by Paul R. Spitzzeri
Having a slew of greater Los Angeles newspapers in the Homestead’s holdings from the early 1870s, especially the years 1874-1875 when the first sustained and significant growth boom in the region took place, is very helpful for us to better understand that period, including the role the Workman and Temple family played in many aspects of development in the area, as well as the general context.
This newest “Read All About It” post pores through the pages of the 10 November 1874 edition of the Los Angeles Herald, operated for a short period by the cumbersomely named The Los Angeles City and County Printing and Publishing Company, a joint stock corporation headed by Prudent Beaudry and among whose shareholders was F.P.F. Temple.
A major item of news in the edition concerned a lawsuit recently filed against the paper by the Los Angeles Water Company, the private concern formed several years earlier and which held a 30-year contract to supply the precious fluid to the Angel City’s residents and businesses, upon which the city assumed control of distribution and which is now handled by the powerful Department of Water and Power.
The immediate issue was that the paper criticized the company for not providing water that was properly clean and pure and was immediately slapped with a $25,000 libel suit. In its editorial page, the Herald boasted that the legal filing “has already added about one hundred names to our subscription list and still they come.” It added that
Were it not that we do not wish to hurt the Water Company’s feelings, we would print a few of the many letters we are receiving concerning that respected and respectable corporation.
Taking a swipe at its competitor, the Los Angeles Express, which was referred to as the water company’s organ, the paper stated that the owners of the firm, the works of which were said to be worth $40,000, paid taxes on a smaller amount and that the new facility was completed after the most recent assessment. The Herald concluded with another pointed question: “is [it] not true that the Water Company with a capital stock of of [sic] $330,000 and an actual cash investment of of [sic] over $200,000 refuses to pay a cent of taxes on that property?”
Hammering away at the suit filed against it, the paper then addressed “Libel Suits Against Newspapers,” observing “this is not a very prosperous period for plaintiffs in libel suits against newspapers,” citing two recent examples involving the much larger San Francisco Chronicle and Sacramento Union papers, which were sued for commentary about mining and election related issues. While it was not stated, the underlying legal question for such actions concerns the freedom of the press and First Amendment rights, matters that remain very much relevant to us now.
Not satisfied with these features, the Herald weighed in on “A Common Error” in which it asserted that
It is an error of judgment on the part of those who see only malice as the prompting motive in all persons who think differently from themselves. There are many people who set down all who do not agree with them on all questions and issues, as either knaves or fools . . . An individual ought not to regard as an enemy one who tell him of an error or declines an endorsment [sic] of his every act. Corporations are combinations of individuals and are therefore liable to commit mistakes, perhaps perpetrate wrongs . . . We are told the Water Company of this city speak of the HERALD as their enemy . . . It is a great mistake . . . Surely the HERALD has never intentionally given the Water Company the slightest reason for regarding it as an enemy.
The paper asserted that, when complaints about the company and the quality of the water it delivered were raised, it published such statements to allow the firm to respond and that “this is done in the kindest feeling and for the best of purposes.”
Finally, a short comment from the Grass Valley Union in the upper gold country town northeast of Sacramento, was cited, including the concluding assessment: “the Company is extremely sensitive or wants money very badly.” It was not until mid-May 1875 that the suit was dismissed for reasons that were not explained in the press. It should also be noted that not only was Beaudry a major landowner and developer of land in the hills west of town, where Bunker Hill and Bellevue Terrace were established and which used water from the firm with some bickering over how this work was conducted, but he was also a candidate for mayor in the December election, which he won, so there were these undercurrents as part of the controversy.
Another Angel City utility was addressed in a short article titled “Mutilating the Streets” in which a letter to the Herald from “Tax-Payer,” such correspondents not being required, as today, to disclose their names, asking “would any but the Gas Company be permitted to dig up the streets and leave them in the condition that corporation has just left Main Street?” and “has the city no rights the Gas Company is bound to respect?”
The Los Angeles Gas Company operated from a plant on the west side of Main immediately south of the Plaza Church, where the LA Plaza Cultura y Artes institution is today, and its officials included prominent figures like president William H. Perry, treasurer Isaias W. Hellman and superintendent Wallace Woodworth and the paper’s response is notable:
It is a part of the Gas Company’s contract with the city to leave the streets in as good condition as they find them. If this condition is not complied with, it is the fault of the citizens or of those whose business it is to enforce the law. The Gas Company are sticklers for the full measure of the city’s contract with them, and it is but a mere matter of justice to the taxpayers that the city should require an equally strict compliance with the compact on the part of the company.
If for no other reason, such rectitude was critical in dealing with a highly explosive material, as the modern Southern California Gas Company recently experienced with the 2015 Aliso Canyon leak, though this tidbit in the Herald was more about the way in which the streets (unpaved and often difficult to navigate during heavy rains or dust storms, as they were) were not properly handled when gas line construction or repairs were conducted.
Another legal matter addressed in the paper related to the long-running court tussles between Pío Pico, the last governor of Mexican-era California and builder of the hotel building that still stands across from the former gas works at the southwest corner of the Plaza, and Antonio Cuyas, who leased the hostelry from Don Pío. This was labeled an “Important Law Suit” and it was noted that the California Supreme Court had already ruled in Cuyas’ favor, but Pico filed a complaint to prevent his opponent “from taking possession of the Pico House.”
