
 cisco and of Oakland are also vitally interested in this contention. Indeed 
 property holders of all classes in those cities, and persons engaged in catering 
 to the luxuries and amusements of the people of the State are interested in 
 the question. As already said, agriculture, wine making and fruit growing 
 are the basis of the wealth of California. The cities depend upon the country 
 for their prosperity. Whatever enhances the agricultural interest increases 
 the riches of the centers of population. Whatever injures our farmers, vine- 
 yardists and fruit growers, hurts the cities. 
 
 It is to be hoped that San Francisco and Oakland, as well as our inlands 
 towns and cities, will send able and intelligent delegates to the Convention,, 
 which will assemble May 20th. Let the whole subject be there discussed in: 
 all its aspects and bearings, and let a plan be formulated and submitted to 
 the people for settling the right of irrigation beyond all future question or 
 cavil. If this is done by a body of representative delegates the plan will be 
 carried out. 
 
 Oakland Sentinel. 
 
 Ixrigatlon, 
 
 No more important question has ever come before the people of California 
 than that which relates to the irrigation of arid and so-called desert land. 
 These lands, which lie in the great valleys, comprise a large portion of the 
 
276 
 
 State. They are susceptible of tb« highest condition of cultivation and, with 
 water, are perhaps the most productive on the continent. The question is, 
 shall they have such necessary water? 
 
 The fact that the running streams and reservoirs in the mountains are 
 capable of supplying this essential requirement of agriculture, if properly 
 distributed, is unquestionable. But there is an impediment, constructive or 
 real, to the utilization of this water. A few of the proprietors of lands bor- 
 dering on the streams claim that under the English common law doctrine of 
 riparian rights, which they say has been recognized by our Supreme Court, 
 they have the exclusive use of the water, and that it cannot be diverted from 
 its natural channel for any purpose whatever. 
 
 It is not claimed that the riparian proprietors can have any use for this 
 natural outflow from the mountains. Indeed, their right to use water flowing 
 by their banks, in any way that will reduce the volume, is denied under the 
 authority of the same common law doctrine. It must simply pass through 
 their lands on its way to the sea, to be lost in the waste of waters, or to be 
 swallowed up in the tule swamps. Meanwhile the desert lands, so prolific 
 under the influence of irrig ition, are dedicated or relegated to sterility. 
 
 Shall such conditions as these continue to exist? Will the Legislature re- 
 fuse to annul the application of the common law by a declaratory statute, and 
 give the thirstinej land its impsrative need and to California a widely increas- 
 ing development and prolific production? Will it condemn the great valleys 
 to barrenness? This is the issue, without exaggeration and without coloring. 
 
 Haywards Jonrnal. 
 
 Irrififation is l¥ealth. 
 
 It is a mistake to suppose that the subject of irrigation is of interest to none 
 but irrigators. The encouragement of irrigation is the duty of every one in 
 the State. Every farmer, every wheat-grower, every merchant or manufac- 
 turer, wants a market for his products or his goods. Business experience 
 teaches that home consumers are most profitable to the producer. Every 
 mile of transportation increases in some degree the cost to the consumer and 
 lessens the profit to the producer. The wheat-growers of California are to- 
 day competing under great disadvantages with foreign producers in foreign 
 markets to supply the dense population of Europe. With a million or ten 
 millions of people on the San Joaquin Valley, a market for home consump- 
 tion would be created in which we could defy foreign competition. But we 
 must fill that valley with consumers who will also be producers. Stanislaus 
 estimates that it contains elements sufficient for the support of from ten to 
 fifteen millions of people. These elements are a dry but fertile soil and 
 living streams of water. The natural dryness of climate and the limited 
 raintall make irrigation necessary. The custom of settlers has heretofore 
 been to select the more easily cultivated lands, generally at a distance from 
 the rivers, and after constracting ditches or canals, to divert the waters for 
 
277 
 
 irrigation. The custom long since developed into unwritten law, whereby 
 he that would divert water for a beneficial use became entitled to it as of 
 right, and the first in time was first in right. The foundations of this law 
 have been lately shaken by a judicial earthquake, and no longer rest secure. 
 The ghost of the long departed doctrine of riparian rights now walks the 
 night. Under this doctrine the rivers cannot be molested and water cannot 
 be appropriated. It is to lay this ghost that the irrigators have called a State 
 Convention, and are organizing into a political unity. Their platform is 
 their right of the free appropriation of water for irrigation and down with 
 riparianism. Success to them is wealth to us. We should lend them a hand. 
 
 A^meda Semi- Weekly Argus. 
 
 Prosperity or Decay, 
 
 The water controversy in this State, between the irrigationists and riparian- 
 ists, involves the question of general prosperity on the one hand or general 
 ruin and decay on the other. It is a contest for the privilege of developing 
 the immense resources of California on the one side, or maintaining the deso- 
 lations of the desert for all time to come and permitting the most highly cul- 
 tivated portions of the State, the rich and prolific farms, the splendid orch- 
 ards, the wide and profitable vineyards, to die and of thirst and lapse into 
 barrenness 
 
 And strange as it may seem, this alternative is maintained by the riparian 
 proprietors of the State. They assert their right to the exclusive use of the 
 water in the running streams and deny the right to divert any portion of it 
 for irrigation. For this is the logical conclusion from the contention that 
 the English common law doctrine of riparian rights obtains in this state. 
 Like Shylock they stand by their bond and claim their pound of flesh. 
 They say that the law gives them the exclusive use of the water and that it 
 is nothing to them if the rest of the State perishes for want of it. This la 
 not only ^he acme of selfishness, but a monstrous crime against society. It 
 is a conspiracy against the prosperity of the commonwealth, and the men 
 who advocate it are public enemies. 
 
 These are the general considerations which have led to the extraodinary 
 movement whose progress will be marked by the Irrigation Convention which 
 will convene in San Francisco in May. The last Igislature met and adjourned 
 without granting relief. The judicial sword of Democles still hangs over the 
 prosperity of the State, and now the masses of the people propose to take the 
 matter into their own hands. They have the power to grant themselves re- 
 lief and they are going to do it. 
 
278 
 
 Brooklyn (Alameda Go.) Eagle. 
 
 Irriiration in Politics. * 
 
 A new political force has sprung to life, full grown, armed and equipped. 
 The call for a State Irrigation Convention makes apolitical era too important 
 *o pass without notice. The address of the Irrigation Committee lately 
 issued exhibits a conscious power that may well attract the attention of people 
 and politicians. The irrigation problem merits the consideration of all who 
 have a great future for the State at heart. Whoever has the ambition which 
 seeks to pass the glory of political honors to his posterity, whoever desires 
 that his children, and his children's children, may profit from the advance- 
 ment of the Commonwealth, will not carelessly cast aside the irrigation ques- 
 tion as unworthy of room in his thoughts. We have come to view the aston- 
 ishing material progress of the State from year to year as a matter of course, 
 and have cot sought the causes of our rapidly incr^sing wealth, beyond a 
 general idea of the illimitable resources of oar soil and climate. A cursory 
 glance at the statistics will reveal the fact that a large part of the people sub- 
 sist from irrigation, and that millions of the annual wealth of production 
 comes from the same source. Also that the future annual increase of pro- 
 duction by the same means, alrnost defies calculation. 
 
