Weekly Phoenix herald., 1884-04-10


 ceprion, in their entire business since the commenc ement of of their 1 railroad life.
 Would any one have thought, when some years ago, Sanford & Co. were, as it seemed. straining every point to get an island in San Franclseo buy 10 make a terminus for their railroad, that it was only q play to get possession of the city frontage on the bay? And that most of the leading newspapers in the city were employed to abuse them for wanting said island; which they did with their best ability in that line, and were paid for doIng it by the abused parties. Would any one at the time, repeat, have sup posed that the articles were written by their instruction, and some of them by their employees, and always pald for by them, was a part of pre>agreement to effect the secession Of the city front The expression was often made at the time Bully for the Altai Bully for the Chron- icali Bully for inc Bulzetinl And SD said Sanford & Co.,, doubtlessly. The city authorities had offered 10 give them all the frontage they needed for the purpose of depot storage and round>houses; but they very candidly told him that the po- sition did not suit them; in fact, they did not want It; they would rather build on tn Oakland side.
 But when they had sufficiently scared the business men and prop> crty holders of San Francisco, and thus also reduced a portion Of the members of the City Council to sub- mission and tumbled the Mayor and a sufficient nun Der of the re of the Councilmeu ''doWn the bank" 10 give them majority of the Board, they compromised the dispute by accepts ing deed to nearly all the city frontage on the bay, and thus closed the door to c, mpetIng lines oA that side of the city.
 believe, Mir Editor, hat we have no right, in justice to ourselves, to believe this company's statement that they have no interest in the matter" whatever, when those acts give the lie to those declarations; when considering those declarations and pig in the poke style of accom- plish ing their objects heretofore.
 Will they deny that they paid Reavis some $3O,O00 for their road bed and station grounds through his grant, that he may be indicted by our Grand Jury for perjury? Will they explain why it was that their and Reavis' lawyer always sent the money to Mrs Willing; and their agent always furnished the money 10 send? But if they did pur- chase the right of way from Reavis as he testlfies and got his deed to the road bed, giving him $50, ,O00 for ii, will anyone think they gave him the purchase mduey to get his title to tn. ir road bed, and thus strength en his title 10 that portion of their railroad grant lying within his Per alta grant, and that tco with title based on papers which, of course, their lawyers examined, which showed fraud on their face9
 While it IS a matter of record, and susceptible of proof by oral evi> dence, that the Maricopa Indians settled sou h of the Gila at the base Of 9i aricopa mountains, long after the said Peralta grant was estab- lished and bounded, as shown by his copy of the records of old Mexico, and that it was long after the h. dians settled there that said mourn tain was known by that name, still the initial rom! of said Peralta grant is fixed somewhere on or Dear Mari copa mountain. Is tito be supposed that the Crocker 6 Co. and Reavis lawyer would not have detected this and similar evidences of fraud? The whole thing is too thin, MT. Editor: either MT Reavis is a periured 1 scoundrel, or Crocker & Co., are ''bulling the job;" one or the other conclusion is inevitable.
 "REILLoC ."