Los Angeles daily herald., 1886-03-26

AhAE NV " tsAo 0OFAte
EDiToR HERALD; AS you have al
ways evinced positive desire in public
matters to be on the right side, desire
to state case to you aud have no doubt
you can greatly aid us in this matter,
you having been on more than one occa.
sion the successful arbiter between right
and wrong.
On the Goth of January last flood
swept down upon the devoted city, and
did considerable damage upon the Also
tract, in the very heart of Los Angeles.
There has been loss to the dwellers on
that tract in the neighborhood Of thirty
thousand dollars. Many of us have laid
in our claims OF various sums to the City
Council to make good our loss, which, by
their charter Of 1876, they are in duty
bound to do, as our losses were caused
by defective bridges or dams, SO to
speak, erected by the ounoil and by
others under franchises from the city, to
the number of five. 1t is patent to all
that those defective bridges ~, otherwise
dams, were the cause of cur misery, suf-
fering and loss by the accumulation of
water above them, to an enormous pres
sure, which said dams, or bridges (!),
could not Withstand, hence the
ponderous weight OF water, rocks,
trees, etc., at one fell swoop upon
the bursting Of said dam came down
upon us like a thief in the night, and
destroying and carrying away in many
cases the citizens worldly possessions,
with some valuable lives. Now, what
we are coming at is this: many claims
have been laid before the Council
for damages, which have been very
cavalierly and unanimously laid upon
the table, thus courting lawsuits at our
tuition of our property. Mr.. Jake
Kurhts above all men moved in the
Council yesterday to lay on the table.
Now the sufferers have consulted emf
nent counsel, and have made arrange
menis to commence suit in the Superior
Court, when all demands shall have
been properly laid before the Council;
but we would rather not resort to ul-
terror measures il the city would only do
the right thing by us. which we claim
would be much better all round. Sup
posing our claims were satisfied, then
that money--most of it-would be spent
right on the spot mechanics and labor
ers would be employed. property be
made more valuable for assessment, and
a grateful feeling would so up for our
protectors. But as it is, we feel our
selves injured and insulted; no money
expended in improvements, no men en-
ployed on our tract, nothing Of any
value to assess for this years taxes, no
income for the city, disoontented lot
OF taxpayers to deal with, ever and anon
growing and deprecating the acts of an
imbecile Council and cursing their fate
at ever having had their lot cast in such
misgoverned city.
Contrast those two pictures and see
which side would rebound to the credit
of our fair city-for fair she is if proper
ly dealt with. Would it not be better
for the credit OF the city to settle this
matter with its injured people than to
trest us like dogs and beggers after all
we have done to help build the city upY
Jake Kurhts got all he wanted when
sued for dereliction of duty as a city
officer to the amount of thousands, and
we think our case fairer, more just and
legal than his claim ever could be made
to be.
A suit has Just been decided against
the city OF Hannibal, Mo by the Sn-
preme Court for damage caused by de-
fectiye bridges, entitled Jorday VS.. City
of Hannibal, and ON general principles
almost every State has given damages
where cities have not protected their
inhabitants. The grounds of suit
against the city Of Boston for sixty thou
sand dollars damages are similar to our
own, the city expected 100 feet of water
would go through 20.foot dam, and
found it would not. But the following
cases have been decided against the city
in our own State of California.
Judge Edmonds rendered decisions
in the suits of Daniel b. Spangler and
A. o. Cook against the City and County
of San Francisco. Spangler's dwelling
and carpenter shop was flooded by a de-
fective sewer in March and April, 1884,
to depth of three feet. He was award
ed by the court $1,000, and bis next door
neighbor, A. o. Cook, s2634 damages. "
1t appears strange to us that if the
Council had any doubts of the citys lia-
bility they had not referred our claims
to their attorney; but no, pigheaded like,
they are sure they are right, so let us go
ahead. Surely the tax payers have some
rights the Council should respect.
| should not have encroached so much
on your time and space, had | not
known you were always for the right.
Respectfully,
ALFRED MOORE,
And many other sufferers.
March 0f 1894