 Shall we foster irrigation or abandon it? That is a question for this peo- 
 ple to answer at the next election. Are we of this country interested in 
 the answer? None more so. The greatness of New York City, of every 
 commercial metropolis, rests upon the populous and productive interior to 
 which it may be the market and depot of supply. Whatever bailds up San 
 Francisco and Oakland adds to the value of lands in the suburbs and vicinity. 
 Put three million people into the San Joaqnin valley, and these two cities will 
 have a population of a million to be fed from your gardens, orchards and 
 farms. But to this the right of irrigation must be guaranteed. There are 
 fifty million acres of land awaiting that guarantee. There are a million acres 
 now ditched and ready for cultivation, open to sale to colonists and settlers, 
 which will be filled the moment water rights for irrigation are assured. The 
 only barrier to an immediate enormous immigration into Southern Califor- 
 nia is an obsolete rule of law known as the English common law doctrine of 
 riparian proprietorship, by virtue of which the owner of lands at the mouth 
 of a river can prevent any use of the water above him. This rule of law is 
 ^9 now being asserted and must be stamped out for the sake of irrigation. To 
 this end are the irrigators organizing. They will have the sympathy and 
 vote of all far-seeing men. 
 
 San Leandro Reporter. 
 
 Irrifi^ation Convention. 
 
 On May 20th there will meet in San Francisco a representative body of 
 representative men from various portions of the State, whose business it will 
 be to plan and lay out a great work— a work of immeasurable importance to 
 
279 
 
 the future welfare of California. We speak of the Irrigation Convention, the 
 call for which has been heretofore published. 
 
 It is now approaching two years since the agricultural population inhabit- 
 ing the great almost rainless valleys of the State and the mercantile and man- 
 ufacturing classes interested with and dependent on, in a degree, upon them, 
 were startled with the announcement that the laws of California do not recog- 
 nize the right of the people to appropriate and divert water from running 
 streams for the purpose of irrigation. Our readers are so familiar with the 
 exact issue of the controversy between the irrigators and riparianists that we 
 need not here restate it. In our judgment a vast majority of the people who 
 gave the subject attention, and no subject has been more discussed, consid- 
 ered and now consider that the rule of law announced by the Supreme Court 
 was, and is, fraught with infinite mischief and danger to the present welfare 
 and future prosperity of California. In a word, and without entering into 
 details, irrigation is absolutely necessary to the existence of agriculture, to 
 any extent, in the State; and in the term agriculture we include vine culture 
 and fruit raising in the great valleys. 
 
 As soon as it became known that the English common law doctrine of 
 riparian rights had been recognized and to the exclusion of the right to appro- 
 priate and divert water for irrigation, the whole southern part of the State, 
 which is most affected by the decision, was aroused. In a short time two 
 conventions were called and held, one at Riverside and one at Fresno. Com- 
 mittees were appointed to apply to the Legislature for relief from the threat- 
 ened danger. Bills were drafted and carried to Sacramento. It was found 
 that the Governor and a large majority of both houses of the Legislature were 
 favorable to the measures, but the session passed away without final action. 
 A few connubiating and filibustering Senators succeeded in defeating the 
 bills — hence the present movement. 
 
 This question must be settled and at once; there is too much at stake, not 
 only the millions invested in lands dependent upon irrigation and in canals 
 and ditches, but, too, as we have said, the mercantile, mechanical and manu- 
 facturing interests connected with agriculture. Until this overshadowing 
 issue is settled improvement will be checked in a great degree and these in- 
 terests will continue to suffer. 
 
 The work for the May convention to do will be to eflfeclually arouse the 
 people of the State to a comprehension of the evils of riparianism, and the 
 importance of irrigation, and to perfect an organization throughout the State 
 that can make itself felt at the election in November, and this we under- 
 stand to be the intention of those interested in the movement. Since they 
 have been placed by the courts and the Legislature in the position to be 
 compelled to depend upon political action they propose to make a political 
 issue of their fight. Success to the irrigators. 
 
280 
 
 Inyo Independent. 
 
 Irrig'atlon. 
 
 No other question now before the people of this Sta'e is of so much im- 
 portance as that of irrigation. Upon a wise settlement of this matter the 
 prosperity of the State will iu great measure depend. The present state of 
 the law governing the use of the water from streams is very unsatisfactory, 
 and should be remedied as speedily as possible. Bills were introduced at 
 the last session of the Legislature, that would have remedied most of the 
 existing evil, but as the Raral Press says, failed through the ignorance of the 
 members of the Legislature. It is important that measures should be under- 
 taken to secure a better understanding of these matters. It is necessary 
 that the coming Legislature should act upon the subject and enact laws 
 which shall meet the needs of the people and the growth of the State. The 
 subjects were brought before the last Legislature aud a strong effort made to 
 secure legislation^ bnt without effect. Much of the difficulty laid in the ig- 
 norance of many of the legislators whose lives have been cast beside city 
 walks, rather than beside running streams. By beginning early this year, 
 it is hoped that men can be elected who have clear ideas upon the subject 
 and can be trusted to legislate intelligently. 
 
 Mariposa Herald. 
 
 Irrififation. 
 
 Among other important questions now agitating California is whether an 
 irrigation system should be ingrafted into our law. As the law now stands 
 the old English common law prevails; and under it, owners of land bordering 
 upon a stream are entitled to thi flow of the stream. Owing to the physical 
 condition and situation of England, the doctrine of riparian rights was politic, 
 consistent and just; but in this State where different physical conditions ex- 
 ist, where the streams are larger and longer, and where vast volumes of water 
 flow unused and without profit to the sea, a different policy should obtain, 
 and the rights to the use and benefits of water should be conformable to our 
 natural status. A rational, practical irrigation system stands knocking at our 
 door asking admittance. Vast tracts of thirsty, barren lands, unfit for any- 
 thing as they now are, would bloom with verdure and fruitfulness, if properly 
 and systematically irrigated. Our sister county, Fresno, with her arid acres 
 of sandy plains, has tasted the refreshing, invigorating draughts of water. 
 Whole sections of that county, a few years since a desert waste, now present 
 the very picture of thrifty life, where happy comfortable homes, substantial 
 and elegant schools, neat and spacious churches, have sprung into life as if 
 touched by the wondrous power of magic. All this change, wrought by a de- 
 viation from the law as it now is, will be swept away if irrigation gains no 
 footing; all the improvements that have been made will sink from sight, and 
 the same old desolate aspect will meet the inquiring look of parsing travelers. 
 
