NOTES ON ADMINISTRATION OF WATER SUPPLY. 71 



past Dubbo. On such occasions the stream beyond the latter 

 place gradually diminishes till it disappears altogether. It will 

 be easily understood that under these circumstances the abstraction 

 of a very moderate supply at Dubbo would reduce by miles the 

 distance traversed by the stream. Such considerations as these 

 show that wherever the British Law of Riparian Rights is in 

 force the opportunities for raising difficulties in the way of making 

 any use whatever of the water of rivers are practically endless. 

 It is particularly interesting to note that a person who wishes to 

 construct a dam has a high legal authority in support of his right 

 to do so, while his neighbour who is determined to prevent the 

 construction of any dam has an equally high authority to rely on. 

 It is, on the whole, a matter for regret that when Charles Dickens 

 was in the vein for writing such a sketch as that on the 

 Circumlocution Office and How Not to Do It, he was not brought 

 into collision with this remarkable jumble of vague and discordant 

 opinions known as the British Law of Riparian Rights. But it 

 may be urged that while this so called Law is unsuitable to the 

 requirements of countries which have a hot climate and a scanty 

 rainfall, it may be sufficient to meet the requirements of the 

 country in which it originated and where these conditions are, in 

 a great measure, reversed. It would be well for the credit of 

 English administration if this were so, but the facts are far different. 

 In Spain, Italy, and Northern India the rights of the State and 

 of individuals are clearly defined, so that the initiation of works 

 for water conservancy, or the development of existing works, 

 presents no legal difficulties, and affords no ground for heavy 

 preliminary expenses or for unreasonable delay. In England, on 

 the other hand, it is impossible to interfere in the slightest degree 

 with a stream, lake, or marsh, without first setting in motion the 

 whole cumbrous machinery of the legislature and stirring up 

 afresh the muddy waters of riparian rights. I have not been able 

 to obtain a statement of the number of English enactments 

 relating solely to water conservation, but I have ascertained, on 

 good authority, that the number of public and private Acts of 

 Parliament which deal with rivers, canals, harbours, and docks is 

 little if anything short of 4,000. The confusion, uncertainty, 

 and loss necessarily arising from such multiplicity of laws are 

 greatly increased by the number and variety of the boards which 

 have been created to administer them. The chief objects of 

 river conservancy in England are (1) protection against floods, 

 (2) facilitating navigation, (3) reclamation of swamps, (4) industrial 

 purposes, and (5) fish breeding. Such a list of objects has resulted 

 in much piecemeal legislation and called into existence a great 

 variety of boards or commissions whose interests are widely 

 divergent. Very little consideration is required to show that the 



