Los Angeles herald., 1906-09-12

ftable to transport the ore by pack
trains from Clancha, near Owens lake,
all the way to this city. Cheap power
and adequate railroad facilities would
| be great boon to that region and or
! inestimable benefit to this city.
| While the upper portion of the val
| ley, l. e., that part above the city's IN
take, is quite extensively cultivated,
the lower portion, from Independence
south (all of it below the point of in
tended diversion of the city water).
is but sparsely settled, and contains
much fertile land capable of extensive
agriculture and of supporting a con-
siderable population when the irrigat-
ing methods familiar to us in Southern
California are applied to it. The irri-
cation of this land could have no pos
sible detrimental effect upon the city's
water supply.
Our plans therefore assumed three
fold aspect:
l. A railroad to connect the valley
with Los Angeles to which it is geo.
graphically and should be commercially
tributary.
2. The development of electric
power, and it's use for operating the
proposed railroad; also for municipal
and commercial uses in the valley; also
for use in adjoining mines and mining
districts.
3. The salvage and piping of waste
water according to Southern California
methods, and the reclamation or arid
lands in Owens valley Herewith.
No Conflict Between Plans, He Says
In this connection 1 will first con-
slider the city's water, as distinguished
from its power plans.
At the time of the announcement of
cd oil a
point at which any Of our filings con-
flicted with its water purchases. With
the exception of one ranch on Cotton
wood, the city's purchases were all
riparian to the Owens river, and our
filings were not concerned with Owens
river at all. The cty's intake was at
Charley'S Butte; our filings were all,
not only on side streams but further
down the valley. 1t is true that on
August 10, 1905. Mr. Eaton made a
filing near the mouth of Cottonwood,
but this y as plainly an aftertL ught
and not regarded as part of the project
in-chief. 1t was considerably subse-
quent in time to ours. Hence the con-
f1ict on Cottonwood was of the city's 8
making and not of ours. Later
the city abandoned the work under
taken for the purpose of making this
fling valid in law, and while matters
were III Cnat condition, upon the state
ment of Mr.. Mulholland to Mr.. Jewett,
that the city wanted the flood waters
of Cottonwood for storage purposes
the later at once stated that that could
be arranged without difficulty.
l make no point of the fact that this
resolution requests the department of
agriculture to go directly to the ex-
pressed Legislation of congress upon
this very matter and as contained in
the city's act and that therefore the
department. cannot legally comply
with it.
make no point of the fact that the
surplus water upon these streams is
already lawfully appropriated under
the laws of California and that neither
the department of agriculture nor any
branch of the federal government has
any power to accomplish coniscation
Of private property.
make no point of the fact that this
resolution, adopted two years after the
city's plans were undertaken, tends to
convict Mr.. Eaton and Mr.. Mulholland
and your honorable board itself OF gross
negligence in the discharge of their
duties and in the carrying out of the
plans OF the city. Certainly this is a
harsh and think unWarranted impu-
tation upon all, and especially upon
Mr. Eaton. whose zeal in the eity's be-
half was so largely instrumental in
procuring for Los Angeles its splendid
water holdings.
The question which, as citizen and
taxpayer keenly interested In the sue
cess of the city's project. l now ask