USA > California > Riverside County > History of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, Volume I > Part 52
USA > California > San Bernardino County > History of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, Volume I > Part 52
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79
Meantime the water users, representing 2,000 acres of land, who were fighting the company as to the control of the water system, rates for water and the spread of water, proceeded to form a corporation of their own to be called the Citizens' Water Company, by which it was thought they could force Mr. Evans and his company to their terms. Mr. Evans, as president, had in view of the fact that the rates charged for water were not sufficient to pay running expenses and interest on the invest- ment, applied repeatedly to the Board of Supervisors for leave to increase
384
SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
the rates charged for water, but without any results. The rates charged for water being seven and a half cents per inch, miners' measurement, under a four-inch pressure for twenty-four hours' run, day water five cents per inch, night run three cents per inch. This method was after- wards changed and no water sold for less than twenty-four hours.
The contention was made by the newly formed Citizens' Water Com- pany that the water that was used by the Riverside Land & Irrigating Company under the name of the Riverside Canal Company was done in a very wasteful and extravagant manner that in fact, and it was tacitly admitted that under existing laws and conditions of fixing water rates by boards of supervisors and city authorities it worked an injustice to the water company, preventing the company from making expenses of operation of the canals and a fair interest on the investment. besides future enlargement of canals. On the other hand the statement was made by the Citizens' that the water company should take into consideration the profits made on land sales as an offset for the losses of the water system.
It was admitted on both sides that by spending more money for the development of water and saving what was in use, by cementing ditches, etc., a great saving would be made, but this the water company declined to do under existing conditions.
In the meantime a new factor was arising and that was the incorpora- tion of the Town of Riverside into a city under favorable laws recently passed by the legislature. There were two objects to be gained by incor- poration and these were first the right to fix rates to be charged for water by the citizens themselves, who were the parties most interested, and secondly, the right to license and regulate the traffic in liquor. At this time there were four saloons in Riverside that were operating on a very low license. In accordance with these ideas the citizens voted on Septem- ber 24, 1883, to incorporate.
On October 10, 1883, Mr. Evans as president of the Riverside Canal Company commenced suit in the Superior Court of San Bernardino County against the Citizens' Water Company, the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County, the Trustees of the City of Riverside, the newly elected trustees by name and a host of others, embracing about the whole people of Riverside, under the flow of the water system, to get some relief from some of the evils under which he asserted the com- pany was laboring. This was accompanied by mutual recriminations and in part at least it came to an almost personal quarrel. The result of it all was under these conditions new settlers ceased to come in and all land sales came to an end. An advertisement was also carried in the Press and Horticulturist, the only newspaper of that time, by Mr. Evans, president of the company, denying the right of anyone to water who either had not bought lands of the company or those living on government lands who had not made an agreement to buy water stock from the com- pany at twenty dollars per acre.
Several years before this Mr. Evans, in a public address published in the Press and Horticulturist of March 25, 1882, setting forth a history of the settlement from the beginning, as well as giving a history of the Spanish occupation and some details of the Jurupa grant. outlining some of the lawsuits the company had been engaged in, some of which had been settled and some still in the courts, submitted some propositions in regard to a settlement which were not accepted by the citizens, and so matters went on for about two years.
The Citizens' Water Company in statements published said their com- pany wanted nothing but what was fair and just, that "water in abundant supply properly conveyed to our lands and furnished at a moderate cost
385
SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
is what we are entitled to and must have." But the Citizens' Water Company also announced that it proposed to finally compel the Riverside Land & Irrigating Company and the Riverside Canal Company to come to its terms by preventing sale of its lands, which was the result of this agitation, but nobody else could sell, making it very hard on those who were in debt and hoped to get out of it by selling a portion of their lands, and practically everything came to a standstill.
The Canal Company refused to do anything because it could not get enough out of water sales to pay running expenses and there was but a limited supply of water running in the canals on account of seepage and evaporation in the river bed between the entrance of Warm Creek into the river and the point of intake of the canal. It was estimated owing to these causes and also the bad condition of the canals that one-half or more of the water was in this way entirely lost. Mr. Evans in the mean- time had asked of the Board of Supervisors of the county an increase in the rates of water to fifteen cents per inch without any success. In view of subsequent events this rate was found to be not an unreasonable one, for since that time for several years the rates for irrigating water had been as high as twenty-five cents per inch in summer, subsequently reduced to fifteen cents per inch.
This was the condition on May 3, 1884, when the Citizens' Water Company commenced suit against the Riverside Land & Irrigating Com- pany and the Riverside Canal Company to restrain them from spreading the water over more than 5,300 acres.
