The morning call., 1892-07-06
FORTIN WINS.
End of the Water. Front Case in
the City of Oakland.
The First Victory Against the Railroad Com.
pany-M Manifestations Of Satisfaction
at the Verdict Rendered.

''We, the jury. find for the defendants,"
read the verdict in the waterfront cas- e
last night.
The lobby broke into involuntary ap-
plause, and the stern voice of the Judge
spoke, "The first man that makes demon
stration will be taken into custody for con-
tempt of court"
1t was 9 o'clock, and the gaslight In the
big courtroom glimmered and danced with
the vibrations caused by the stamping of
feet and clapping of hands.
1t was the first victory against the Water
Front Company. Others are to come.
q James Lentell, foreman of the jury, rose
and made a statement to the effect that
three of the jurors at first stood for the
plaintiff Taylor. and nine for the defend
ants Fortin, Davie, Dameron aud others.
Afterward the verdict was made unanimous.
Nine were sufficient for verdict in favor
of the defendants, and the jury was so in
structed by the Judge previous to retiring.
''Shake." said F0rtin to A. A. Moore. at
torney for Taylor and the Water Front
Company. after the verdict had been an
nounced.
Il will not" answered Moore. pompously !;
''but I'll shake with you." said Moore
turning to Mr.. Mullaney, attorney for the
defense.
"Yes. our little spats have amounted to
done our duty"
The jury had reached verdict shortly
after going out at O'Clock. but the Judge,
who had announced that he would be in
calling distance until II, did not appear un-
til O'Clock TO receive the decision.
The attorneys aud spectators remained
away only long enough for dinner and then
returned early to the courtroom.
The arguments began at 8 A. NJ. The jury
stood the fusillade well, only few of
81.
progress. Previous to the arguments Mr..
Moore. attorney for Mr.. Taylor. moved to
strike out the evidence regarding the resolu-
tion of council directing the Street Superin-
tendent to remove all distinctions on streets
running TO the water line. This evidence
had been submitted by the defense TO show
ali official recognition OF the existence of
publ C streets below the line OF First street.
The motion was denied. and Mr.. Nus
banner then began the argument for the
plaintiff Argument hsd been limited TO
three hours for each side. and after Nus
banner bad waded through the evidence
w. X. Davis of the defense follow ed, and
r. NJ. Fitzgerald then addressed the jury,
stating briefly that his client, J. l.. Davie,
had been made defendant in the action on
a complaint as wild and scrambIing as the
defendant had shown bis position 10 be-
Dave had not claimed possession OF the
land then in dispute, and the Water Front
Company had made him defendant simply
TO annoy him.
Ex-Judge Cotton then took up the cudgel
for the defense. arguing that the city's and
the defendants cause were analogous.
Attorney Mullaney closed the arguments
for the defense ard Mr.. Moore for the prose
eution, the latter dwelling upon the fact
that the title TO the land was not con-
sidered, the question hinging only on the
right of occupancy.
The charge of the Judge was OF an hours
duration and was considered TO be very
clear and learned statement OF the legal
phases involved