Pico’s counsel, the firm of Glassell, Chapman and Smith (who also represented F.P.F. Temple and William Workman in cases at the time) argued that Cuyas “entered upon the possession of the property pretending to be a partner, but had no authority in fact, either by lease or articles of co-partnership, and that no lease ever existed.” Moreover, it was asserted that Cuyas’ “only object in getting possession of the property is to force [Pico] to pay him money to get clear of him.”
For his part, Cuyas, represented by the firm of Ganahl and Hawer, answered that he had proof of a partnership and lease and that “the terms of the lease were that [Cuyas] was to furnish the house, which he did at an expense of $30,000,” while Pico also paid bills “againit [sic] the concern for a long time.” It was further averred that
The defendant has always been willing to come to a fair settlement, and when reimbursed for time and money he was willing to dissolve the partnership.
Despite the prior high court ruling, Pico pressed the matter further and the Supreme Court rendered another decision in Cuyas’ favor in May 1875. Another suit by the ex-governor against his former partner concerned the payment of fees for a referee for arbitration relative to what Pico owed Cuyas and that continued for another year.
The educators of Los Angeles County gathered for a Teachers’ Institute, with the prior’s day opening session consisting of organizing the leadership for the convention, with superintendent George H. Peck in the chair and with board member James M. Guinn (later a chronicler of regional history) and principal of the recently opened Los Angeles High School, Dr. William T. Lucky as vice-presidents.
Committees on arrangements, entertainments, music and resolutions were formed before adjournment and it was added that “all of the public schools in this city were dismissed for the week, except those in the High School building, and they were kept in session to receive visitors during the day.” For the remaining four days of the week, “the scholars in these departments also will have a holiday.” Lastly, it was reported that there was full attendance at the Institute with all county schools represented and “the prospect is good for an interesting reunion of the teachers of the county.”
Having completed the first day of business, a “Teachers’ Social” was held at the Good Templars Hall, operated by temperance (non-alcohol) advocates, with most of the educators and some citizens “who take an interest in educational matters” present. It was added that “besides the social part of the evening, some literary and musical entertainments were given, which added much to the pleasure of the occasion.”
When it came to dancing, the Herald observed that “Dr. Peck and lady led down the dance in a manner to show the young people present that they had not forgotten their earlier days” and that, at 10 p.m., the county superintendent “dismissed the assemblage with a neat little speech which was calculated to send all away in the best of good humors.”
During this first boom, considerable attention was paid to mining efforts locally and somewhat far afield, including Cerro Gordo near the Owens Valley of eastern California’s Inyo County and where F.P.F. Temple and William Workman had considerable interests. Southeast and in the same county was the town of Panamint, where silver and copper were discovered and which had some 2,000 residents in 1874.
The key figures in operations were the two United States senators from Nevada, John P. Jones and William M. Stewart and the article specifically covered the camp known as “Jonestown” and which had “about seven hundred men and a few women,” with high expectations as “an immense rush is predicted in the Spring.” While there was but one house considered “comfortable looking,” with shanties of rocks and bark as well as canvas tents and some residents living “in natural or artificial cavities,” lots were being sold for up to $1,000, while “most of the ‘citizens,’ however, are squatters, and hold the title to their property by the virtue of a good shot-gun.”
Miners were paid $4 per day, though it was noted that board cost $8 weekly “a square meal cost[s] one dollar,” eggs fetched $1.25 per dozen, onions and potatoes went for thirty cents per pound, and hay was sold at $200 a ton. For those with private meal arrangements, the costs were some $10-$15 a week, though it was anticipated that “prices will decline as the difficulties attending the transportation of supplies are lessened” to a place that was a challenge to reach.
With assaying of the copper and silver pegged at between $300 and $400 per ton, it was averred that “the mines are exceedingly rich . . . and no one in Panamint has a fear that the ore will ‘peter out.'” With the spring expected to see the commence of operations that would reveal the full capacities of the mines, a stamp mill was recently finished and another as underway.
Notably, the best route to Panamint was said to be from Los Angeles north and northeast through the modern Antelope Valley, rather than east through Spadra (Pomona) and San Bernardino, but, earlier in 1874, Temple and others formed the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad to construct a line through the latter and up Cajon Pass to get to Cerro Gordo, with Panamint accessible to it.
Jones ended up taking a majority of the stock, but on condition that a branch line be constructed first to his new seaside resort town, Santa Monica. This was done in fall 1875, but, as with the mining towns of Cerro Gordo and Panamint, the L.A.& I, as it was known, did “peter out” in the resulting economic downturn, following a national depression that burst forth in 1873, and which included the failure of the Temple and Workman bank.
Other news included the operation of the Alden Fruit Factory, which dried its products and which had support from Temple along with others; a rare selection of items from the Spanish-language newspaper, La Crónica (later operated by Temple’s son, Thomas, then a cashier at the family-owned bank); reference to the importation of Kentucky-bred livestock from the Saxe Brothers, among whose customers was Temple; and more.
Perusing through these newspapers is generally a remarkable snapshot into conditions in the emerging city and region during this first modest boom, considering the much larger ones that came later, and we’ll continue to offer more “Read All About It” posts featuring these early 1870s editions.