The San Francisco call., 1898-01-18
THE LOS ANGELES WATER WAR.


 n CAREFUL reading of the contract, made in / \ 1868, between the little village of Los Angeles and the little corporation which undertook to build $Iooo fountain and supply the people with ten inches of potable water will furnish complete infor1 nation upon the accrued rights of the great city of Los Angeles and of the big corporation which is furnishing water to its tens of thousands of people. The contract was made in good faith on both sides, and apparently without ambiguity. The little town had provided and owned its water supply. It leased
 its water property the little corporation for thirty years, with no provision for renewal but with the expressed intention of resuming control of its own property at the end of that time agreeing to arbrate the value of the betterments put thereon by the poration and to pay the award reached Between individuals there would not be moments hesitation nor word of dispute the terms of such con The arbrator would be chosen and the value of the betterments would be determined and the trans action would close in business order and decency. Why cannot this be the when the parties in in- terest municipal and private corporation? The wisdom and economy of municipal ownership not in issue at all. Such ownership may be wise wise, that does not touch the issue
 The sole point is the right of the city of Los An geles to enforce contract and possession of her property and franchises at the expiration of the lease.
 The laws of California give sufficient advantage to the leaseholder He need not surrender the proprey on the expiration of his lease forfeit possession upon failure to perform any covenant of the lease. No matter what of the contract he may violate the lease is udicable and the leasehoder cannot be expelled from possession except by judicial process
 It IS not necessary to state the for this cond tion inherent in legal principles by which the owner nf of the law while the dishonest possessor of it under lcasehod is protected in its beyond his after violation of his covenants to the spolation of the rightul owner.
 All of these advantages run to the artificial person. the corporation. a leaseholder and to the disad- vantage of the municipal corporation. the owner of the water plant It is for this reason that the people the actual of the property, need and are titled to the zeal and fidelity of the officers of the municipal corporation. The stockholders of the pri- vate corporation getting the jealous service of its officers and what evil genius denies to the people similar zeal the part of the officers of the muni- cipal corporation?
 The disadvantage put by the laws of the State upon the ownership of leased property is very high why in such this in Los Angeles the people should be faithfully represented. If the city govern ment fail to make good its rights under the contract the most serious consequences may follow. Suppose that the date fixed for arbtratng the value of the betterments pass without action, then the rights of the people will be seriously affected These rights un- derlie all others The right of the people to govern ment in the form of municipal corporation had to precede the right of the private corporation maks
 contract of lease of the property which belonged to the people
 Corporations must be taught to respect the source of their existence and of all the rights they have Partisan corruption and official treachery must not be permitted to hold the rights of all subordinate to the interests of less than all
 In pursuance of its settled policy The Call sustains the right of the people of Los Angeles to recover possession of their own property in the way and upon the terms set forth in the contract We ask for them only what IS nominated in the bond. They want no drop of blood anything vital nor valuable be- yond the plain terms of the contract compliance with which IS as easy as honesty always is.