281 
 
 All the beautif q1, happy, useful results growing from a diversion and spread- 
 ing of water, are brought about by no material comparative injury to other 
 enterprises. Thousands of acres now lying unused and unoccupied in all 
 parts of the State, and of no account to man or beast, would be transformed 
 into the busy scenes of prosperity and culture. Thousands of families would 
 plant themselves in our midst and reap an enjoyable living. Invested capital 
 would realize a fair return, and all sections would be tributary in building 
 up the splendid possibilities of our future. 
 
 Legislative action is necessary to accomplish the desired end. The exist- 
 ing law must be repealed, and new and adequate provisions adopted in lieu 
 thereof. Friends of irrigation are alert, and are taking ' 'Time by the fore- 
 lock" so see to it that proper representatives are sent to the next Legislature, 
 Merced is about entering into an era of prosperity through irrigation. Our 
 neighbor sees the utility and advisability of such a system ; and it is therefore 
 almost if not absolutely safe to say that this Assembly District will send a 
 man to Sacramento imbued with the spirit of irrigation and pledged to use 
 every effort in securing the necessary change in our law. 
 
 Daily San Diegan. 
 
 Riparianism. 
 
 Are you a riparian or anti-riparian, is the question the voluble politician 
 will be called upon to answer, and in certain sections of the State, to dodge 
 this question or skulk behind an ambiguous answer means political death and 
 a hasty burial. The Executive Committee of the State Irrigation Convention 
 has sent an address to the press throughout the State, which is a ringing 
 document on this important question, and voices with no uncertain sound 
 the purposes of anti-riparians, and the issues involved in the settlement of 
 an old English law, that is as much out of place in its application to the ne- 
 cessities and conditions of California as the feudal law of the Middle Ages 
 would be in the midst of American political institutions. We believe that 
 running water, like the air, is the free gift of God, and not to be possessed, 
 appropriated and held by the few to the detriment and destruction of the 
 many. The peculiarities of our soil and climate, the extremes of dryness and 
 moisture that divide our seasons, fixed by an inexorable law the necessity for 
 artificial irrigation, without which the mighty possibilities of future develop- 
 ment of the agricultural resources of this State will be strangled at the very 
 threshold of its almost miraculous career. Riparianism in its tendencies and 
 ultimate results will produce a condition of affairs similar to the horrible 
 strait of Coleridge's mariner, "water, water everywhere and not a drop to 
 drink." Millions of gallons of water would flow usekssly to its appointed 
 reservoir, the sea, if riparianism is to prevail as the absolute law of the State. 
 Manifestly this is wrong in theory, law and results. Every agency that 
 nature has placed in our reach to rescue the soil from barrenness to fertility 
 should be utilized, and the right should exist paramount to all individual ad- 
 
282 
 
 Tantages to appropriate that which will subserve the good of the many. It 
 is a law eternal as the hills, and unchangeable as that of the Medes and Per- 
 sians, that the rights of the few must yield to the necessities and welfare of 
 the many. Riparianism is centripetal in its tendencies, irrigation is centrif- 
 ugal in its scope and purposes, and should be the law and the gospel of 
 California. 
 
 Fresno Republican. 
 
 Biparian rights will be so deeply buried by the irrigationists this fall that 
 the question will never again stand in the way of progress and prosperity in 
 our State. It is a disgrace to California courts that English common law was 
 ever admitted as applicable to the water question in this State, and this ad- 
 mission was a mistake that the people are going to correct at the coming elec. 
 tion. The Governor, Judges of the Supreme Court and members of the 
 Legislature to be elected this fall will have to hold up their right hands and 
 take a solemn pledge to carry out the will of the people in favor of irrigation. 
 
 Santa Cruz Sentinel. 
 
 A Cripple or a Giantess. 
 
 It is impossible to exaggerate the supreme importance of this irrigation 
 question to our State. California will be a hobbling cripple if the riparian 
 doctrine prevails; she will be a robust giantess of unrivalled powers and 
 queenly mien if the irrigation doctrine is established. That doctrine is 
 already established in the will of a vast majority of our people. All that is 
 needed is to give that will a legal form and direction. This is the object of 
 the proposed Convention. 
 
 Kern County Gazette. 
 
 Irrijj^ation in the Coming Campaigrn. 
 
 There is no mistaking the tenor of the ringing address of the Executive 
 Committee of the State Irrigation Convention, issued on April 6th. It 
 sounds the keynote of the coming political campaign, and it means that the 
 irrigation issue is to become paramount to all other considerations before the 
 polls. The irrigators are fully alive to the fact that riparianism is menacing 
 their very existence, and they are preparing to speak in thunder tones in the 
 assertion of their rights and in the maintenance of the principles that "the 
 right of appropriation of water for beneficial purposes is and always has 
 been paramount to any alleged rights of riparian owners in this State." The 
 address recites the history of the movement to secure the passage of bills 
 remedying the evils of existing laws relating to appropriation and adminis- 
 tration of water, framed and recommended by the Fresno Convention of 
 1884, the earnest support of these measures by the intelligent press of the 
 
283 
 
 State and the last Legislature, through the parliamentary filibustering of 
 the riparian minority in both houses, notwithstanding the active sympathy 
 given them by a vast majority of the people of the State. After referring to 
 the progress already made in irrigation, it is stated that the acreage is insig- 
 nificant compared with the desert unreclaimed, and that within the rim of 
 great interior valleys there are 64,000,000 acres of inhabitable land, equal in 
 area to all the New England States and New York and Pennsylvania added, 
 whose combined population is 13,427,270 souls. The total population of 
 our valleys is but 284,000, or 5% persons to the square mile, while the 
 average population of the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys is even 
 less — 4.9 per square mile. If these latter valleys were as densely populated 
 as the basin of the St. Lawrence their inhabitants would number 1,856,000; 
 if equal to the New England coast, 3,588,000; if equal to the Ontario basin, 
 4,523,000; if equal to the valley of the Delaware, 10,208,000. The conclu- 
 sion to be drawn from these statistics is that the valleys of California should 
 support a population of 11,000,000 people; but that these results can only be 
 secured by irrigation, on account of the lack of rainrall, its uncertainty from 
 year to year, and its unequal distribution throughout the season when it is 
 needed for the maturing of crops. To add force to these statistics a com- 
 parison might have been drawn between the relative density of the popula- 
 tion upon irrigated lands, and that supported by farming lands dependent 
 solely upon rainfall. We venture the assertion that if the truth were known 
 the irrigation communities of this State can show an average population ten 
 times as great per square mile as the average population upon the irrigated 
 farming lands, and this of itself is the strongest evidence of the necessity 'of 
 irrigation and a radical change in methods of farming, in order that the 
 lands may support the greatest population of which they are capable. 
 
