Seventy-Tiiiki) Annual Report 1183 



sary he may proceed with the same either directly where the cost 

 is estimated at less than $500, or by the employment of an engi- 

 neer and by pnblic contract if the sum involved is estimated to be 

 more than that amount. 



The cost of such assessment is apportioned in the same ratio 

 as the original assessment, unless only a part of the system is in- 

 volved, in which case it is divided as the conditions seem to war- 

 rant. This seems to be a reasonable and satisfactory provision 

 for the maintenance of pnblic drainage ditches, and we find no 

 basis upon which to suggest change. 



Still another method of procedure for the acquisition of better 

 facilities for the outlet of drainage water is by reference of the 

 matter to the town fence viewers (Town Law, Sec. 121). The 

 fence viewers for the arbitration of the matters in dispute are 

 selected by the parties concerned, and when so selected their de- 

 cision is made binding in a court. This is most suitable for the 

 more mild difficulties and is an important provision since it es- 

 tablishes a simple and inexpensive method of settling many dis- 

 puted questions in drainage improvement. 



Modifications and Rulings. The chief contention against the 

 machinery of the drainage hiw has been that for snuill projects it 

 is too cumbersome and expensive to be invoked by the average 

 farmer. Especially is this true since the farmer needing the 

 drainage is likely to have very limited financial means to carry 

 through the necessary petitions and court proceedings. We be- 

 lieve these difficulties have been unduly magnified due to the fact 

 that the method of procedure and probable cost is not thoroughly 

 understood. It should be very clearly noted that the active opera- 

 tions of the commission may cease after the preliminary report 

 and that from that point onward the petitioner may carry out the 

 surveys and construction mider the general supervision of the 

 commission. 



Another point is to be noted and is especially opened for dis- 

 cussion. The opinion has been held in some quarters that where 

 an easement is acquired by condemnation proceedings and the 

 necessarv damage paid, the person so objecting could not be as- 

 sessed for any part of the cost of benefits he may derive from the 

 ditch. This is manifestly unfair and such a ruling would open 



