26 BULLETIN 1207, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
are often led into the main ditch from lands which were not included 
in the original district, and such lands as receive a benefit from the 
maintenance of the main ditcli can be assessed in proportion to 
that benefit. New railroads or highways the construction of which 
may have been made possible by the drainage may receive a benefit 
from its maintenance. On the other hand, lands originally assessed 
for the construction of the drain may cease to be benefited and, 
therefore, become exempt from assessments for repairs or liable in 
a reduced ratio. 
It is generally held that the proceeds from a maintenance assess- 
ment must be used solely for that purpose and not to widen, deepen. 
or to add to the original drain. 
As a general rule assessments for maintenance should be made 
before any indebtedness for such work is contracted. 
The proper maintenance of a public drain is. in most cases, quite 
as necessary as its original construction. The power to assess for 
that purpose continues as long as the drain exists and is of public 
benefit, and it may be exercised from time to time as conditions 
require. 
ASSESSMENT SUBDISTRICTS. 
Physical conditions and topographical features frequently are so 
different in different parts of a district as to make it advisable to 
divide it into subdistricts for the purpose of making assessments. 
For instance one lateral may serve a broad area, another a narrow 
valley, making a big difference in the average costs per acre. Again, 
some lands may be so low that an extra depth of ditch is required 
to drain them. Rock ledges may make the work much more ex- 
pensive in one part of the district than in others. Neither engineer- 
ing nor legal authorities are agreed in regard to the propriety of 
dividing a district into subdistricts for assessment purposes. Some 
hold that a drainage district must be treated as a unit, and because 
it is a unit consideration should not be given to the different costs 
of parts of the work in apportioning the total cost according to the 
benefits. Other authorities insist that a landowner must not be 
assessed to help pay for work done in other parts of the district 
when it does not benefit him. 
Few court decisions touch on this question : some can be found 
supporting either position. A drainage district in Illinois must be 
considered and assessed under the Levee Act as a unit according to 
the decision in Freesen v. Scott County, "Drainage and Lever Dis- 
trict. 283 111. 536, 110 K E. C>2. r >. which reads, in part, as follows: 
The ninth refused instruction submitted six special interrogatories to the 
jury, in which they were asked whether they found that certain localities in 
the district needed more particular and minute drainage, and whether the 
proposed ditches (naming them) were a honcfit to any portion of the district 
except that in which the particular ditch was located. The instruction was 
bad for the reason that the Improvement and the effect thereof .is to benefits 
on each tract of the land in the district must be considered as a whole, and not 
her some part of the improvement or one of the different proposed ditches 
would or would not benefit some particular tract. 
Under the Mississippi drainage law the court must decide whether 
the work to l)e done requires a combined system of drainage. When 
a combined system has been approved, the Supreme Court held in 
the case of Wheeler & Sihler /•. "Rogue Phalia Drainage District, 64 