 The richest of soils, the most genial of climates, and water in abundance 
 fed by exhaustless snows and springs, are here to be found, and "the 
 thought is insufferable that uncongenial law shall permit human selfishness 
 to forbid the bands between these gifts of God, and by keeping land and 
 water wastefully apart, deny the world the benefits and blessings of their 
 union." 
 
 The counties vitally interested in irrigation cast upwards of 40,000 votes, 
 and to these voters the address of the committee appeals to form themselves 
 into anti-riparian irrigation clubs. In union there is strength, and these 
 clubs organized and united, with the earnestness of purpose and unflinch- 
 ing determination of j'men defending their homes from desolation and ruin can 
 dictate the coming campaign. To them all other political considerations will 
 be dropped, and only those men who favor progressive development in the 
 State by irrigation can be electedgas governor, attorney-general. Supreme and 
 Superior Court judges, and legislators, if their united efforts are of any avail. 
 A State Convention is called to meet in San Francisco May 20th. It will 
 consist of delegates from the clubs throughout the State, and its object will 
 be to effect a permanent central organization to perfect the scheme of laws 
 required by the irrigators and urge their passage by the next Legislature, 
 
284 
 
 and to formulate a plan of action to be followed in the coming political cam- 
 paign, of which they may make their strength felt in every precinct in the State. 
 Their objects only need to be understood and the nobility of their purposes 
 appreciated, to insure them a rousing success in the campaign. Who is 
 there that will oppose measures, the ultimate result of which will make Cali- 
 fornia one of the wealthiest and most popular States in the Union, aud cre- 
 ate in San Francisco a trade center second only to New York in size aud import- 
 ance? Certainly none but those who have selfish personal ends to gratify, and 
 care nothing for the public welfare. It is the duty of the press and the friends 
 of irrigation to disseminate information on this subject, to convince the 
 public of the loftiness of their aims, and to show in their clearest manner 
 the serious import of the issues before them. When clearly understood it 
 will dawn upon the public mind that the irrigation question far exceeds in 
 importance that of hydraulic mining, or any other similar issue which has 
 been appealed to the judgment of the public and the courts, and when so 
 understood there can be no doubt of the public verdict. The right must 
 triumph and irrigation will win. 
 
 Los Angeles La Cronica. 
 
 Cuegtion Magfna. 
 
 En nuestra cuarta p4gina damos una traduccion del memorial que al pub- 
 lico han dirijido los miembros del Comite Ejecutivo de Kegadores del Estado. 
 Oomo nuestros lectores veran, la cuestion es de interes vital para el Estado, 
 y debe posponerse a toda otra cuestion de mera conveniencia politica, que 
 generalmente solo resulta en ser empleados los que ahora no lo estan, 6 en 
 que continuen viviendo del presupuesto los que ahora gozan de el: general- 
 mente estos cambios se reducen a un cambio de pildoras, que tanto unas 
 como otras hacen el mismo efecto al estdmago del pueblo, que es quien paga. 
 
 Pero la proposicion que presentan los regadores es mucha mas importante 
 y se cifra en el principio de si hemos de aprovechar las aguas para hacer 
 fructificar terrenos ahora improductivos, 6 dejar que estos continuen desiertos 
 porque les place a unos pocos que el vivificador liquido se pierdo en el mar. 
 
 No creemos que el memorial citado dejara de hacer sn efecto, pues apela 4 
 los mejores intereses de los ciudadanos de todas clases, pues la agricultura 
 es la base m4s sdlida de la riqueza de este Estado, y el agua de riego es un 
 elemento indispensable para su completo desarrollo. En la importantisima 
 eleccion que este aiio tendr4 lugar esta deberia ser, y sera4, no lo dudamos, 
 una de las cuestiones priucipales, sino la principal. 
 
285 
 
 Oallanb Soiirnaf. 
 
 Die ^ett)dffentnG^frage. 
 
 I^k gragc iiber bie 33ertf)eiluni3 be§ 395affcrDorrat()§ in (£aIifornicn 
 ift cine dugcrft iDi(i)tige imb ein ^onflift jmifd^eu ben 33ertrctern bcr 
 beiben ©eftc^t^punftcn, unter benen bie grage betradjtet itjcrben mug, 
 ift uuDermeibbar. ©in SompromiB ift unmdgtid). 
 
 (^ntiDeber ge()brt ba^ gaffer, tDeld)e0 t)on unfcren Bergen ^erabftrdmt, 
 ben Seuten, t>k beabficf;tigen, bie bradj liegenben grogen (Sbenen unfere^ 
 ®taate§ p bctraffern, ober ben tDenigen ®rnnbeigentl)itmern am 
 glngufer. 
 
 ilBenn eg mafjr ift, iDie bie ^efiimorter ber 55ert^ei(ung be§ 3Baffer^ 
 fagen, ba^ hk natlirlidjen Umftcinbe in (Ealifornien ber geringe D^cgen- 
 fad, hk i^rnd)tbarfeit beg Sobcng, itjenn er bnrc^ bie ^irfung beg 
 SBafferg befrud)tet ttiirb, ber njarme langanbanernbe (gonnenfdjein nnb 
 anbere Umftcinbe, hk $ert)orbringung t)on D^ieberloffungen benjirft 
 l)aben, fo befi^en bie Uferbeit)ol)ner alg folc^e feine 9^ed)te auf ba^ 
 SKaffer, ttjelc^eg il)r Sanb bur(f)flie6t. 
 
 ilBenn im ©egent^eil ba^ englifc^e ©efefe biefem ?anb anfgebrnngen 
 hjorben ift, ob burd) gefe^lidje 5lnorbnnng ober burc^ bie ©riaffe ber 
 D?id)ter; menn bie ©efe^e iiber 3Bafferred)te unb t)k Ueblic^feiten einer 
 ftetg in ^ebel ge^iillten 3nfel, hk genligenb ^enjcifferung Ijat, 51U* 
 njenbung finben fotten auf bieg troiene unb bod) unter^Umftanben 
 Iuj:uridfe l^anb bc^ etDigen @onnenfd)eing, bann laffe man eben t>a^ 
 @efe^ iralten unb bag Gaffer mug augfd)liegtid) bem Uferbenjo^ner 
 ^ugefprod)en werben. ^ie grage faun, iDie gefagt, nur mit „3a" unb 
 „Wm" beantttjortet loerben, 
 
 2Benn bk ^ed)te ber Uferben)o^ner anerfannt werben, b. ^. njenn 
 ha^ (Sigent^umgrec^t beg ^Kafferg bem ©runbbcfi^er am Ufer t>t^ 
 gluffeg adein grf)ort, bann loirb nac^ bem eng(ifd)en ®efe^ hk Ijkv fo 
 notl)tt)enbige -33obenben)afferung unmdglic^ unb bk Sioilifation njirb auf 
 bie glugnfer, bk Ufer unferer :Sad)e unb unferer (Siimpfe befdjrcinft 
 merben, in mW le^teren diele 9?innfale derfc^minben. ©elbft bk 
 UferbetDo^ner biirfen bk gaffer beg gluffeg nidjt ableiten unb baburd) 
 Derminbern, mil bag @efet^ bieg oerbietet. 
 
