The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1893-02-11
ASSEMBLYMAN ADAMS
HAS HIS SAY ON THE ANNEXA-
TON PROPOSITION.
Jud. c. Brusfe Locks Horns With the
Yolo County Statesman The
Probable Outcome.

A meeting of the Joint Committee on
Counties and County Boundaries was
held after adjournment yesterday for the
purpose of reporting upon the proposed
annexation of that part of Yolo County
comprising the town of Washington and
the highlands surrounding it to Sacra-
mento County.
Only members of the Senate Commit
tee We're present, however, as the AS
sembly had not yet adjourned, when
Assemblyman Adams of Yolo County
appeared upon the scene, and asked to be
heard upon the question, he being a
committee of one appointed for that pur-
pose by the Assembly Committee on
Swamp and Overlooked Lands.
The Committee allowed Assemblyman
Adams five minutes in which to present
his argument, and he lost no time in
coming to the point. He first produced
Assembly Bill No. 595, by Anderson,
which is "An Act to provide for the or
ganlzaUion and government of drainage
districts, for the levee, equalization and
collections therein, for the construction
and maintenance of canals and other
drainage works to secure the lands OF
such districts from overflow and confer
ring powers and imposing duties upon
the State Board of Public Works in re-
lation to such drainage districts"
/ MIR. Adams asserted that the bill for
annexation would, if passed, forever pre-
! clude the reclamation of those districts
lying west and south from the town OF
| Washington, and which comprise over
100000 acres of land, which is to-day as
sessed for - SO an acre, and which would
if reclaimed be assessed for at least 500
| per acre. The sense of the Assembly bill,
Mr.. Adams said, was to construct 4 canal
along the highlands near the river, which
would carry the surplus waters directly
! into the bay, thus preventing breakage
of the levee and flooding the Yolo Basin.
1t was the intention of Sacramento, con-
! tinued the ASSemblyman, to throw q
| dyke up near the mouth of the American
River and protect their city by making a
! huge reservoir or dumping ground of the
great swamp district of Yolo County.
Such an action would forever prevent
| Yolo from reclaiming the rich section
known as the tule lands.
why does Sacramento" exclaimed
! Mr.. Adams, 'step in between Yolo and
Washington, when such an action will
! positively prevent reclamation?"
Jud. C. Brusie of Sacramento claimed
and was allowed the privilege of answer
| ing the ASsemblyman from Yolo. He
declared that the present position taken
by the men who opposed annex alton, had
not been sprung last night when the dis
cussion ragged, and that an undue advan-
tage was given them by the statement OF
| Mr.. Adams, seeing that the main pro-
moters of the scheme were not present to
refute the same. "Y olo County," thun-
dered Mr.. Brusie, "has spent about SS4,-
600 on their levees along the river front,
while Sacramento spends 500, 900 yearly
on hers, and thinks nothing of it.
Never year passes but breaks occur
on the Yolo side, and the basin is always
inundated. We claim that Sacramento
will do more toward reclaiming those
lands than Yolo ever would. Why
should we not do so? That immense
territory lies nearer to us than to Wood
land, and we may naturally expect re-
turns from it, if it is reclaimed. Besides
that, it is Sacramento that is interested in
keeping up both sides of the stream for
navigation purposes, and not Woodland,
and she will do so in case of annexation
The Senate Committee adjourned with
out action being taken.
An hour later the Assembly Committee
met in the same room for the same pur-
pose, but adjourned without forming a
| report.
1t is stated on good authority, that the
Assembly committee will report the bill
back amended, so as to leave the propo-
sition to vote of the citizens of Wash
ington, a two-thirds majority being neces-
Sarv for division