Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-08-16
A RIGHT OF WAY.
Private Interests and Emf.
nent Domain.
HOW SHALL THEY BE ADJUSTEDs
The Efforts of the Southern Pacific
Company to Get Through the
Briswalter Tract.

ing toward the removal of the tracks of
the Santa Monica branch from San
Pedro street, and the getting Of trains
from the city by the sea to the new
passenger depot on the Wolskill tract
along Alameda street. At the southern
boundary of the Pueblo there is quite a
stretch of territory lying between the
ends of the two streets referred to above.
The HERALD mentioned this project in
connection with the sale of some parcels
of realty in that vicinity to the Southern
Pacific Company, which purchases were
made in order to secure right of way.
The general impression was that right of
way had been fully secured all along the
stretch of territory in question and that
the change would be made at once. The
dwellers along San Pedro street were
very jubilant as the removal of the track
is considered to be of great benefit to
that thoroughfare. In due course Of time
the fact was properly chronicled that
work was in progress towards accom-
pllshing the change in contemplation.
But love is not the only current in the
world in whose progress asperities OF
action are to be found. The best laid
plans of mice and men find no excep-
ton to the poets rule even
when the doings of great railroad
ompanies are encountered. Thus there
need be no great establishment expert
enced when it is learned that the South
ern Pacific has struck a great snag in the
carrying out of its plans. Some days
since the HERALD again give publicity to
the facts as to an injunction laid upon
the great corporation by Mr.. J. G.. Grif-
fifth, the present owner of the Briswalter
tract. These facts are to the effect that
the Southern Pacific Company did not
get right-of-way over this tract; but
without such right-of.way the company
proceeded to build, or at least to prepare
to build. over that property. Mr.. Griffith
objected and proceeded to get an injunc-
ton to stop the work. 1t was stated
at the time that no further movements
would be made until the matter was
properly adjudicated in the courts. So
the matter WAS thought to rest for the
moment. and such no doubt would have
been the case but for an article in a
morning contemporary, to which Mr..
Lunt, as agent for the railroad, felt it in
cumbent upon him to reply. In this
"new matter" as the lawyers term it,
was introduced, and 80 the subject was
reopened.
WHAT MR., LUNT SAID.
AS this is most important matter,
and as the people are much interested in
the outcome on many accounts, it may
be best to put the matter forward in
full. The most important statement,
perhaps, is Mr.. Lunt's letter in this:
Mr. Griffith requested of me q map showing
the line of the right of way desired by the rail
furnishing him with the information desired,
and also for the purpose of determining the
best line for the railroad company, l arranged
ground and run preliminary line. The engi-
neer, with three assistants, went upon the
ground. They were not armed with picks,
work, but took with them the necessary in
struments to run a line through the vineyard,
and in doing SO they found it necessary to clip
sighting across the vineyard. There was no
dirt dug for roadbed, no fences torn down or
destroyed; there were no armed men upon the
field, but the man in charge, not knowing the
intention OF the parties, informed Mr.. Griffith
of the facts. and as soon as the facts were
learned the whole matter was adjusted, and, so
far as l know, satisfactorily arranged. The
Southern Pacific Company mas not, through its
agents, at any time entered upon that tract of
land for the purpose of constructing a right of
way, or been there at unreasonable hours, or
done or attempted to do any Of the things
spoken of in the article above referred to.
Amicable negotiations are still in progress for
vineyard and nothing has been done or is
likely to be done until the matter is adjusted.
Yours respectfully, 8. P. LUNT.
WHAT Mr.. GRIFFITH THINKS.
In order to get the other side Of the
question HERALD reporter found Mr..
Griffith and discussed the matter with
him. He said there would be letter
from him in an evening paper setting
fourth his answer to Mr.. Lunt. From
that letter these extracts are taken:
During the progress of friendly negotiations
between him and myself, looking toward the
solution of the right OF way matter, corps of
men, who claim to have received their orders
from Mr.. Lunt, entered upon the vineyard from
San Pedro street, and did break the fence in SO
doing. Not only SO, but they did mutilate and
destroy 526, by actual count, OF the finest vines
in this county, without vestige iof authority
from myself and without my permission or
consent. Indeed my consent was not asked.
Mr.. Lunt said in his article he managed with
a preliminary line." that's all.
The engineer himself says that he had run
the "preliminary line" there some time before,
and that his business there on Friday and Sat
urday of last week was to ''locate the road"
The engineer said, moreover. that Mr.. S. P.
Lunt authorized him to go in upon the property
and cut away those vines and locate the line
The shotgun policy was our effective agent in
stopping this work, and the men engaged in ii
were rounded up and herded out on San Pedro
street by those engaged in guarding the prem
ises, and were warned in no uncertain way that
an attempt to enter upon the property would be
undertaken at their peril. These facts coming
to the notice of Hon. s. M. White, attorney fol
the Southern Pacific Company. he assured me
that this work had been i'll advised and that
nothing further would occur looking to a forci
BILE entry upon the land in question. If Mr.
Lunt had refrained from rushing into print tC
defend his course should not feel called on Il
state this side Of the question.
G. J. GRIFFITH.
Los Angeles, August Is, 1888
WHAT MR.. GRIFFITH WANTS.
In conversation with Mr.. Griffith that
gentleman developed his wishes in the
matter. He said in substance: am moi
asking to take any unfair advantage OF
the road; but I think they do seek tc
take such advantage Of me. The facts
are these: own the land; the road
wishes to cross it. The tract will do me
no particle of good; but it will do me a
great deal of injury. l must have some
rights in the case. If you want that
piece of land and come to me to buy
It I will set my price on it. You can not
take my land until you pay my price.
Very we'll, the railroad wants my land,
and I set my price on it. The road
thinks it too high. What is their re-
course. The law of eminent domain
applies. The road may enter suit to
condemn my land. Pending the adjudi.
cation of the case in the courts they have
no more right on my property than you