Daily Los Angeles herald., 1879-08-15

and not paid for on the day OF sale,
were on the next day put up and
resold for q less price than first
bid. The practice was loose and
hardly in strict accordance with n
wholesome rule of procedure.
By these sales some $l2, ,970,59
were realized, as shown by the sup
Elemental report of the Commits
sioners, made on the 9Th of Septem.
Der, 1875.
There were some other sales made
to Messrs. Duane and Hearst, of
lands about which there was a con-
test before the Board by several
claimants, and the committee is in
cllned to the opinion that the ward
to Duane and Hearst was, under
the circumstances, correct, at least
we have been unable to discover
any positive unfairness or oppres-
sion in the sales, although consid-
erabie testimony was taken in re-
gard to them. 1t was soon devel-
Oped in the examination that u con-
siderable quantity Of these tide
lands Of great value had been (by n
kind of general residuary sale) con-
veyed to one George w. Ellis. AS
to this sale, very large amount of
testimony Was taken, consldera.
BILE portion of which was conflict
ing and contradictory. The Ellis
sale was the last one made by the
Board from which. according to the
deeds, was realized the sum of
$5,748.9G
The lands embraced in the deeds
are the whole of Old Channel
street and Mission Creek, between
Ninth ana Eighteenth streets, ex-
cept such portions as were taken by
the new streets laid out by the city
authorities, as above set forth, and
except, also, a small portion Of Old
Channel street, or Mission Creek,
bounding on Mission blocks forty
two and one.halt, forty-fve and
forty six.
Those deeds also embraced same
closed up streets in Mission Bay
blocks one hundred aud thirtythfee,
forty and forty one, and also the
greater portion of Mission block
fifty-pine, large portion of the
west half of block sixty, and u
portion of the west half of block
| forty-niue, together with small por-
tions of New Channel street. This
sale was authorized (or rather
made) by the Board at their last
meeting ut San Francisco, upon the
records of the Board, at page 292.
Under date of November Oath, 1875,
we find the following entry:
"Iu the matter of the application
of Geo. w. Ellis. on motion, it was
ordered that the engineer denomi-
nate all parcels of land included in
the pre-emption claim OF said Ellis
and others, AS per record IN liber Is,
of Miscellaneous Record, page
665, Recorders office, city of San
Francisco, which have not been
| heretofore disio@ed OF by the State
of California through tie BoaId OF
Tide Land Comm ssinneis, and that
Ellis be allowed the privilege Of
purchasing all the right, tile and
interest ofthe State of California
thereto. at the rate Of "a per LOCO
square feet"
From the evidence taken, ii ap'
pears that the above was not EN-.
braced in any formal motion made
| before the Board, but that it was
written up from rough memoranda
kept by the Clerk or Secretary, as
expressing in Il formal way the
conclusion of the Board on the
question.
1t further appears from the evil
dence that Allardt, the engineer,
was ordered to lay down on a map
all the unsold lands, so that proper
descriptions could be made of the
lands ordered to be conveyed to
Mr.. Ellis.
Mr.. Allardt says the instructions
to make the map came from Secre-
tary Russell.
Mr.. Allardt further states that he
was instructed by Commissioners
Green to include the land in Mis-
sion Creek; that, being in doubt,
he went to Green for instruction.
He also states that he produced
the statute of March twenty-seven,
eighteen hundred and seventy-four,
and informed Mr.. Green of it,
which Act conveyed Mission Creek
to the city, as before stated.
Mr.. Green denied 1t, and Allardt
was then uncertain whether Green
got the information, but was certain
he opened the hook aud showed
the statute to Paul Newman in
Green's prerence-that Newman
read it, but he cannot say If Green
heard it. We might say here, II
appears strange that the Commits
siouers, and even the Attorney
General, were all ignorant of the
act, and yet this engineer and tht
Secretary, Russell, both knew of it
and the matter becomes a wonder
when we take into consideration
the fact that no offer, or attemp
was ever made before the Ellis sale
to sell the lands in Mission Creek
or any part of them. Acting undel
the instructions received by him
the engineer, Allardt, prepared ant
filed with the Board two maps, eX
hibiting the unsold portions of tide
lands afterwards included In th,
, Ellis deeds.
, One was quite q large map, ant
was used before your Committee
and marked "Exhibit A." Thi
map Included Mission Creek from
Nluth 10 Elgnleeulu 3 reefs, AM
( also Mission blocks forty-nine, fifty
, nine aud sixty.
The other was n much smalle
| map, some two feet square, upol
which was laid down three small
2 pieces of land included in the Eli
g deeds, being parts of closed street
in Mission Bay blocks forty, forty
] one, and one hundred and thirty
D three.
: Both these were returned to ant
3 filed with the Board before th,
Q Ellis deeds were drawn or signed
: and the descriptions were made vi
f from the data furnished by SAT-
}, maps. 1t will be OBSERVED that b.
9 the entry on the minutes of tn
t Board, Mr.. Ellis was to be allowe,
a to purchase as much of the unsol,