Los Angeles herald., 1891-10-18

The sewer will pass through Inglewood
in a closed pipe, laid so that the top is
at least four feet under ground. There
will not even be manholes. Sewers are
laid in the most populous streets of
great cities and are considered an adj
vantage.
"Mr. Freeman also says that he does
not care for irrigation for his land. If
he uses the sewage water, he declares
he can rent his land only to Cinnamon,
because no white man will use the
water. There is really no reason why
a white man should not use the water,
as it is strained, and is no more objec-
tionable than ordinary manure. But,
leaving that out OF account, he can rent
his land without using the sewage. The
fact that the sewage runs through or
rather under his property, does not
compel him to use it, but only gives
him an opportunity of doing so in case
any of his tenants desire to avail them
selves of it. There are plenty of owners
south of Freeman who will take the
water. Going through Freeman's land
gives the line a sufficient elevation to
irrigate the land south, an elevation
which could not be obtained any other
way.
"The line which Mr.. Freeman wants
the city to take, makes an angle to the
southwark and runs along his south
boundary. 1t would increase the length
of the sewer about two and one half
miles, without the slightest compensat-
ing advantage to the city. In addition
it would involve an increase of cost,
amounting to about $4,000. Thirdly,
the line proposed by Mr.. Freeman
would be on a much lower level,
and about 5000 acres would be cut off
from irrigation, which by the present
line could receive the waters. That
would mean a loss of about $4,000 in
revenue to the city every year, placed at
the lowest figure.
"Mr. Freeman wants from the city
either big price for the right of way,
or in place OF such price the use of the
water. The city must own the right of
way and control the distribution of the
sewage unqualifedly. 1t could not af-
ford to adopt the suicidal policy of CIV
ing away the water, and depriving itself
of great revenue in order that it may
accrue to others. In conversation held
by me with Mr.. Hugh Vail, who owns
land south of Mr.. Freeman, that gentle
man told me that he would be willing to
pay $3.50 per acre per year for 1000 acres
that he controlled. The law of supply
and demand would, it seems to me, af-
feet the price of the water, and do not
see therefore how the city could enter
tain a fixed price. We have sufficient
water for $4,000 acres of land, so you can
readily see that if the city gets $1,000 per
year for 1000 acres, it ought to expect an
income of $63, 900 year from the whole
supply. In Vernon, the land that uses
the sewage pays So per acre per year for
the use of the same. If Mr.. Freeman,
as he says, does not want the sewage,
why should the city pay for the right of
way in water rights? Logically, the
only compensation he can ask is the
which can be fixed either by ar
bitration or by jury"
Mr.. Freeman's reply is as follows:
EDITORS HERALD: You have asked me
to comment upon the communication of
Engineer Dockweiler, which appears in
this issue, upon the sewage question.
Mr.. Dockweiler does not touch upon
either of the two objections L made to
the propositions of the city council, the
first of which was that they could make
no contract for the sale of the waters of
Los Angeles river that could not be re-
voked by themselves or their successors
upon six months notice. The second