Los Angeles daily herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1884-1890, 1886-05-14
THE CITY HALL.
Further Interviews With
Citizens.
CITY AND COUNTY BUILDINGS.
What the Mayor and Councilman
willard Think-Mr. Max
Wells Letter.

encountered was the Mayor. bis Hon
or is, on the whole, rather in favor of
some snch exchange as the one pro-
posed. He thinks the present place is
not sufficiently large. The one proposed
he is of the opinion will, in few years,
be found sufficiently near he center of
business to subserve all the purposes of
such building. As to the relative val
ue Mr.. Spence would not express an
opinion, as he has not yet had time to
give the matter the close attention nee
essary to form such an opinion intelli-
gently. The matter of the posi-
bility Of alternating the property
from city purposes was called To-
his mind. The Mayor seemed
to think there was little in that. de
said it would require the very best legal
talent in the city to pass on such prop
osition and the views Of any other than
good lawyer are not of much import
ance. He added: 1.-THE will OF the
people is supreme in such cases. They
can do as they like in such cases" Mr..
Spence was rather disinclined to commit
himself on the subject, but left the gem
eraI impression on the mind OF me re.
porter that he would give the exchange
a careful consideration and perhaps from
a point Of view rather favorable TO the
avian than otherwise if ever called upon
to act in an official capacity.
THE CHICAGO CITY HALL.
Mr.. George Rice was met, and, the
subject being opened, he said read
your interviews as they appeared in the
HERALD at home and there we discussed
the matter. The subject was not new
to me. | had frequently talked it over.
particularly at home, and we always
were of the opinion that the city and
county buildings should be together.
The case of Chicago is pertinent one.
The city and comfy there are far from
being coterminus, as they are in San
Francisco, where the city and county |
government is all one. In Chicago, as
here, they are separate. But the two
governments are in joint building, aud
very fine one. 1t works all right
there. 1t would be good thing for Los
Angeles city and county to do the same
thing. 1t will give q much better |
building than could be built separately.
All the offices would be together and |
this would be a matter OF very great
importance to all citizens in the many |
conveniences resulting from such an ar |
rangsment."
GEN. L. BoUToN
Was victimized for an opinion. and said
he could see no fault with the present
site. But added, jocularly: eli they |
must move. think the corner OF College
and CASTELAR, streets would be better |
place than the block on Sixth and Fort. |
will swap for the City Hall lot on as
good terms as any one."
The reporter thought he discovered q
motive, and suggested interested bias in |
the mind OF the General. But the gen. |
tleman would not allow this view, but
said he had as much property in the
part Of the pueblo near the st. Vineents
block as in the northern part of the city. |
He thought College and CASTELAR, nearer
the center OF the city geographically, |
commercially and numerically.
WHAT A COUNCILMAN THINKS.
Mr.. Cyrus Willard, Councilman from
the Fifth Ward, had the report orial
suction pump let into the deep recesses
of his statesman.lik mind. This gentle
man did not hesitate to say he was in
favor Of a swap on certain conditions.
He thought it not essential to have the
city hall in the business center Of the
city. San Francisco was mentioned as
place where it was rather to one side and
Mr.. Willard thought with no detriment
to any public interest. Sixth street
might be little far now, but in three
years it would be surrounded with bus
iness-not in the very center OF COM
merce. But that fact was not an impor-
tant one. 1t would not be inconveniently
far off.
As to the terms Of the swap. Mr.. Viii.
lard Is opposed to an even exchange.
He thinks the city property worth $780,
600. The college property he understands
is worth SIS, 900 to 5000. When told
that 500, 900 was asked for it the Coun-
Gilman said: "Then they have raised on
1t. | understood they were Offering it
at $4,000" He figures like this-600
feet on Fort street at SIS foot. s45, 600;
600 feet on Hill at $50. $4,000; total,
S75,000--as an extreme price.
The reporter remarked that there was
Q building on it which cost $40, 900.
Mr.. Willard is practical contractor
and builder, therefore his views on this
subject are important. He Is of the
opinion that the college building is of
very little value for city purposes. Ii
an attempt 10 made to use it as il Is it
will be a failure. He thinks 1t would
at least have to be remodeled, and then
it would be badly botched job. The
only way to do would be to tear it down
and in such cases practical men like the
speaker, as he explained, estimate that
the old material will pay the cost OF
demolition. That is, it Is not
worth anything more than the bare lot
He would not estimateit at even SO, 600.
Mr. Willard figures out that the city
should get about $40, 900 boot in the
swap.
LETTER FROM MR.. MAXWELL.
In this connection the letter below
from Mr.. w. s. Maxwell must prove of
great interest. 1t Is very carefully
considered proposition and will bear in
vestigation.
EplroR HRRALp:--The subject Of the
CITY hall and county court house having
been and now being industriously can
vassed by parties in interest, taxpayers
and the public generally, take the lib
erty of giving my views on the same
through the columns of your valuable
paper. The county has a frontage of AS
feet on Temple street, running through
from New High street to Fort
street, by 1894 feet on New High.
Now let the county sell to the
city the property on the ccr-
ner of Temple and Fort for say $40, 900.
Then let committee from the Board of
Supervisors and the City Council be APP
pointed to confer upon a joint plan for
building that will fill all our require
ments and for a city of 100, 900 Inhabi
tants, that we can reasonably expect to
have within few years.
Second, let the county sell the old
court housean its lots that it has left on
the Dan Stephens lot for, say Sl25, 900.
This with the sale of the corner of Tenn
pie and Fort street to the city will make
q cash fund for the county to commence
building operations on of sl65,000 An
article in your paper few days ago
showed that there is probably cash now
on hand to the amount of $50, 900, which
can be used for the above purpose.
Here we have S2ll, 900. In the tax
levy Of 1887, let provision be made for,
saw SS5, 900, which will be a small fig
ure on our large list of property now as
sessed and it will be hardly felt by the
many tax payers. The S2ll, 200 will
carry the building operations on until
the Ss5, 900 can be levied and paid into
the Treasury. This will give the county
the sum of S296, 200 with which to erect
a suitable building for such purposes.
Third, let the city dispose Of its prop
erty on the corner of Spring and Second
street. which, as it new stands, will sell
for about Sl20, 900. Deduct from this
s4O. 200, tn be paid to the county for the
property on the school house hill. and it
will leave a cash fund Of $4,000 with
which TO erect q building suitable for
our growing requirements-and il it is
found necessary that more funds
will be required. there is GER
tain portion Of the moneys to be