The morning call., 1893-12-06
In the City's Suit for the
Water Front.
Hayward Remembered His Sweet
heart i'm His WiIl-Davenport
at the MacdOnOugh.

thirtS-two pages of typewriter manu-
script. Among the chief points brought
out are the following:
1t denies that the plaintiff owns. In fee or
otherwise, the land in controversy, and AYERS
that large portion OF the land Is alternately
covered and uncovered by the tide, and that
The remainder is mudflat; that the shallow
water extends from the upland two and half
miles, Is unified for navigation and cannot be
used therefor without the construction OF
wharves across the entire distance from upland
to ship channel.
Defendant admits that the land in contro-
yersy Is the barbor In which the United States
Government is making improvements for nay-
CATION and commerce. but d MES that the
plaintiff ever had any title 10 he land and holds
that II is only subject TO the control OF the
United States Government; that all land In the
harbOr beyond the perbead line is solely under
the controI of the said United States Govern
ment. Defendant claims no right 10 the use OF
the land in Oakland harbOr beyond the p Ter
head, except subject to the con rol of the Gov
ernment, and did In January, 1879 by a resoiu-
tion OF It's board OF directors dedicate the
whole thereof 10 the Government for barbor.
Defendant AYERS that 1t owns in fee all OF the
land In controversy except portions which have
been conveyed 10 third parties and are now
held by such third parties.
And for further separate answer the defend
ant AYERS that the city never had any title 10
any portion Of The waterfront except three
tracts; one OF two acres below Peralta street.
and 10 tract of land between Franklin and
Webster Streets from high wafer TO First
street and 200 feet southerly of the wharf as
1t existed April l. 1868. and the other that
portion OF Lake Merritt which lies north OF
1weifi h street
hat INC Legislature of the State conveyed
the lands 10 The town OF Oakland by an act
May 4 1852, and that the said town conveyed
the said waller front TO Horace w. Carpenter,
In consideration Of the construction OF one
schoOlhOuse aud three wharves. That the said
transfer was duly made by the town of Oak
land, and that August %, 1858, Carpenter had
completed two Of said wharyes and the school
house; that the Board OF Trustees thereupon
rallied and accepted the said Improvements as
In compliance with The Carpenter agreement,
and that all right, title and interest of The town
of Oakland in the water front was conveyed to
Carpenter and bis assigns forever, and that all
of these acts of the Trustees we're subsequently
ratified by the Legislature by an act OF March
%. 1854
That Tor twenty-five years by mesne convey
ances from Carpenter the defendant has been
the owner in fee OF all the lands in dispute ex-
cept portions which have been conveyed TO
third parties.
Defendant further states that the United
States had the right and power To appro-
pirate the Oakland waterfront for public
use that the land known as the fringe
and lying between high tide and the bulk
head line is bare at low water and can be
legally filled in with earth, and that the
parts between this line and the pierhead
line may be used for the building of
wharves and piers.
The defendant AYERS that the Oakland harbor
Is Ia every sense an artificial han bor created by
dreoging; that In It's natural state steamers
drawing three feet of wafer were unable to
enter IL, ana passengers on boats stuck on the
bar waded ashore; tha I'm its natural state The
harbor was and still Is united Tor use for cum
mercial purposes by reason of its shallowness.
and that la order TO construct wharf II Is
necessary 10 fiji in for two ana half miles be-
fore shlp channel Is reached at which ocean
steamers can land.
Defendant further claims that for forty
years 1t has been the policy of California To
sell and dispose OF lands around the Day OF san
Francisco TO private pafti s. between high tide
and the ships Channel, TO induce its citizens 10
reclaim SAID properties TO construct
wnarves. aud that the grants so made have
been universally sustained by the Supreme
Court OF the state even prior TO the tim Car
pentIer conveyed the Oakland wat-r front TO
the defendant. at which time his title 10 said
land was valid by the laws of the State, as then
eXpounded by all depai tments of It's govern
ment ana as administered by its courts.
Wherefore the defendants claim that the va
lidlty of its title cannot be IMPAIRED by anv
subsequent decision of the couris of the said
State altering the construction of the laws
under which the defendant acquired title TO
said property.
And for a further and separate answer
the defendant goes on to give an entire
history OF the Oakland water front and
how II acquired title thereto in early DAYS
ana quotes the various decisions given in
favor of the railroad com pany ia its en-
deavors to hold possession.
STeeial stress is laid upon the action of
the City Council of 1868, in which an ordi-
nance was passed ratiiying the deeds to
Carpenter and abandoning all suits or
claims to the water front. Upon the
strength of title obtained from Carpenter
the Western Pacific Railroad Company
spent S5O0.000 and the Central Pacific
S1,0O0,000 in improving the water front.
building moles, piers, etc.
II is stated that sinpa 1870 whan Cor
pentier acquired possession, until 1868.
when he sold TO the defendant, he regu-
larly paid taxes on the property, and that
since 1868 defendant corporation has paid
these taxes.
1t is also stated that in 1880 a suit of the
city against the waterfront company To
acquire title to the water front was decided
against the plaintiff. and that in 1882 the
Council directed that all suits on the part
OF the city be discontinued and the title
quieted to all the water front forever. and
ihat ludgmen mt to this effect was given on
February Z, 1882
The long answer winds up by stating
that the action is barred on the cty's part
by sections 31S. 319 and 343 of the Code of
Civil Procedure.
Remembered His Sweetheart
The will of William NJ. Hayward. son
of the founder of the town of Baywards.
will be filed with the County Clerk to-day.
The property left by the decea sed is said
to be considerable. 1t will be divided
equally between his mother, Mrs. Rachel
Hayward, his sister. Sarah Louise Hay-
ward, and his sweetheart and intended
wife, Henrietta Stey Moody. The execu
tors of the estate are j. III. Strobridge and
William Roberts, who are empowered to
act without bonds. Reed and Nusbaumer
are the attorneys.
The career Of young Hayward was brief
but eventful. When his father died he
expressed great dissatisfaction with the
terms Of the will, and employed LAWYER
to begin suit with a view of breaking the
document This procedure had the effect
of bringing his mother 10 his terms and
what promised to be bitter family suuab-
Bile was averted. When Hayward came
into his full estate he started East on
protracted trip. AT Lafayette. Ind. he
met Miss Henrietta Stey Moody and in
short time became engaged TO her. The
engagement was kept a profound secret
and few of Hayward's most Intimate
friends knew of 1t. In a short time Hay
ward returned to California, but his health
failed him rapidly, and in spite of efforts
to rebuild it he died a few weeks ago of
complication of diseases. The will bears
date of December 20. 1892. and was wit
messed by Charles l.. Tilden and William
hall ~ CO..