In the Press and Horticulturist of January 12, 1884, Mr. Evans as president of the two companies made a further proposition to sell to the Citizens' Water Company and the owners of land all of the property, franchises, etc., of the company in connection with the water system, together with a transfer of one-half interest in all of the unirrigated lands of the company on condition that the Citizens' Water Company would, together with all landowners under the flow of the canals who had not previously done so, take stock in a new company to be formed to the amount of twenty dollars per acre. This was exclusive of town blocks, which were ultimately to be furnished with pure water for domestic use to be pumped from Spring Brook. This proposal also involved the improvement of the canals and conservation of water by spending a large sum of money to save water wasted under the system at that time in use and spreading the surplus water thus saved over the 6,000 acres to be owned in common.
This was not accepted and things got from bad to worse, until September, 1884, when H. J. Rudisill, as secretary of the Riverside Land & Irrigating Company and the Riverside Canal Company came to the writer and talked the matter over about the condition of affairs, showing that everything had come to a standstill and that the irrigators in general were tired of the whole business and would gladly accept any measure that would put an end to the controversy that had almost got to the stage of a personal struggle between Mr. Evans and the directors of the Citizens' Water Company. Mr. Rudisill on behalf of Mr. Evans said that Mr. Evans was ready for any kind of a reasonable proposition that would put an end to the unseemly controversy that had been going on for the past two years and that had been disastrous to all parties concerned.
With that end in view Mr. Rudisill asked the writer to get up an article for publication in the Press and Horticulturist setting forth the existing condition of affairs in the settlement which had put a stop to all progress and created a very bad feeling and discord between not only Vol. I-25
386
SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
the two rival factions, but also between the water users and citizens themselves. Mr. Rudisill urged that as the writer had not taken a very active part in the controversy that had been so bitterly contested that he would be a very proper person to start a movement that would restore harmony in the community.
The result of the interview was that a communication under the signa- ture of Pioneer (a signature that had been often used before) was pre- pared and submitted to the Press and Horticulturist of September 13, 1884, for publication. The article in question, without saying it was prompted by any suggestion from Mr. Rudisill or Mr. Evans, went on to detail briefly the condition of affairs that had produced a situation that had paralyzed every line of business and if we continued as we were with two lawsuits that would in all probability be unsettled for years, and exceedingly costly in money as well as results, great loss would be sus- tained by both sides and that now was the time to make a settlement for which everybody was praying, that as the Citizens' Water Company had gone in on the idea that they "would prevent Mr. Evans from selling any more land, they have not only done that, but they have prevented anyone else from selling." They all knew that the agitation had produced a period of discord that must be ended.
L. M. Holt, as editor and proprietor of the Press and Horticulturist, had just returned from an extended visit to the East, but had sided with the Citizens' in their water issues, seeing that the time was ripe for settlement, on receipt of the article signed "Pioneer," and surmising that the inspiration behind it came from official sources, held back publication of the communication for a week and immediately got active, trying to effect a settlement of the water question. By Mr. Holt's efforts and the publication of "Pioneer's" article, the public mind underwent a great change, the result of which was that with some important modifications the proposal of Mr. Evans made January 12, 1884, was accepted on behalf of the two parties in the lawsnits. This had to be submitted to the water users at large for confirmation and acceptance. The news of settlement produced great excitement and rejoicing and the following Tuesday was set apart for a holiday and a public meeting for ratification of the agreement.
The settlement of the whole matter was in effect a union and alliance between the two parties whereby all differences would be set aside and the two would work in harmony for the future as friends and partners in place of rivals and enemies.
It took, however, several months to complete arrangements, and it was hard to get many who had known the pinch of poverty to bond their lands for twenty dollars per acre and there was a small minority who never did come in.
Under the terms of settlement there was formed a new company to be incorporated and called The Riverside Water Company, with a capital of $600.000, a land company also to be incorporated, called The Riverside Land Company, with a capital of $600,000, to take under its management the 6,000 acres of land owned by Evans and Felton, and the Riverside Water Company to manage them, and whenever there was sufficient water to extend over more land, to segregate and sell the portion so irrigated, the proceeds to be equally divided hetween the parties. It was thought that the sales of this 6,000 acres of land would be ample to pay all indebtedness of the company and leave a margin, but owing to mis- understanding and suits about the spread of water over the new lands. the Riverside Water Company was put to considerable expense, and pending these suits the lands could not be sold at good prices when
38
SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
there was demand for them, and so because of the obstinacy of a few men the lands when sold did not bring the prices expected. A portion of the land, too, was sold at a low price without water, thus not meeting the sanguine expectations of those most active in effecting the settlement. Twenty dollars per acre was paid by all those who had not done so before, those who had not the cash got from five to ten years to pay to Mr. Evans.
