Campus Access Only

All rights reserved. This publication is intended for use solely by faculty, students, and staff of University of the Pacific. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or later developed, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author or the publisher.

Date of Award


Document Type


Degree Name

Master of Arts (M.A.)




This thesis was not written for the purpose of condemning the city of Los Angeles. The author has lived in the valley since 1918 and has been present during the period of conflict. Perhaps, for this reason, he is not qualified to judge the actions of the city. But the conclusions that have been made criticizing Los Angeles, the author sincerely believes, have come as a result of the investigation necessary to write this paper.

Even if it is granted that the criticisms are inspired by prejudice, if the reader accepts the facts presented in this thesis, or investigates the matter for himself, he will find that fair, impartial committees have condemned Los Angeles more severely than has been done in this paper. The State Legislature has deviated from its business of legislating on two occasions to investigate the city’s record in the valley. In both instances, with almost unanimous approval, the city has been severely criticized.

Many authors, journalists and engineers, who have been mentioned in the thesis, have made independent surveys of the controversy and in every instance they have become champions of Owens Valley. Morrow Mayo, in his book Los Angeles, bitterly denounces Los Angeles for its action in Owens Valley/ Judge Harlan Palmer, who served as the president of the water board, wrote in his paper, after retiring from the board, that Los Angeles could never repay Owens valley for the injury don, no matter how liberal they might be in prices paid for property.



Included in

History Commons