The herald., 1897-11-16
Heavy Claim for Damage
by Flood Denied
IN THE WOODWARD CASE
THE JURISDICTION QUESTION TO
BE SUBMITTED
Gilbert Young Found Guilty of Rob
bery-George Barnett Hunting
Trouble-Court Notes

Southern California Railroad compan
has been rendered by Judge Allen. Thi
is one of the suits wherein the plaintiff
claims damages for injuries sustaine
through the change in the river bed dur
ing the flood in 1889.
A number Of suits were instituted a
a result of that flood, and in the D.
Baker case a verdict was returned fo
$4,000. The supreme court reversed th
finding and remanded the case for re
trial. In the Danere case, more recent.
tried before Judge Van Dyke and
jury, a verdict was again found for the
plaintiff for damages in a lesser amount
The present case was tried without {
jury and occupied about three weeks
In hearing, and upon it depends in large
measure the fate of a number of kindred
suits instituted to recover damages ag.
gregating very many thousands OF
dollars.
Woodward claimed ownership of GER
tain lands lying east of the Los Angeles
river and east of the lands of one Bas-
sett, whose lands abut on the river.
He alleged that certain railroad COM
panies wronsfully and neglgently con-
structed a levee in the bed and channel
of the Los Angeles river extending from
First street to the southerly limits of
the city. which levee was SO constructed
as to divert the natural flow of the waters
of the river, by which the channel there
of was changed from its ancient bed,
no part of which was upon his land, to
q new channel through his land: that
this change in the bed of the channel
occurred during the flood of December
-, 1889, on account of which thirty-thrce
acres of Woodward's land of the value
of SEC. 900. and improvements and per-
sonal property. independent of the
land, of the value of $4,000 more We're
wholly destroyed. and the land so di-
vided from other parts as to damage
the remainder of his holding to the
amount Of $4,000, that, afterward, in
1891, a subsequent food occurred, which,
taking the course of the new channel,
washed away and totally destroyed in
addition about forty acres: that the
companies so constructing such levee
We're, in November. 1889. consolidated
with other companies under the laws of
the state into the defendant corporation,
who at the time of such consolidation
assumed and agreed to pay all of tina
liabilities of the constituent companies.
and succeeded 10 all their rights, prop
critics and franchises; that defendant,
as such successor in interest maintained
the levee. was maintaining 1t at the time
of the disaster, and has since continued
to maintain it: that the channel so cut
through plaintiffs land Is permanent,
and has greatly injured the remainder
of the tract of land owned by him not
so actually destroyed.
These are the facts upon which plain
tiff rested his claim
In reviewing the salient points of the
testimony the court touches upon points
of historic interest in connection with
the making of the first surveys of the
river.
THE FIRST SURVEY
"The Los Angeles river" says Judge
Allen, was originally a sandy wash,
extending through the city from First
street south to the charter boundary. of
irregular width. varying from five hun
dred feet to a half mile. the widest por-
tion thereof being at the south charter
boundary. The surface of this wash
was lower along the easterly portion. on
account of which the natural flow of the
river at mean stages was along the
eastern bank of the river In flood
times the water would flow over the
whole wash
1.-The city of Los Angeles, in 1862, hav-
ing succeeded to the ownership of this
wash, and all pueblo lands. caused one
Waldemar, city engineer, to make
survey of the Los Angeles river as it
ran through the city. This survey and
the map was made, and in November.
1862, the city council of Los Angeles, by
ordinance, declared such a map to be
official. In 1864 the city council, by or
dinance, granted to all owners of land
upon the borders of said river the inter
vening lands between their original
lines and this official line of the river,
provided they would plant and maintain
live fences along such declared official
line AfterWard, in 1871, the council,
by ordinance, created q levee fund.
THE LEVEE BUILT
In 1886, certain railroad companies,
out of which defendant was subsequent
ly formed, desired an entrance into
the city for steam railroad by the
terms of which the city of Los Angeles
granted to such railroad company all of
the lands owned by the city in this wash |
west of the line established by Walde- |
mar as the western bank of the river, |
from Seventh street to the patent bound |
ary, and agreed to pay $4,000 in money, |
then in the leVee fund.- in consideration |
of which the railroad company agreed |
to construct q leVee from Macy street to |
point between Sixth and Seventh |
streets, known as the Kellar & Good |
win tract. This levee was partially
constructed by the Riverside railroad.
and completed by the California Central
railroad, It's assignee. These railroad |
companies also constructed a line of |
steam railroad, parallel with the levee |
line, and some hundred feet Westwardly |
from First street to point midway be- |
tween the patent and charter bound |
aries of the city, being several thousand
feet south of the point named in the or
Ginance as the southerly end of the
levee, at which point, by curve in the
line, they cross the Los Angeles river
upon a bridge $50 feet in length, built
upon piling driven in the river bed
The great weight of the evidence is in
line with that of eX-Mayor Workman
and other old residents of the neighbor-
hood. that the Los Angeles river at all
stages of water. other than during times
Of great food always ran east of the
line of the levee. and that during great
floods it spread over the whole wash and
the adjacent streets of the city to the
west, submerging the lands of Bassett
on the east and m1lch Of the sIlrrol1n1- |