 T)ie not^njenbige (2d)IugfoIgerung aug bem borgebrad)ten 5(rgument 
 ift, ba^ bie flimatifc^en S3erl)a(tniffe unfereg ©taateg er^eifdjen, ba^ bk 
 Slnfpriidie ber Uferbenjofjucr n i d) t beriid ficbtigt toerben. 
 
286 
 
 3)ie grage mu^ ent|d)ieben ttjerben, bag cin fitr aflcinal bie UferBewo^ner 
 fcin c^*clufbe§ ^cdjt aiif ha^ glugiDaffcr fjaben, tucIc^eS i^r i'aub 3tT)ccf* 
 lo^ burrfjfliegt, 
 
 3n ■53egug aitf bic 9?cci)te fiir bag SSaffer fitr irrigation gilt ha^ 
 @efe^ friil)efter ^efi^ergrcifung, H)cld)e§ in alien ![^anbern anerfannt 
 tuirb unb and) f)icr geltcn fotlte, 
 
 (Sine iCcrfammlung ber „3rngatore" f)at fitrglicf) in gre§no ftattge* 
 fnnben nnb njir finb kgierig, ob hk bort gefagten ^ef(J)litffe bie not^igc 
 SBirfnng anf bie in ber grage ^etrtffenen nnb bie gefe^lidjen (Sntfd)ei* 
 bnngen l)aben tuirb. ^ie grage ift eine ber it)idjtigften, iDeld;e je^t bie 
 ^nfmerffamfeit ber garmer anf fic^ gie^t. 
 
PETITIONS 
 
 Presented to the Senate and Assembly, Asking the Passage of 
 Irrigation Bills. 
 
 To the Senate and Assembly of the Legislature of California: 
 
 Your petitioners, citizens and land owners of the county of Fresno, do re- 
 spectfully represent to your honorable body that our property, our homes, 
 and our very existence depends on the right of appropriation of water for 
 irrigation, and we pray that you will place us under the protection of law. 
 We respectfully represent that we are satisfied with the bills now before 
 your honorable body, which were prepared by a committee appointed by a 
 convention of irrigators, held in the town of Fresno last December, said 
 committee being fully informed of our wants and necessities and having 
 provided foi them to our satisfaction. That your action in this matter may 
 be speedy and favorable, your petitioners will ever pray. 
 
 Names , No. Acres Owned. Valuation. 
 
 S.N.Walker 3,700 $32,000 
 
 W. H. Chance 500 14,000 
 
 A.G.Andersen 40 2,000 
 
 S. W Henry 164 1,000 
 
 S.C. Booth 60 2,50a 
 
 P. B. Donohoe 664 30,000 
 
 Wm. Wilkenson 560 16,000 
 
 Otto Froelut 31 10,000 
 
 Geo. H. Eggers 3,000 200,000 
 
 W. P. Quick 80 15,000 
 
 M. F. Tarpey 160 10,000 
 
 Geo. W. Taps 80 5,000 
 
 Geo. Bernhard 60 5,000 
 
 J. S. Elliott 480 15,000 
 
 C. Erickson 80 16,000 
 
 Wm Bitteridge 85 3,000 
 
 C.W. Cutler 40 4,000 
 
 G. W. Hensley 40 8,000 
 
 C. G. Sayle 1,500 26,000 
 
 M. S. Harris 20 1,£00 
 
 C.A.Fuller 40 8,000 
 
 F. E. Paddock, Jr 40 4,000 
 
 Chas. A. Beesley 40 10.000 
 
 Fred Kramer 860 15,000 
 
 19 
 
288 
 
 Names. No. Acres Owned. Valuation. 
 
 A. W, Lyon 80 $10,000 
 
 J. W. Coffman : 40 4,000 
 
 J.R.Austin 40 3,000 
 
 W.J.Dickey 210 5,000 
 
 Jim Cory 120 16,000 
 
 Chas. Warfield 15 2,000 
 
 J. Eock 20 1,000 
 
 S. S. Wright (Agent for) 5,000 150,000 
 
 Geo. Studen 5 5,000 
 
 Wm. H. Ahers 5 5,000 
 
 Wm. Gash 70 8,000 
 
 BairdBros 160 16,000 
 
 D. C. McLaughlin 20 2,000 
 
 Daniel McLaughlin 40 18.000 
 
 Wm. Adams 40 4,000 
 
 E. Keeler 325 4,000 
 
 C.H. Haun 50 11,000 
 
 Jos. Lee * 110 9,000 
 
 B. F. Burton 80 4,000 
 
 John Brown. 480 9,000 
 
 J. W. Loper 20 ''^00 
 
 L. Lewis . . 240 7,000 
 
 C. H. Carghill... 20 3,0(0 
 
 H. N. Ewiug 80 ,000 
 
 P. K. Peaters 20 3,000 
 
 A. F. Peaters 20 3,000 
 
 A. D. Ewing 20 3,500 
 
 F.A.Eddy 10 1,200 
 
 H.B. Choice 400 15,000 
 
 A. H. Statham 403 25,000 
 
 E.H.Gould 200 20.000 
 
 Estate of Geo. H. Briggs, deceased, by A. P. Catlin, 
 
 Administrator 4,500 250,000 
 
 A. P. Catlin 575 12,000 
 
 G. R. Fanning 160 8,000 
 
 F. J. Haber 80 4,000 
 
 W. T. Oden 320 15,000 
 
 John Wilde 80 6,000 
 
 E. L. Wemple 20 4,000 
 
 S. B. Breser 40 4.000 
 
 Jesse Trome 320 6.400 
 
 B. F. Lawson 80 7,000 
 
 Wm. C. llyce 640 10,000 
 
 D.Bruce 320 1.500 
 
 E. P. Hughes 160 10,000 
 
289 
 
 Names. No. Acres Owned. Valuation. 
 
