140 LEQI^LAflO^ ON TomiENIS. 



the High Alps, because it subjected to a fi^ed rule all the works which 

 otherwise would have been executed as chance might determine, pei;h9,ps 

 with mutual detriment and damage to one and another of the works 

 executed. And he adds, that, if it has not yielded all the fruit which might 

 have been expected, it may be well to take into account the hostile spirit 

 which generally animates the proprietors of the opposite banks of a river, 

 and which, unhappily, often prevents their union and co-operation in the 

 construction of such an embankment as would be the only means of 

 rendering the defence perfectly harmless and productive of the greatest 

 amount of benefit possible, i 



Valuable information in regard to the subject of this decree may be found 

 in Notice des principales lois decrets ordonnances, <&c., relatif aux rivieres, 

 'torrents, etc., par Morisot, Chef de bureau ct la prefecture des Basses-Alpes, 1821. 

 There exists also in the papers preserved in the prefecture of the High Alps 

 an excellent rlglemewl, which developes fully the decree of the Jfih theraddor, 

 which was drawn out in 1802 by M. Gauthier, councillor of the prefecture. 



By an Act of 16th September 1806, obtained on, demand of M. Ladoucette, 

 who had been prefect of the High Alps, this decree was extended to the 

 Drome and the Lower Alps. 



In a law bearing the date of 16th September 1807, there were embodied 

 several enactments somewhat at variance, if not directly opposed, to the 

 requirements of that decree. And the question was subsequently raised,, 

 whether this law were not virtually an abrogation or rescinding of the 

 decree. To those who are desirous only of learning what may be learned 

 relative to practical measures, sanctioned and tested, and approved or 

 abandoned by the Government in dealing with this matter, this question is 

 of importance mainly as indicative of the importance attached to the subject 

 by the Legislature and Administration of the country. The importance of 

 this legislation, under this view of the case, arises from the probability 

 which there is that it will be long before the more efficient remedies 

 'proposed by Favre, Dugied, and Surell, will be extensively adopted in newly- 

 peopled territories, and from the probability that meanwhile the adoption 

 of the less efficient measures which occupy only a secondary position in the 

 comprehensive projects submitted by them may be advocated as temporary, 

 if not as final, measures to be adopted ; and it may be advantageous to 

 know what has been done in similar circumstances by others, and with 

 what results. 



According to Art. 33 of the law of 16th September 1807, it is enacted, — 

 " When it is proposed to construct sea-dikes against rivers, streams, and 

 torrents — navigable and not navigable alike — the necessity for this being 

 done shall be determined by the Government, and the expense borne by the 

 property thus protected in the ratio of the interest in the work, excepting 

 in cases in which the Government shall deem this of public utility, and 

 grant all necessary assistance from the public treasury. . . . 



" Art. 34. The forms of procedure hereby established, and the interven- 

 tion of a Commission, shall be applicable to the carrying out of the 

 preceding Article." . . . 



It is in these forms of procedure alone that there is aught opposed to the 

 decree previously enacted. By this law there were established two com- 

 missions, the Syndicate, and another designated a Special Commission. By 

 the decree there was established only the Syndicate, and the powers of this 



