Los Angeles daily herald., 1889-01-16
THOSE RAILROAD LANDS.
~. W. Y. ...ll. Sets Sa m Fra N ciscs
Reporter Right.


Reporter Right.
T. K. Mulkey, Esq, San Francisco,
CAL:
DEAR SIR II have before me the clip
ping which you very kindly enclosed
with yours of January 10th. Now, if
you had another copy of the paper be-
fore you you would see how easy it was
for an nnintelligent reporter to make a
mistake, and how hard it is to make q
sensible man out of an idiot. An Eram.
iner reporter came to me and asked per-
mission to interview me concerning the
sales of last year. told him we had
sold 5000 acres of granted land. He
wished to know at what price, but de-
clined to inform him for two reasons
first, because it makes the business
common; second, because I did not
know myself. The books had not been
closed for the year, and we were not
soliciting an advertisement at the hands
of the Examiner. or of any paper, in the
premises. They were looking for us, not
we for them. told him no large tracts
of grazing land had been sold. He asked
about the lands in Capay Valley. l told
him there were $4,000 acres in Capay
Valley-not grazing land, but rich land
lying in the western part of Yolo County.
The Capay Valley Land Company which
is not the Central Pacific Railroad Com
pany, nor the Southern Pacific Railroad
Company is a corporation owning land in
the Capay Valley, and by permission of
the directors of the Southern Pacific
Company, they have placed their lands
in my charge to colonize, lay out towns
and cut into small subdivisions for sale.
Some of these subdivisions Immediately
adjoining townsites have sold for 5000 an
acre. In one case, a vineyard in bearing,
with little unimproved land connected,
sold for $265 an acre. Lands in Capay
valley are wholly separate and apart
from railroad lands, and much is excep-
tionally good land, lying in the most ia
vorable climatic conditions, with rail
road running through it. With regard to
the Capay Valley my answer was that
we had sold lands there in large
quantities. That we had done well
with townsites. That we had established a
colony of fruit growers from Vacaville, the
best fruit growing part of the State. That
lands were being sold from $40 to 5000
an acre; that there was only one in
stance of q sale at 5000, and that was
Immediately adjoining townsite, where
there was considerable prospect of town
growth; and that there was a piece of
improved property which had been sold
for $265 an acre. These matters ap-
peared very much as relate hem to
you in the Examiner. But now comes
the Alta and says that the company has
now about six million acres; that the
company had sold $1,000 acres during
the past year; that the lands sold were
located in the Capay Valley; that the
price ranged from 5000 to $275 an acre.
Now if we sold rs 900 acres at 5000 an
acre. we received SIS 1000, 900 for
the same, when the very same article
contains the statement that the gross
receipts of the Office were 1858, 900. 1
have long since determined not to reply
or explain to q newspaper concerning
anv error, unless it relates to question
of honor, but sopne of these errors are ex-
ceedingly trying. The average price at
which railroad land sold for last year
does not exceed So an acre. We have
large quantities of good fruit land at $40,
IS. and as low as So an acre. My own
opinion is that land at $75, $100, or 1925
An acre is always the cheapest land, if
there is any market for it, among those
familiar with the locality, the character
of the soil and climate.
Yours very truly,
WV. II. MILLS.
TThe above letter refers to a clipping
from the Alta which the HERALD pub
lished few days ago with editorial COM
~rocf Ed HFRAID