Los Angeles herald., 1891-05-28
Their Title to the County
Jail Property.
AS Far As the Deeds Go 1t Is
Perfect.
But Will An Error In Deed Be.
Sustained In COurt9
The Abstract to the Property in Brief.
Supervisor Perry's Opinion = He
Admits the Stoddards' Title
By Deed is Goo d-But
Does Not Think They
VIII win.

The article in yesterdays HERALD
showing that there is a cloud on the
title of the county to the property on
which is located the county Jail and the
south wing OF the courthouse naturally
caused considerable comment.
Attorney G. G. Stephens, who, with
Judge Bicknell, is acting for Mr.. G. P
Huntington, the trustee OF the Stoddard
heirs claims, that there is no question
in the world,a to the title of his clients
to the property in question as far as the
deeds go. The matter OF the statute Of
limitations, and the question of the
county having held the property without
adverse claim, are matters for the court
to settle.
There were some errors in the article
in yesterdays HERALD, as to the manner
by which the Princess Hatzfeldt and
her sisters and brothers claim the prop
erty. A brief of the claimants abstract
is as follows:
The city decided the hill property to
Heringer in 1858. a
Heringer decided to Oscar E. Macy,
father of ex-Supervisor Macy.
Macy decided to the city the $50 feet
in controversy, beginning at the Fulton
block line and extending north on New
High street.
In 1872 the city put the lot in ques-
tion in the control of the school board.
In 1874 G. w. Wilson, who had sue
ceeded to the Macy inserest, applied to
the council for duplicate of the original
IlAx. t..,
claimed the original deed had been lost,
and the city re-executed the deed, and,
whether Willingly or not, included in it
the l5O feet which had been decided by
Macy to the city, and through Wilson,
who was their grandfather, the claim
now passes to the Stoddard heirs.
SUPERVISOR PERRY's OPINION.
S. M. Perry, chairman of the board of
supervisors, says that the county first
heard of the flaw in the title to the old
school property while investigating the
Bell claim about two months ago. Bells
claim to the land was found to have no
foundation, but in looking over the rec
ords, the discovery was made that the
city had decided the south 15O, or 100
feet, as Mr.. Perry CLAIMS, to q. w. Will
son, IN 1874.
Although the abstract shows the title
to vest in Wilson's heirs" said Mr..
Perry, ''it is so plain that the deed from
the city conveying it is an error that [
do not think their claim to it is tenable.
Some one has made a stupendous mis-
take, however. When Wilson petitioned
the city for copy of the original deed,
it was granted him. Later he dis
covered that be had been given more
than he asked for, and the property was
reconveyed to the city so correction
could be made. Another deed
was given Wilson, but by some
fata! blunder the second deed
was the same as the first and gave Will
son 100 feet of the old school lot, to
which he had no claim and for which
he made no demand. We have copy
of the petition he presented to the
council, and have looked UP large
number of witnesses-men who were
parties to the transaction--who will tes
tify as to the intention of the city when
the deed was made.
"When the county bought the prop
erty from the board of education for
$75 700, it was supposed that the title
was clear. As far as know no abstract
passed at that time, as no one seems to
have taken the trouble to look into the
matter and find out where the
title lay. confess that when
we first learned OF the Stoddards'
claim we were considerably frightened.
The supervisors held number of star
chamber sessions while discussing the
matter, for which they were strongly
criticised by the HERALD, bat we did
not want the knowledge which we
possessed to become public until
we learned just how the matter stood.
Lately we have had an abstract pre-
pared, which has been examined by the
district attorney and by Houghton,
Silent and Campbell. These gentlemen
are Rll of the opinion that the county
can hold the property.
"Of course it is very probable that
contest will be made" added Mr.. Perry,
''but we have such strong case that |
do not fear for the result. The city and
county together have held undisputed
possession of the land since 1874, and it
is the opinion of the county's lawyers
that the statute of limitation will pro-
tect us if nothing else"
United States Signal Service.