The rest of the agreement with Evans and Felton called on the River- side Water Company to issue bonds for $200,000, $120,000 of which was to be spent in improving the water system, which was done by going across the Santa Ana River to the mouth of Warm Creek, taking the waters from there in a large flume to the other side of the river, from thence in a tunnel about a mile long to the first deep arroya somewhat further, below Highgrove, where there would be a fall of about forty feet which could be used for power purposes, turning in a rental to the water company. From there it was passed into the old canal, which was improved in grade and in other ways by cementing the sides, etc.
This method and improvement made an increase of water to about 3,000 inches, permitting an extension of irrigated lands to the benefit of all concerned. The remainder of the money from the sale of bonds was used in the settlement with Evans and Felton.
This gave the citizens of Riverside the best water system in Southern California and more water per acre than in any large settlement, the amount now used in the driest time being about one inch of water to three acres of land. This permits abundance of water for irrigating alfalfa and for growing vegetable and other crops which require more frequent irrigation and more water. Such is the abundance of water and the capacity of the canal that the supply is ample and can be had at any time when ordered.
Prices for water, however, have ruled at times higher than was ever anticipated. More recently prices have been more moderate, about fifteen cents per inch in summer and ten cents per inch the rest of the year.
There is a prospect, too, that whenever the company gets ahead far enough and has money enough to justify it, a thorough cementing of the canal with other needed improvements, water can be sold about as cheap as it was when Mr. Evans first took hold of it. The lower canal has for some years been abandoned and all the water run in the upper canal, which has made a considerable saving in expenses of maintenance. The canal has been filled and the street it occupied, Fairmount Boulevard, is the finest in the city.
There are two systems in use now which appear to work very well. One is to sell water by the inch at rates established by the City Trustees and the other to sell by the acre, with practically no limit to the quantity used except in the driest summer weather. Eight dollars per acre per annum is the charge to those who choose to buy by the acre, while by the inch for the summer months, May 1st to September 30th. the charge is twenty cents per inch, and from October Ist to April 30th the rate is fifteen cents. These rates, owing to unusual local conditions, are higher than customary and are liable to be lowered when conditions change. As it is, each user of water is entitled to his pro rata of water at all times and in quantities desired. At the smallest flow of water in the canals the amount of water available is fifteen inches of water per acre each thirty- five days, equal to a perpetual flow of one inch to 2.33 acres. In ordinary times as much as one inch to one and three-quarter acres each thirty-five days is furnished.
388
SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
In winter water for flooding for grain or for bringing in new land is furnished at a rate of two cents per inch.
This makes the Riverside water system under the Riverside Water Company's acreage the most liberal in Southern California.
The distribution of water and its further conservation has been much hindered by litigation by San Bernardino denying some of the water companies' claims to certain privileges and rights to water in the San Bernardino basin. Riverside's rights and claims have always been sus- tained by the courts, but it has been a costly procedure, it having cost Riverside about $75,000 and San Bernardino nearly as much without changing the situation to any great extent except strengthening Riverside's claims. A better feeling begins to prevail and in place of spending money in litigation it will be spent in conservation and development of water by saving the great volume of water run from the Santa Ana River into the ocean in the winter time.
This will be further written up in the article on the conservation of water.
The Riverside Water Company improved the canals and laterals by cementing and piping, saving water that can in all probability be used to irrigate an additional 500 acres under the flow of the canals. The improvements contemplated will enable the company in time to make a substantial reduction in water rates and give a service that will be acceptable to all.
The efforts of Riverside to put the water system on a satisfactory basis has been a safe guide in founding other surrounding colonies. S. C. Evans, on behalf of the companies he represented, in a public address given in Riverside as published in the Press and Horticulturist of March 25, 1882, said "it had always been the policy of the company to convey the ownership of the water to the land owners and users of water, but had been prevented by adverse views on the part of some land owners who thought they ought to obtain equal rights to ownership in the canals without paying anything for their cost."
These water matters have all been amicably settled by experience gained by years of contention. As the people of Riverside took a large part in the settlement of other and surrounding colonies the water ques- tion has been thoroughly settled by the owners of the land to be sold, securing water rights along with the land and placing the waters on the land as an appurtenance thereof, building all pipe lines in advance of sale and settlement and putting the water on the highest part of the land. There was an element in the case that has not been encountered in those newer settlements and that was a portion of the lands to be irrigated were government lands not officially surveyed and these lands could not be encumbered in any way for any purpose, and it took ten or twelve years before title could be obtained. In all other cases no question was made about land ownership or title thereto. In Riverside, too, there was some trouble at one time experienced because it was not definitely understood between the water company and the users of land that the water and water stock were appurtenances of the land. In all late transactions all these questions are settled without any contention or question.
