Daily Los Angeles herald., 1879-08-15
REPORT.

REPORT.
MIR. PRESIDENTS: Your special
committee to investigate the matter
of the sale of the tide or salt marsh
lands of the State, respectfully re-
port as follows,
Immediately after the appoint
ment was made, we gave notice
that we would, upon day named,
visit San Francisco for the purpose
IF making the investigation and
giving every one an opportunity to
be heard before the committee.
The whole committee, in very
few days thereafter, repaired to San
Francisco for the purpose Of MAX
Ing as thorough an examination OF
the questions before them as possi-
BILE.
The public press ofSan francisco
had called attention to the whole
matter before the appointment of
the committee, and gave general
notice to the public of the time and
place of meeting of the committee,
so that every one was afforded an
opportunity to be heard, and u
great many persons availed them.
selves of il. The committee used
every endeavor to possess them
selves of all Information within
their reach touching the matter.
They devoted all the time TO the
subject that the pressure OF their
other duties would allow. They sat
in San Francisco until all the testi-
mouy that could be reasonably pro.
dnced was heard, after which they
adjourned to meet at Sacramento,
where they met from time to time,
until they were satisfied they had
taken all the testimony that could
be of reasonable service in the
premises, taking into consideration
the time at their command. The
committee, In the discharge of the
duty imposed upon them, exam
ined many maps, records, deeds and
documents, took four volumes of
oral testimony, amounting in the
aggregate to six hundred and sew
enty-seven pages of written mat
ter, and in addition thereto, they
went upon the ground embraced In
the Ellis deeds, in order to person.
ally inspect and examine the condi-
ton thereof.
The late Board of Tide Land Com
missloners were acting under the
Act OF the Legislature of the State
Of California, approved March 3Oth,
1S74-found in the statutes of 1873
4, page eight hundred and fifty
eight. That Act, by its second sec
tion, gave to the State Board OF
Tide Land Commissioners the pow
er and the duties of the old Board
Of Tide Land Commissioner The
fourth section gave the said Com-
m!csioners, or part of than, pow
to compromise with and adverse
claimants to any portion or por-
ticns of tide lands under their con-
troll, whenever and on such terms
as they may deem most conducive
to the interests of the State. All
such compromises to be by the ad-
vice of the Attorney General of the
State.
At the same session of the Legis-
lature, and on the 9th day of March,
1874, another Act was passed,
granting the tide lands in Channel
street aud Mission Creek, between
Ninth and Eighteenth streets, TO
the City of San Francisco, and va
eating said Channel street and
Mission Creek as highway be-
tween said points, and authorizing
the city to divide the same into
lots and blocks and sell 1t. (Statut.
es of 1874, pages 712 and 7l3i
Sectien 2 and 3 of said Act.)
n;t ,,ndnr hn
last-named Act, did divide these
lands into proper subdivisions, and
laid down the proper streets
through to the city, in the vicinity
of Channel street and Mission
Creek. This Act, in the opinion ,ol
your committee, took all of the
tide lands in Channel street anG
Mission Creek, between Ninth ant
Eighteenth streets, from the con-
troll of the State Board of Tide
Land Commissioned (and from thu
control of the State), and vested
the title thereto in the City ant
County of San Francisco, subject tt
disposition by the Board of super
visors Of said city and county, a
directed in said Act. "rhe Stat
Board OF Tide Land Commission
ers'' organized under the Act o
March 3Oth, 1874, above referred to
thereafter offered a considerable
quantity of tide land for sale a
public auction. These auction
sales took place in November, 1876
We have given such auction sale
quite searching examination
and while your committee hav
found that quite number OF lot
of land were knocked off at sucl
sales to different men from thos
who received the deeds from tn
Board, we have been unable to dis
cover any fraud. The practic
seems to have been to give the fina
deed to the assignees of the orig
nal purchasers, III pursuance to
practice that had been indulged j