San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1886-12-07
THE CITY COUNCIL.
WHAT THE LAWYERS THINK OF THE
HEAD OF THE RIVER QUESTION

Necessary Public improvements Settled
| or Shelved by the Monotonous
| Cry OF mo Money"
The regular session Of the city council
was held yesterday in the city ball.
Mayor Callaghan presiding, aldermen
| all present.
The minutes OF last meeting being
read and approved, the following
= PETITION, ETC.,
were read and acted upon in the manner
| indicated:
From citizens, requesting the opening
of Baltimore avenue to Rock Quarry
road. Referred to committee on streets
and bridges.
From Frank Krisch, Jr., for permit to
construct branch ditch from the AlaZnn
to Castro street. Granted.
From Chris Mockert, offering to fur
nish shade trees for the city park. Re-
ferred to market committee.
LEGAL OPINION ON wATERwoRKs' RIGHTS.
Mayor Callaghan then read the legal
opinions of Messrs. simpson Il James on
the waterwOTks' right at the head Of the
| river, which was as follows:
| To the Honorable Mayor and Board of Alder
men OF the City of San Antonio:
In compliance with Il resolution adopted by
yOuE uOuOIdDlc DOuy On lut lOlI udg VI OClO-
Der last, requesting our opinion as to the
rights of this city to certain land and prlvi-
leges at the head OF tue San Antonio river,
said opinion BY Alderman Mackey, the author
OF the resolution, and by Messrs. Matnck,
Locke and Giraud, civil engineers, and pre-
sumably upon any other pertinent infOrma
tion attainable by us, respectfully report as
follows:
II seems that the city lots in question were
SO d With others on the 9Th day of November,
lS5z, at public auction.
That they sold nv "A nv TN
GentZ for Giraud, surveyor, frOm Giraud's
held notes, and MIR. Gentle Identifies the old
map now in the engineers Office as that origi.
nal map; that the original field notes are
lost
Gentle states further that the figures Civ
ing the lengths OF the original lines of certain
lots were put on said map by him from
Giraud's field notes, aud that he drew the lines
dividing the los IN question from the road
bounding them on the east, to the river, with
out having received any Information BIS 10
whether or not the river was the west boun-
dairy.
ings OF the city council found In book A, page
lsl, that on the 9Th day of November, 1852, the
day the sale commenced, the council ire
ceiyed and adopted report from Francis
Giraud recomne ending for public uses certain
reservations in the large property then be-
longing to the city. Among other recommen-
dations By MIR Giraud, the following are in
list. That lots IS, 80, 81 and 80. in range l. dis
trict 2, be set apart for a United States arse
nal aud other pu Dnc purposes.
End. A square represented on the map, re-
serving the san PeGro Springs, purpose not
stated, but evidently for public park.
3rd. Lots l and z, range ], district 2, for a
male college, and lot D. range 3, district ., east
of the San Pedro, for u female college.
4th. AS many lots as you may think neces-
sary between ~ and u inclusive, range l, dis
trict 3, for hard rock quarries.
9Th Roads ~ varas wide, not placed on the
map should be reserved subject to future reg
ulaIion by the city on the east side OF the
Alamo ditch and of the San Antonio river
where the Austin or NacOgdOches road now
runs, also on the west side of the ditch of the
upper labor and of the San Antonio river as
near the edges of said ditch and river as they
may be placed consistently with the public in
terest.
One witness states that he was present at
the sale of the lois, that nothing was said
about road or right-of-way on The west side
or the river, but that the auctioneer distinctly
gave notice that there was a reservation on
the east side of the river and Alamo ditch of
~ varas fora road or street, though no such
road showed on the map; that the lines of
lots running east and west showed upon the
map as running to the river; that the map did
not show the length OF said lines and that the
lots were sold by their numbers and number
of acres. This witness purchased lots on the
west side.
which took place at the old court-house) and
bought lot on the Olmos. He heard nothing
said there EabOut reservation, or right OF
way; but prior to that saw Giraud and Gid
dings surveying the lots on the OlmOs and
they told him he could not fence the lot to the
river; that he might cut timber along the
river, but right of way was to be left open.
Another witness writes that the lots did
not reach the waters edge; that he thinks
that there was res: rvation at the head OF
the river, but refers to the map made by
Gentilz for Glraud. Another writes that he
got it directly from Giraud at the time that
three varas were reserved on each side of the
river for a right of way. This is the sub
stance OF their com ,nuDicationsJ
The engineers mentioned above reaffirm the
statements made in their report, heretofore
presented to the council, that they could iden-
ify no original corners on the east side OF the
river, but that in running the lines of the lots,
from the street known as New Braunfels
street their east boundary towards the river
by the distances figured upon GIrauds map,
they all terminated more or less short of the
river bank aud short OF the spring branch; and
that they Identified an original corner on the
west side OF the river; and upon measuring
the line of that lot to street, It's western ter
minus, they found an excess of % feet We are
satisfied that there are other creditable per
sons who will testify that u notice, such as
above indicated, was gwen at the time of sale.
On the other hand there are creditable per
sons who say that no such notice was given at
the sale, and we find further that Giraud ex-
pressly stated that the roads" recommended
by him were mot plated on his map" That
the city while adop ting his report passed no
concurrent or subsequent resolution or oIdi-
nance to establish ana carry out his recon-
mendation; but on the contrary proceeded to
sell the lots, and make titles to the same. not
by meters ana DOuDus, Dut Dy NUMBERS,
range and district as per Giraud's map. Every
deed so recites
The lots intended by Giraud for an arsenal.
those for colleges we're all sold, the San Pedro
springs al ne were saved, aud that would
seem to have been almost by the interpositiOn
of a kind Providence. Ii also appears that
about IA months alter November 8, So, the
city surveyor, X. K. Clements, surveyed, for
the ow ner, the two lots now claimed and oc-
cupied by A. Lieck, al his field notes make
their western boundary the san Antonio
river. This was while the matter was fresh
in the minds OF every one
We have given the above summary
Of the leading facts mere for the
as basis for legal opini n, for
the most of which facts we are indebted to the
efforts of Alderman Mackey. And II is clear
that If q snail part of his energy and zeal for
been exercised by those in authority at the
beginning OF this chapter OF municipal his
tory, valuable property and franchises would
have been preserved TO the city.
For the most potent fact i'm all the case Is
the great lapse of time since the rights of the
city, whatever they may have been. accrued.
1t Is well settledin this state that the statutes
of Limitation run against Incorporated cities,
cisions on this point are conflicting. We do
not intend TO cumber this report with authori-
| ties, but on this important point refer to the
case Of Galveston VS.. Menard, %, Texas Re-
ports.
Our conclusions under the premises are as
| follows:
First The intention of F. Giraud or of tho
| city council i'm 1882, to reserve the ~ varas
/ The city executed deeds to the various parties
| inconsistent with the reservation, by describ-
| ing the lands by reference to the map which
showed the lines as extending to the river
| The notice given at the time of the sale would
/ probably have saved the reservation as
against the original purchasers at the sale, and