The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1893-07-08

that proposition was also being contem-
plated. AS to the threats that had been
made that he and the Council would be
cited for contempt, he jokingly remarked:
"Of course none Of us know how soon we
may be in JAIL"
I'VE do not necessarily regard this as
waterfront fight" the Mayor explained,
although it might prove the beginning of
one. We can fall back on the Chicago
waterfront decision if we need to, but all
we have endeavored to do Is to clear the
public streets of the city. That little
ticket Office and the fence were obstruct-
ing Broadway in violation of city
ordinance. They were removed accord
ingly. l contend that the little spur of
track is also an obstruction. aud l asked
Mr.. Harrison, the Superintendent of
Streets, to remove it, but by the advice Of
his attorney, Mr.. de Cola, he declined to
comply.
'The order for removing the track was
my own. not the Councils. Somebody
pulled up the rails, but who l don't know.
did not, and neither did the men l or
dered do so. The wharinger is now in
charge with police protection. The South
ern Pacific has blockaded the landing, but
whether such blockade can be main
tanned remains TO be yet determined. We
merely proposed to prolong street ded-
Gated to public use. 1t was an open street
at the time when the old opposition boats.
the S. NJ Whipple and the Chin Wan. used
to land there. We have been contemplate
ing some action for two months"
City Attorney johnson said: What
the railroad company proposes to do have
no legal nor any other kind OF knowledge
yet. We talked over the possible legal
consequences at the consultation between
the Mayor and Council yesterday mornin 6,
and it was recognized that il the city could
not SUSTAIN its position and that the fence
and gate were unlawful distractions, then
the railroad company might be able to re-
cover to the extent of its actual damages.
Considering that these could not be SO very
great, it was decided to take the risk.
This Offices has had no abstract of title
of the property at the foot of Broadway.
and therefore 1t has been imp0ssi BILE for
me to give an opinion upon the facts as to
tine ownership of the property. But have
advised the Mayor and COuncilmen that IL
Broadway is a public street to its end
their rights to remove distractions from it
is clear and undo bted No proceedings
in court are necessary to do that
The Mayor and Councilmen, believe
looked up the question of fact as to the use
of the street. making very careful! inquiries.
Five years use as a public street operates
as dedication. and If the former owners
of the property permitted its use that
length of time, of course it became street.
It was by establishing this fact to the
satisfaction Of jury as to Castro street
that Forth beat the Waterfront Com pany,
or it's lessee.
'ln regard to the railroad track-the
company has franchise to maintain a
track on First street. but that oss not give
it the right to lay rails all over town. l
have never seen any franchise giving the
railroad company the right to lay spurs
and branches from its First-street track.
This branch extending to the foot of
Broadway is several hundred feet away
from First street,"
Asked whether, in the event OF ntempt
proceedings the whole question OF title
would be opened up anew. he thought 1t
could not. Speaking of the proviso OF
Judge Sawyer's order he said 1t way very
important. 1.-The company" said lie. has
refused to pay any tolls. wharfage or dock
age although the original grant to H. w.
Carpenter of exclusive wharf privileges
has expired"
Referring to the tearing up of the rails
Mr.. johnson said: "The city did not tear
up the rails. MIR. Harrison did not obey
the order. II. however. 1t be a public
street, and there is no franchise for the
track, it would be proper and legal for the
city to remove the rails as an obstruc-
ton"
Chairman Smell of the Water Front Com
mittee went out of town to enjoy little
outing with his children at Mount DiabIo.
Accordingly no explanation of the causes
leading up to the city's sudden action could
be obtained from him, nor could any an
ticipation of the city's Intentions for the
future be ascertained.
l.. j. lie Conte, the United States engi-
neer. assistant to Colonel Mendell. said:
II thought that question would be raised
some time. have heard people say that
the wharf at the foot of Broadway was
formerly q city wharf. I don't know the
facts, but they ought to be easy to ascer-
tain"
''Where does the Government arbor line
run past the foot of Broadway"
"Alone the front Of the wharf. A good
many years ago, when the railroad built
the present wharf there. 1t run it out
hundred feet beyond the harbor line.
We communicated with the Washington
authorities, and then conferred with the
railroad people. they decided to cut off
the end Of the wharf. They took off the
extra hundred feet. and I remember that
Mr.. Brown complained that it cost 500 to
do this"
How much has the railroad company
filled in or made ground at the foot Of
Broadway?"
Il don't know exactly, but think that
four years ago. when they extended the
cable road down Broadway and put a
turntable at the foot, they filed in about
seventy-tive feet. carrying the made ground
out to the nose Of tile ferry slip. This fill
ing was done where the wharf formerly
stood"
Councilman Towle said he understood
that the harbor lines were so drawn that
they ran along the shore Mt the foot of
Broadway, so there was virtually no Ques-
,;nr of ,y,tor froof nrnparfv nvnlvod Ao