Sacramento daily record-union., 1881-06-18
A LETTER.
A PLAIN STATEMENT OF THE MATTER
CONCERNING DRAINAGE.
Some History to be Recalled and Some
Facts to be Considered Relative
to Drainage and Levees.

| TO drainage anu kefeSos
EDS. RECORD UNION: The drainage and
levee question is taking on new interest. /
desire now and here to speak very plainly,
and in doing so l know that l reflect
the sober thought and judgment of the
taxpayers of this city. shall state the facts
in manly and absolutely truthful spirit.
Sacramento is protected by levee defenses
of magnitude. The city limits are Thirty
first street on the east and Y street on the
south. Levee defenses on these two lines,
with the other lines on the north and west,
would effectually and completely have pro-
tecte1 the property interests OF the CITY
But Sacramento took broader view OF the
situation when she adopted her levee system
| and erected works on the north to Brighton,
some seven miles, which form an adequate
and the ONLY protection afforded to the city
from overflow of the American river. She
did not do as she might have done, build an
| impregnable barrier on Thiriy-first street and
| leave the American river and the resul; OF a /
the watershed east OF that street to annually
sweep over the lands south of the city, now
held at such exceedingly high price, and
the values of which depend wholly
upon the defenses of the city on the north.
More than this, Sacramento did not limit her
self to Y street on the south, but built alevee
along the river to Freeport, some ten miles,
taking into protection the old district thus
| embraced, which gave $4,000 only of the
SAG. 900 expended in the construction of the
| leYee. Subsequently she gave control of
the levee to residents of District No. l. His
tory records how woefully they neglected the
| trust and allowed the defenses built for them
| to fall into ruins. Some four years ago law
was passed organizing Drainage District
No. |, SO as to include the territory
alluded to below the city and some
lands east thereof and of the city,
and every acre of which drained naturally
| toward the Sacramento river and into the
bottom lands south of the city. Let it. be
constantly remembered, and in this consider
alton kept plainly in view, that Sacramento's
defenses. and none other, have given all the
protection afforded to the lands of Messrs
| Merkley, Mesick, Flint, and all their col
| leagues in District No. l, and that they all
had and have Just as great an interest In the
integrity of our defenses as have the property
owners of Sacramento, and each OF them far
greater interest than any single lot-owner
within the city. But in addition to these
generous acts of Sacramento she took OFT OF
the hands of the county the faint line of ditch
it had cut to drain District No. and en-
lareed it into canal intended TO drain the
city (but which it never did perfectly
and afford the people of District
No. l means to be rid Of their
water accumulations and house and farm
drainage and regular water fall, which it
did perfectly. That this canal, after great
expenditure of money by Sacramento, has
now failed to answer to the growing demands,
is no fault of Sacramento. Be it remem-
bered, also, that outside of the city there
arose a stream which found way through the
city, and has been a source of annoyance,
cost and great damage to this city, and its
waters were almost wholly waters shed from
lands outside of the city, and which, left TO
natural flow, must, and always will, run
down upon and through the bottom lands
south OF the city-the very same lands pro-
tected by the city levees-levee defenses
which the outside lands so protected
should have paid for in proper
tionats amount just as surely as city
lots and the personal property of our tax
burdened people. Be 1t also known that
certain people Of District No. L, on lands
east of Thirty-frst street, turned drain
waters into the stream named which should
have flowed from the highlands east and
southeast of the city towards Willow slough.
but which, by bitches, they forced into Burns
slough, and thence into the city land which
the people OF Sacramento have had year
after year to pump out), act in defiance Of
natural and statute laws-and which no other
people bat the lOng-suffering ones OK Sacra-
mento would have patiently endured. Is
! peciaIly was this done IN the section OF coun-
| try where Joseph Hull lives, gentlemen
who has been particularly forward and active
| in securing the passage of an Act in the
| interest of these very people who were on
| the upper edges of District No. l, and
who rebelled, and by the passage of the
| Act had themselves legislated out of the dis
| trict and relieved of all burden attaching to
| it's drainage. to which their lands more than
any Others contributed the waters. These
people, free from all liability and legal obi
! CATION in the premises, now have the hardl-
hood to threaten Sacramento with litigation
| for attempting to turn Burns slough outside
the CITY. and impudently demand the right
| to run the waters through the streets of Sac
rsmento, and this notwithstanding the fact
| that it can make no earthly difference tC
them for the slough, whether running above
or below Thirty-frst, must ind its way tC
the lowest point, and that is the bed er basir
of the strip of lands below street anc
along the Sacramento river, and which th'
drainage canal referred to traverses. lie
Gently an election was held in this city as to th'
propileCy anu eCobHlAJ VI puilpihS siO VI 1iA
age of the city into the river. The proposition
was defeated by pitiful majority. AnC
how was it accomplished by people OF Dis
trict No. ! coming to our polls and election
eeFipg against it. Why should they hay'
done so? In gratitude for the offer OF th
city to contribute S27, 500 toward the con
struction OF leyee defeuses along the Sacra
mento TO protect the lands of these very peo
pie? The people voted their approval OF the
proposition to expend this money, and therein
bore testimony to their broad and lloera
spirit of citizenship. But why should tn
lowlanders have thus labored to defeat pump
ing? The answer is undeniable. 70 fore
the city to operate the canal at its own ant
sole expense, which affords District No. al
the drainage it has. That this issolsclear. Tn
Pocket people cannot aver that Sacramento
drainage floods thsm. Shut eff to-
canal and all our discharge, as has been done
and Willow slough will ill =" the Pocket " Il
one storm. Some men who strut abou
robed in the gossamer garb OF smatterlng 0
science, have opposed pumping into the rive
because they thought they could find differ
ence between discharging into the rive
through q pump-nozzie, and running drain
age into the river through sluggish canal o
exceeding slight fall that is annually growini
, less Broad Judgment, real science, cult
ured aud experienced engineering knowledge
point out that there is no difference, an
, landowners below District No. ! evidently 5
believe. for they have already sued the Cit,
to enioin her from using the canal Thus o.
the east they threaten US if we do not dis
charge waters into the miserable apology 70
drainage canal, and below the city the
! charge upon us with an injunction if we dc
{ while between the two the selfish people o
District No l come to our polls and meddl
with cur aft airs. to compel us to maintain
ditch that is useless, that cost them not on
cent. and, with few exceptions, for whic
they made us pay roundly for the right c
way over their lands. In addition to this
r they have neglected the old levee built b
\ the city. and now demand that the none
D recently voted shall be expended in rep4irin
and rebuilding private levees that have bee
q run around on bow formations, in order
, reclaim private lands., These abTuF
bends being leveed detected the nv,
! from It's true course at high water, an
e caused the Mesiek aud Fern breaks la
n winter. The simple question Is now, shA