The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1895-11-13
THE CALL LACKS INFORMATION.

Our esteemed contemporary, the Call,
recently stated, as an ascertained fact,
that the Southern Pacific Company had
purchased the lands lately the prop
erty of DR.. Hugh j. Glenn. The state
ment was wholly incorrect. 1t inter-
viewed Congressman Mcguire upon the
propriety of the purchase, and in all it
said concerning the mater, it showed an
unfriendly spirit toward a project re-
Gently mooted of combining some large
land holdings in the Sacramento Val
ley in such a manner that the lands en-
braced in the combination might be
put upon the market at a cheap rate,
with the purpose of inducing their set
tlement in small subdivisions.
That this project should have been
received in an unfriendly spirit by any
newspaper in California is an addi-
tional evidence of the inability of the
people of California to unite for the
accomplishment of any good. We are
Indifferent as to the attitude of our
contemporary on this question, and are
not now mountaineering particularly
on its unreasoning and unreasonable
attitude. We are using the incident as
an Illustration. The inability Of COM
munity to combine for the accomplish
ment of a signal good to itself is an evil
oF Of l,a fal1
gence of the members of that commu-
nifty.
Answering the Marysville Democrat,
the Call refers to its warning that the
Southern Pacific Company's affilia-
ton with the institution in question
will make the establishment of COM
peting railroad difficult, if not i'm
possible achievement.
If the Call is willing to be taught, we
desire to present for its consideration
some of the facts connected with the
proposed scheme. The lands proposed
to be consolidated are without excep-
ton lands embraced within original
Spanish grants Each and every hold
ing has a frontage on a navigable
river. navigable all the year round.
This navigable frontage extends sew
enty-four miles along the banks of the
Sacramento River. The greatest
width Of the land proposed to be com
bined is four miles. Let the Call take
note, then, that there is no land to be
embraced in this combination a greater
distance than four miles from a navi-
gable stream, theaYerage distance being
two miles. The statement should be
taken into the consciousness of the Call
In this form: It is proposed to com
bine land, the average distance of
which from a river is two miles About
eighty per cent. of this land lies on
the west side of the Sacramento River,
and the greatest distance from the
river TO an existing railroad, so far as
the lands in question are concerned, is
ten miles, while for many miles the
road runs through thelands, within one
and a half miles of the river. The lands
lying on the east side of the Sacra-
mento also have river frontage and
the greatest distance from the river to
a railroad is four miles. the railroad
running through some part of each
holding proposing to enter the COM
bination To state this in another
form, the lands lie along the Sacra-
mento, having a river frontage with an
already constructed and operated road,
both on the east and west side of the
river, the maximum distance between
the two railroad lines so far as they
affect these lands being fourteen miles
with a navigable river running be-
tween. A competing road would have
to be built on the bank of the Sacra-
mento River.
We beg further to inform the Call
that the part taken in this by the
Southern Pacific Company is a purely
disinterested one. When newspaper
has adopted a policy of railroad oppo-
sitfon. it generally speaks, as the Call
has in this instance. without proper in
formation. 1t does not know the facts
of the case, and it does not want TO
know them: if they are favorable to the
railroad it chooses to oppose. The river