 W. F. Kowe 7 $1,300 
 
 George Church 180 13,000 
 
 S.W.Griffith 136 18,000 
 
 E.J.Griffith 80 2,000 
 
 T. O. Wilburn 80 4,800 
 
 Jos. Porteous 100 5,000 
 
 A. Pave 20 3.000 
 
 W.Harvey 40 2,000 
 
 W. Harvey, Agent for Perrin 3,600 36,000 
 
 Tho E. Church 30 2,000 
 
 G. W. G. Glenn 40 9,000 
 
 M. Neiderer 20 3,000 
 
 Stevens Brothers 100 12,500 
 
 H. C. Colwell 20 2,000 
 
 B.Marks 700 60,000 
 
 W. J. Prather 160 5,000 
 
 Geo. S. McNeil 30 3,500 
 
 S.A.Miller 30 4,500 
 
 J.W.Williams 100 2,000 
 
 Jas. Carncross •. 40 8,000 
 
 A. B. McCorkle 4 1,000 
 
 M.T.Wilson 2 lots 200 
 
 Robert Smith 201 40,000 
 
 Mrs. Robert Wright 320 7,000 
 
 Mrs. J. Miller 160 3,000 
 
 Robert Barton 640 50O,0CO 
 
 C.S.Pierce 10 1,500 
 
 Wm. Sutherland 80 8.000 
 
 John Beard 343 7,000 
 
 R. A. White 20 4,C00 
 
 M. Ocbiuer ' 80 7,500 
 
 McConnell & Co 420 14,000 
 
 Wm. Sutton 20 1,500 
 
 J.P.Vincent 280 32,000 
 
 A. S. Bamfield 480 9,000 
 
 A.S.Goldstein 20 800 
 
 M.F.&S.Co 5,000 25,000 
 
 H.Hedinger 82 2,500 
 
 J.W.Conner , 20 1,200 
 
 JohnWallder 20 2,000 
 
 B.B.Pierce 20 3,000 
 
 C.W.Howard 20 3,000 
 
 W.B.Moore , 20 4.00O 
 
 M. Z. Donahoe 500 50,000 
 
 L.Anderson 480 7,800 
 
290 
 
 Names. No. Acres Owned. Valuation. 
 
 K.M.Wilson 60 $6,000 
 
 M. Madsden 400 * 7,000 
 
 C. J. Christiansen 20 2,500 
 
 Wm. M. Hughes 320 50,000 
 
 M.L.Smith 160 1,500 
 
 W. H. McKune 640 4,000 
 
 A.M.Clark 640 7,500 
 
 J.S.Eastwood 40 2,0U0 
 
 Packard Bros 20 3,000 
 
 Moses Dodge 20 1,200 
 
 L. P. Hogue 240 6,000 
 
 G. Eisen 640 25,000 
 
 F. Koedling 3,200 100,000 
 
 D. Duquesne 2 2,000 
 
 S.H.Hill 320 4,000 
 
 J. J. Beyburn 640 8,0CO 
 
 A. Loveall 163 2,500 
 
 B.T.Elmore 400 7,000 
 
 S.H.Cole 200 8,000 
 
 D. R. Thayer 40 4,000 
 
 J.F. Morga 640 4,500 
 
 J. W. Reese 90 16,000 
 
 J A. Lindsey 30 1,800 
 
 W.A.Linforth 50 3,000 
 
 C.Schmidt 40 8,000 
 
 F. A. Woodworth 160 30,000 
 
 Samuel Johnson ' 40 1,600 
 
 J. E. Hughes 480 35,000 
 
 Thos. E. Hughes 560 75,000 
 
 F. Jansen 80 800 
 
 J.F.Simpson 20 4,000 
 
 Wm. Hamilton 404 3,000 
 
 Wm. & Anna Hawkins 640 10,500 
 
 P. A. Burnette ... 200 3 000 
 
 J.Harmon 160 3.000 
 
 L.B. Church 320 32,000 
 
 M. H. Briley 40 8,000 
 
 P. Johansen 40 8,000 
 
 E. B. Perrin 40,000 400,000 
 
 G.W.Owen 640 12,000 
 
 P.M.Corfley 160 10,000 
 
 J. B. Hancock 160 4,800 
 
 B.L.Dickson 40 4,500 
 
 W.S.Graves 500 30,000 
 
 C. B. Pressley and H. S. Dixon 100 12,000 
 
291 
 
 Names. No. Acres Owned. Valuation^ 
 
 T. L. Eeel 1,000 $20,000 
 
 L L. Dixon Town Lots. 1,500 
 
 M. R. Medary " •• 4,000 
 
 L.Shaw • •' '« 3,000 
 
 Rnl;ner, Goldstein & Co 640 10,000 
 
 Lewis & Bard 360 25,000 
 
 J.T.Goodman 130 30,000 
 
 J. M. Meiskell 
 
 Phillips Bros 240 9,600 
 
 J. W. Gerrhart Town lots. 500 
 
 Lewis Waggoner 480 10,000 
 
 W. H. Jackson ... 
 
 C. T. Riggs. 807 16,000 
 
 E.M.Morgan 602 12,000 
 
 J.H.Brady 200 20,000 
 
 J. A. Blasingame 10,000 100,000 
 
 B. R. Woodworth 240 30,000 
 
 E. A. Baird 240 6,500 
 
 J. A. Ewing 390 15.600 
 
 Geo. E. Freeman 40 4,000 
 
 J. E. Dickensen 120 2,400 
 
 C.L.Walter 240 1,200 
 
 W.J. Berry 760 11,400 
 
 W. D. Eericke 180 10,000 
 
 J. W. Furguson 160 4,800 
 
 Iowa and California Fruit Co 320 25,000 
 
 Rosendal & Walton .* 100 5,000 
 
 F.H.Adams 160 12,000 
 
 John S. Dore 20 S.OC'O 
 
 M.W.Miller 160 10,000 
 
 W. E . Gilmore Merchant. 
 
 F. K. Prescott 20 4,000 
 
 S. C. St. John Merchant. 
 
 J. L. Lewison & Co *• 
 
 F.J.Davis 80 2.400 
 
 Geo. M. Edmunds 100 2,000 
 
 G. J. Markewitz Merchant. 
 
 John Acworth 80 2,600 
 
 J. G. McCall 640 12,800 
 
 M. W. Brelenberg 
 
 W.H.Parker 650 19,500 
 
 W.D.Hill 164 3,300 
 
 R.B.Johnson 100 2,000 
 
 Rennie& Noble 220 6,60o 
 
 A.F.Baker 160 2.400 
 
292 
 
 Names. No. Acres Owned. Valuation. 
 
 J. J. Grenham 200 $2,000 
 
 Thos K.Brown 250 3,000 
 
 Jas. Roberts 180 2,000 
 
 €. G.Anderson 40 2,000 
 
 James W. Smith 20 3,000 
 
 J. M Sumner ^ 20 2,000 
 
 E. Kauntze 80 4,000 
 
 M. Sides 400 10,000 
 
 A.Barieau 80 7,000 
 
 M. Martin 40 1,600 
 
 F. B. DeWitt 160 6,000 
 
 D.B.Stephens 160 0,000 
 
 W. H. Deedrick 40 1,200 
 
 T.J.Anderson 3 500 
 
 J. E. Whitsen 160 10,000 
 
 S.B.Shaw 160 5,000 
 
 J A. Hodges 80 4,000 
 
 W.A.Yost 23J 1.000 
 
 Jas. H. Gay 160 5,000 
 
 J.H.Payne 80 3.000 
 
 D. Gourguet 48 4,800 
 
 E.P Falconer 120 12,000 
 
 W. S. Staley 80 12,000 
 
 J. M. Eose 160 7,500 
 
 F.Ross 40 2,000 
 
 I. VonGlasen 160 6,000 
 
 J.H.Walker 320 6,000 
 
 H. R. Beyman ' 240 5,000 
 
 A.H.Graves. 3 500 
 
 D. E. McCloskey 40 2,000 
 
 Oscar Duuke 20 ],000 
 
 W. S. VanEmon 160 5,000 
 
 Wm. Maze 160 5.000 
 
 F.J.Otis 160 6,000 
 
 F.B.Cody 160 4,000 
 
 J. A. Stroud 1,400 28,000 
 
 J. E. Yokum 80 2.500 
 
 O.S.Davis 40 1,500 
 
 H.I. Fowler 160 4,000 
 
 Jas. Karnes 3.000 60,000 
 
 I.T.Bell 40 1,500 
 
 I.A.Rose.. 80 3,200 
 
 F. M. Cox 80 2,800 
 
 John Meyer 95 3,500 
 
 R. W. Goodell 160 3,000 
 
293 
 
 Names. ' No. Acres Owned. Valuation. 
 
