The morning call., 1893-01-07

laad. But mind this, | would like TO see
this big city of Oakland formed to take in
anything else but Alameda. That would be
our making Now we keep an eating and
sleeping place for San Francisco. But apart
from that certainly do not favor division
of this county.
John t. Ward, the real estate mani am
bitterly opposed TO the plan. We would lose
everything. Our taxes would be greatly in
! creased. 1t is only a plan Of politicians to
enlarge the number OF office-hOldings.
j. b. Vasburgb. the hardware dealer-I
am against it, Alameda would certa My be
great loser in the lack of interest in NUM-
cipal government.
c. c. q. Peterson, wholesale liquor dealer
You can count on me for being dead
against any plot Of division. 1t would not
benefit Alameda unless we were we'll clear
OF Oakland, and that would not be probable
or they would not be aEltatlng II so actively.
City Marshal R0gers-lt is very evident
scheme of Oakland's to bring us into their
indebtedness and make US pay their short
age. We are getting along well enough
without them, and l am willing to risk il a
willie lengeT.
}. b. Barber, City Tax Colleetor-It all
depends upon where the division line goes !;
but you can depend II means to leave Ala
media somewhere by Oakland to get Swal-
lowed up. Against that big scheme you can
cOnnt me first, last and all the time.
Z. NJ. Smith, City AssessOr-Alameda
would gain nothing By division unless it
kept her out from Oakland and gave her the
county seat. The evident plan is to have us
make up" with Oakland and that would
mean our ruin.
Rev. John Kirby-That means TO join US
| with Oakland and / am of opinion we are
| perfectly capable Of standing alone. Here
we are almost the size of Stockton and you
] consider Stockton quite town, do you not?
! There is no use in our playing a second
| fiddle TO Oakland. 1t is as friend OF mine
said, II want first church when l go To
town to take passionate. Tor no matter
how you improve a second church II always
remains a second and never becomes a
first"
Charles E. AlIen-I am against division.
| We have our improvements and there is no
! good reason why We should become part
| of a city without any.
II. Sevening, banker-I am opposed to it
I OIL general principles. Alameda is getting
along well enough and does not want to be
buTdened with the heavy taxation of Oak
4 land. Some of Us who own property there
know well how the officials pile up the
taxes. No. there is no sense In giving such
a proposition o second thought.
j. S. Leonard, real estate dealer-I am
heartily against any plan of dividing Ala
media County. Il would be sure or bring
ing us into some sort OF union with Oak
! land. and that is to be guarded against.
! We want to keep away from her politics
!
makes no claims, and has no desire to be
anything else.
Hermann Ernst, grocer-I am rot against
| a division OF this county, provided we are
| kept apart from Oakland. But rs soon as
/ that threatens count on me for opposing it..
L. b. Hayden, a Park-sfTeet property
owner-It is no plan that promises well to
| Alameda, and for one | am bitterly against
| IL.
F. Binder, druggist-There is nothing in
/ these schemes of a union with Oakland.
/ They have been preached several times and
/ are most unpopular here. We are not
( anxious TO pay their debts. No; L am
! against II.
Postmaster SturtevaRt-It Is only plan
TO enlarge Oakland and diminish the stand
ing Of other adjacent cities. ! am against
it heart and soul.
A. w. Mitchell, grocer-No division in
mine l am willing to be content with our
existing prosperity and let well enough
alone.
DIR. Stidbam-It is of no advantage to US.
| | am opposed TO a division.
John l. Hall, real-estate deaier-Such a
| move would be sure to result in Alameda 5
being lost in the greatness OF Oakland.
A. O. Colt eweleT-Agains any such
scheme as this l am heartily opposed.
There Is nothing for MS to gain.
\. Clifford Page. eomposer-I am opposed
to {, We should be content with our pres
ent prosperity. 0akland's city improve
ments are expensive. We have no such
foolish waste Of money as running streets
out into the foothills l am thoroughly
against the plan.
c. ii. Frost Of the real estate firm of D.
Judd q Co.-There is positively nothing fol
US to gain. Alameda is a suburban resi-
dence town and peculiar in many ways
Our government is the very best. Each
citizen Is obliged by law to put down pave
ments before his property. the quality Of
/ ma "a Ia a. IA nod nv ba
| Town Trustees. AS a consequence. ouI
city has the best streets and sidewalks tC
be found in the United States. With al
this our rate of taxation is not over high
We are doing very we'll.
All the trouble with Oakland is she hasn'f
quite notes enough 10 run the county, anC
that is way she is anxious for this move
ment.
Alameda should lie as a unit in opposition
to any plan Of amalgamation.