In the Imperial Valley, where all was government land, the system followed in taking water from the Colorado River in Mexico is for a large company to bring the water to the government lands and for the settlers to take the land up in large tracts from eighty acres up, either as homestead or as desert land under the Desert Land Act. In either case water is bought from the company at a fixed rate per share and put on
389
SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
the land as a part thereof and are subject to assessment for running expenses and improvement of canals which the owner of land has to pay whether he farms the land or not and whether he uses any water or not.
Water is paid for as used if rented by the renter. In this way the interests of the land owner all lie in using the land as the annual assess- ments, amounting to two dollars per acre or more, according to circun- stances, are quite a tax on ownership beside taxes, so there is but little inducement to let lands lie idle waiting for what has been termed by Henry George "the unearned increment."
On the other hand, under the custom in Riverside the owner of unused lands does not contribute to the support of the canals nor to necessary changes or improvements, although profiting by them. These have in a large measure to be paid by the users of water, but as that burden becomes lessened by all repairs and reconstruction such as bridges, head gates, etc., being of a permanent nature, the burden will become less, permitting lower rates for water.
1
S. C. EVANS, SR., who took a leading part in what might be termed the second era of the colony, deserves more than a passing notice.
Coming at a time when the whole colony was unsettled in regard to the distribution and use of water and its ownership and nothing except the old Spanish custom of appropriation and use purely for local purposes and in a very small way, it was a difficult matter to lay down definite rules in an untried field. Enough was shown to see that success was going to be an assured thing. The company that he represented owned the water and all of the available water appliances and the most of the land. There was considerable government land adjoining the company's lands and under the flow of the canals of the company.
There were no laws in regard to the use of irrigating water because none heretofore had been needed. Anaheim as the largest settlement where irrigating waters were used was not a public corporation for the purpose of supplying the public with water for irrigation. The Anaheim Company was a mutual company formed to supply itself with water for each individual's lands with plenty of water and at first with no question of use beyond the settlement lands, and so the people themselves could make their own regulations.
Riverside, on the other hand, was a public corporation, formed to build canals and furnish water on lands designated as covering several townships, part of it Spanish grant land and some of it government land, with but a limited supply of water in sight.
If the water company had owned all the land it would have been a much easier matter, but here were outsiders owning lands that had been furnished water without any other regulations or restrictions than had been imposed on those who had bought lands from the company. Under the Spanish system, except around the missions, water was used only for annual crops and that was taken from the source of supply by the parties themselves in temporary ditches, which in a measure had to be built every year.
The Southern California Colony Association was a very different affair, for here was a permanent canal built at great expenditure of money. Flumes had to be constructed over arroyas at great expense, bridges, had to be built, head gates put in, etc., and water brought in to irrigate trees which would be permanent features for generations to come and that would die out completely in one or two seasons without irrigation.
390
SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
The company's lands were bought as a speculation and to be made valuable by putting water on them and sold to the public. Here also was a large tract of government land that had been set out to trees and in other ways and by permanent improvements depending on water for their duration without any stipulation in regard to the use of water more than those who had bought their lands from the company.
These were some of the difficulties besetting Mr. Evans and the company that he represented. The difficulty in regard to lands bought from the company was settled early in the history of the Land & Irrigating Company by putting the water on the land as a part thereof, but there was the further unsolved problem that arose and could not for a time at least be settled and that was how much water was really necessary per acre and how many acres could be covered with water. Only time and experience could solve that question.
The right to water by settlers on the government land was denied after some years except to those who would pay a fixed sum per acre as a contribution towards the cost of bringing water to the lands, but another problem had arisen. About the time that Mr. Evans and his associates got possession of the original canal and built one of their own the State Legislature took a hand in the controversy by passing a law that when- ever a water company furnished lands with water, the right to water for that land could not be taken away, but the law did not compel the company to make any further spread of water. In this way the settler's trees and permanent improvements were protected, but in case of the government land settlers who had large tracts, no more land could be covered with water and no one would buy land except for a nominal sum unless he could get awter to irrigate it with. To complicate the matter still further, the company would not sell water for a portion of the non- irrigated tract-it was all or none. Again the situation was made more difficult by the quantity of land to be irrigated and the amount of water available for that purpose.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.