 Hugh Forsman 160 $3;000 
 
 H. N. Cutler 80 3,200 
 
 W. D. Lagrange 40 1,200 
 
 M. L. Dean 320 9,000 
 
 E. H. Tucker : 1,500 30,000 
 
 A. M. Terny 160 6,000 
 
 W.T.Martin 220 5,000 
 
 M. M. Cooper 160 4,500 
 
 F.A.Wood ' 80 2,000 
 
 G. A. Walker 220 2,600 
 
 John Tuft 80 3,200 
 
 Jas. B. Sheat 1,000 30,000 
 
 C. Baley * 240 7,000 
 
 W. W. Baley 240 8 000 
 
 D. H Cobb, 60 2,400 
 
 W.J.Caldwell 160 10,000 
 
 W. T. Cox 89 1,500 
 
 W. A. Sanders 260 10,000 
 
 Z. T. Jordan 160 1,000 
 
 B. N. McCloskey 180 7,500 
 
 B. M. Crow 40 1,600 
 
 J. W. Whitsen. S. T. Prather & Bro Town lots 
 
 Hy. Hausberger 280 8,400 
 
 K.G.Woods 160 6,000 
 
 M. Suyder 80 4,000 
 
 T.J.Otis 160 6,000 
 
 J.G.Dawes 960 4,800 
 
 J. A. M. Vanness. .' 40 400 
 
 L.W.Spencer 240 2,400 
 
 Theo. Schilling 160 6,000 
 
 C. Schilling 320 10,000 
 
 K. E. Spence 160 4,000 
 
 Elisha Harlan 160 1,600 
 
 G. W. Mooney 160 10,000 
 
 Jas. H. Powell 320 6,000 
 
 J. Schonwand 600 4,000 
 
 Zumwalt & Baker 80 1,000 
 
 K.R.Lee 40 700 
 
 J.M.Smith 160 6,000 
 
 J. H^ Thrasher 40 1,000 
 
 H. P. Cease 80 1,500 
 
 Joaquin F. Prerro 80 2,000 
 
 N.F.Martin 186 9,000 
 
 Turner Elder 160 4,000 
 
 Drury Elder .80 2,000 
 
294 
 
 Names. No. Acres Owned. Valuation. 
 
 N. C. Carrington 160 $4,000 
 
 W. G. Thasher 40 700 
 
 J. R. Baird 160 5,000 
 
 Jos. Johnson 160 5,000 
 
 O. E. Kinkerlin 160 3,000 
 
 Wilson P. Mickel 100 2,000 
 
 Freedom Bennett 90 2,000 
 
 L. Cohen, Merchant 
 
 John B.Kelso 20 8,000 
 
 C. H. Eobinson 160 8,000 
 
 J. L. Gilbert 320 $40 per acre. 
 
 E. T. Hammers 320*' " 
 
 W. S. McCartney 80 " 
 
 W. D. Eead 160 " 
 
 Eeadife Dudley 152 " '* 
 
 E.Johnson 169.52 4,000 
 
 A. W. Wibber . . . ." 3,300 66,000 
 
 Grand total $5,042,000 
 
295 
 
 The undersigned, o-wners of land along the banks of Kings Kiver, respect- 
 fully represent to yonr honorable body, that the owners of the bank lands, 
 otherwise known as riparian owners, are interested in irrigation as much as 
 others, and respectfully pray your honorable body to pass Senate Bills 210, 
 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41. 
 
 E. D. Morrison. Susie Sutherland, 
 
 N. J. Layton, Ellen Wimmer, 
 
 T. Williams, ' James Sutherland, 
 
 E. T. Kay, C. F. Kiggs, 
 
 J. A. Stroud, R. Wilson, 
 
 T. B. Hays, J. F. Brooks, 
 
 S. W. Hays, Joel Lyall, 
 
 Sam Davis, D. Burris, 
 
 Solomon Davis, John E. Palmer, 
 
 M. P. Warner, A. T. Yeargin, 
 
 T. S. Beatty, D. J. McConnell, 
 
 E. M. Morgan, D. Wait, 
 
 J. M. Bell, A. G. Anderson, 
 
 D. K. Zumwalt, E. C. Thorn, 
 
 W. T. Martin, W. McHaley, 
 
 A. Farley, S. M. Phillips, 
 Lewis Waggoner, Eobert Stevenson, 
 
 ' Mr. F. Sutherland, S. Traukenan, 
 
 . T. P. Sutherland, D. P. Blivins, 
 Edward Sutherland, N. Phillips, Jr., 
 Gillis Sutherland, M. C. Hoag, 
 Delos Swain, 
 Elisha Harlan, 900 acres, value $10,000. 
 
 B. H. Burritt, 240 " *' 4,000. 
 James H. Banelle, 320 " '• 6,000. 
 
296 
 
 We, the People of Merced County in Mass Meeting, on Monday, February 
 22d, 1885, ask and demand of our Senators and Assemblymen, and of the 
 present Legislature, to pass Senate Bill No. 210, and Assembly Bill No. 410. 
 
 H. H. McCloskey 
 J. W. Robertson, 
 John Grebe, 
 M. B, Cusick, 
 E. S O'Brien, 
 C. C. Mitchell, 
 Eobert N. Hughes, 
 H. M. Bucket, 
 Wm. W. Gray, 
 J. W. Blackburn, 
 C. C. Smith, 
 Thos. S. Peck, 
 P. A. Spooner, 
 Geo. Renter, 
 H. W. French, 
 J. F. McSwain, 
 W. H. Mitchell, 
 J. L. Deford, 
 C. J. Ehat. 
 T. E. Flournoy, 
 Wm. Twomey, 
 Wm, Fahey, 
 W. E. Season. 
 
 Lucien Curtis. 
 W. Fahey, 
 Geo. P. Lee. 
 J. C. Bannister, 
 A. A. Eleat, 
 J. M. Hollister, 
 Thos. Harris, 
 A. H. Dauchy, 
 Wm. Wegner, 
 John Morley, 
 H. W. Leeker, 
 Geo. Ponway, 
 W. L. Ashe, 
 Sam'l C. Bates, 
 A. J. Meauy, 
 . Smith, 
 W. W. Abbott, 
 J. L. Melner, 
 A. Beeds, 
 O. M. Stoddard, 
 C. H. Marks, 
 John Crosby, 
 
297 
 
 PETITION FROM KERN COUNTY. 
 
 To the Honorable the Senate and Assembly 
 
 of the Legislature of the State of California: 
 
 The undersigned citizens and tax payers, residents of Kern County, State 
 of California, most respectfully represent that the very life and prosperity of 
 that portion of the San Joaquin valley, situate in this County, depends upon, 
 the right of appropriation of water from running streams for irrigation pur- 
 poses; and in view of a recent decision of our Supreme Court, enunciating 
 the doctrine, "that the waters of streams must run in their accustomed 
 channels undiminished in quality," we do most earnestly petition your 
 Honorable body to enact a law recognizing and establishing the right of 
 appropriation of the waters of the streams in this valley for the purposes of 
 irrigation. Our property, our homes, our very existence as a community, de- 
 pends upon immediate legislation in our behalf, for which we will ever pray, 
 etc. , 
 
 Kern County Bank, by S. Jewett, President. 
 
 H. A. Blodgett, Director Kern Valley Bank. 
 
 Sol. Jewett, " " " 
 
 A. Weill, *' 
 
 A. F. Bernard, Treasurer Kern Co. 
 
 W. Tyler, Auditor, 
 
 N. K. Packard, County Clerk. 
 
 D. A. Sinclair, Deputy Sheriff. 
 
 Board of Supervisors, by the Chairman, J: M. McKamy. 
 
 A. Weill, merchant and land owner. 
 
 Phil. Jewett, farmer and land owner. 
 
 Sol. Jewett, 
 
 C. W. Goodrich, farmer and land owner. 
 
 A. Heyman, merchant. 
 
 E. A. Dumble, farmer and land owner. 
 
 F. M. Carlock, land owner. 
 O. D. Fish, merchant. 
 
 Paul Galtes, merchant and land owner. 
 H. D. Bargwardt, land owner and butcher. 
 Thomas Owens, land owner. 
 John O' Miller, " 
 
 B. F. Rector, land owner and stock raiser. 
 S. M. Judd, land owner and farmer. 
 
 Hirshfeld Bros. & Co., merchants, property and land owners. 
 
298 
 
 L. Hirshfeld, merchant and property owner. 
 Daniel Wagoner, farmer and land owner. 
 W. R. MacMurdo, Connty Surveyor. 
 
 0. O. Mattson, real estate owner. 
 
 Ed. A. Pueschell, owner of 160 acres of land. 
 
 R. Hudnut, land and property owner. 
 
 M. C. Purcell, land owner. 
 
 Dom Castro, •' 
 
 Tomas Castro, " 
 
 H. F. Condict, " 
 
 Mrs. J. D. Thronsen, land owner. 
 
 H. C. Park, lumber dealer and real estate owner. 
 
 Alonzo Coons, agent Wells, Fargo & Co. and merchant. 
 
 A. P. Eyrand, hotel keeper. 
 
 L. S. Rogers, land owner and physician. 
 
 D. S. Loomis, land owner and stock raiser. 
 
 H. H. Fish, real estate owner and stable keeper. 
 
 H. H. Colton, Canal Superintendent. 
 
 S. H. Anderson, farmer and land owner. 
 
 A. G. Meyers, land owner. 
 
 W. A. Howell, real estate owner. 
 
 J. J. Darmul, farmer and land owner. 
 
 W. T. Jameson, land owner. 
 
 W. D. Hall, land owner. 
 
 John E. Bailey, property and land owner. 
 
 C. Brower, land and property owner. 
 
 W. R. Bowen, Sheriff Kern County. 
 
 1. L. Miller, hotel keeper. 
 
 T. E. Harding, Assesor Kern County. 
 
 C. H. Swain, land owner. 
 
 D. A. Leonard, land owner. 
 
 H, A. Blodgett. land owner and bank cashier. 
 
 Chas. E. Jewett, stock raiser. 
 
 F. D. Nelson, land owner. 
 
 W. H. Scribner, property owner and merchant. 
 
 J. E. Smith, blacksmith and property owner. 
 
 B. Brundage, land owner and farmer. 
 
 A. C. Mande, publisher Californian and land owner. 
 
 J. \V. Freeman, District Attorney, Kern Co. 
 
 Thos. C. Miller, land owner. 
 
 Thos. J. Davis, land owner. 
 
 John F. Maio, druggist and property owner. 
 
 L. A. Beardsley, land owner and farmer. 
 
 E. P. Davis, livery stable keeper. 
 Walter Bull, property owner. 
 
299 
 
 N. E. Wilkenson, J. P. and property owner. 
 
 M. "W. Morris, land owner. 
 
 Wm. F. Nelson, land owner. 
 
 R. M. Payson, stock raiser and ag^nt of Gen. E. P. Beale. 
 
 Franz Buckrens, property owner. 
 
 O. Brown, property owner. 
 
 C. H. Duvall, real estate owner. 
 Henry Bauer, land owner. 
 Mrs. Barbry, St. Merr}', farmer. 
 E. M. Ashe, land owner. 
 
 John M. Keith, stock raiser and land owner. 
 
 G. W. Morrill, tax payer. 
 
 Chas. Baterbaiigh, tax payer. 
 
 Gao. G. Doherty, tax payer and land owner. 
 
 W. P. McCord, stock raiser and land owner. 
 
 Alexander Hudnut, taxpayer. 
 
 E. M. Roberts, land owner and stock raiser. 
 
 E. F. Gitel, hotel keeper. 
 
 Ed. O'Donnell, real estate owner. 
 
 J. Enas, farmer and land owner. 
 
 O. M. Taylor, land owner. 
 
 D. G. McLean, land owner and farmer. 
 D. Hill, land owner. 
 
 Dallas McCord, butcher and land owner. 
 
 Those signers represent on the assessment roll property to the amount of $470,000. 
 Copy of memorial introduced in Senite by Senator Reddy from the people of Eern 
 County, praying for the passage of irrigation laws. 
 
RETURN TO the circulation desk of any 
 University of California Library 
 or to the 
 
 NORTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 BIdg. 400, Richnnond Field Station 
 University of California 
 Richmond, CA 94804-4698 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 2-month loans may be renewed by calling 
 
 (415)642-6233 
 1-year loans may be recharged by bringing books 
 
 to NRLF 
 Renewals and recharges may be made 4 days 
 
 prior to due date 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 JAN 2 5 1988 
 OCT 21 1991 
 
 I 
 
YC 53784 
 
 j-r, 379962 
 
 t z C- 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA LIBRARY