The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-08-31
STATIONS IDEA.
What He. Thinks of the
Belt Railway.
A QUESTION OF CAR RAILS
And Not One of Right or Wrong
Is Involved.
THUS MONOPOLY SHOULD WIN
The Harbor Commissioners Attor =
ney Files Letter for Public
Record Favoring the S. P.

Attorney F. S. Stratton, the State Rar-
Dor Commissioners legal adviser, has filed
his opinion regarding the Broadway cleo
tric railways tracks on East street. The
document, somewhat curtailed, is here
with given for students of matters of pub
lie interest to contemplate:
To the Honorable Board of Harbor Commits
s1o1aers-GENTLEMEN; In June or July last
had several consultations with you with refer
ence TO the power of the board to grant the use
OF portions OF East street, subject to certain
limitations and restrictions, for the purpose OF
passenger electric railway.
On one of these occasions / drew up reso-
lu!ion which was adopted by your board per-
uniting the laying OF tracks along East street,
pursuant to the supervision OF the chief engi-
neer and subject at all times 10 the control OF
the board.
This action on your part has been freely crit
icized as being an invasion of the rights Of the
State and as being without authority OF the
law and an alienation of portion of the water
front of this State against the provision of the
law as embodied In section 1924 of The POlt-
zeal Code, which provides that "said board
shall not lease TO or permit any corporation or
association, or any person or persons, TO lay
down any track or tracksxfor railroads along
any OF the property described herein, or any
portion OF the water front of San Francisco I'M
der any condition whatever"
In view of the questions that have arisen in
regard TO your acJiOn 10 the matter deem IL
proper 10 render this opinion anu ask that it
be made matter OF record, in order that II
may appear that your action in granting the
license in question was taken adviSedly and
after careful consideration OF the rights of
The public and OF your duties as embodied in
the laws OF this State.
without going into detailed argument upon
the question Involved | VIII state generally
mat The language of section 1924. as quoted
does not include tracks laid for cable or electric
passage railways
for great many years your board has, from
time 10 time, permitted various hOrseears,
cable and electric railways the privilege of
entering upon and crossing East street. This
authority on your part is not only granted 10
you by law, but your Interpretation of your
powers. as evident by the practical operation
OF affairs, has never been questioned in any
manner. This could not well be So for with
out granting these streetcar lines the right Of
carrying passengers to various ferry systems
of the barbOr front incalculable Inconvenience
would be Occasi0ned TO the travelling public. in
addition TO very serious Inconvenience TO the
interest of commerce.
Such being the state OF affairs, on March / g.,
1889, the Legislature authorized the HarbOr
Commissioners 10 construct a belt railroad
along the exterior water front of The city anu
county of San Francisco. CT is well TO mention
incidentally here that this belt line has been
crowded OF the exterior line of the city and
county water front by the electric road in ques-
tiOn)
/ his belt line was for delivering freight and
passengers along the water front. aud for the
transportation OF engines, trains and cars.
lt is altogether distinct from the cable, horse
car and electric lines already in operation,
winch were exclusively Tor the convenience of
the travelling public.
At the same time. section 1924 of the Politi-
cal Code was amended so as 10 permit the
board TO lay down tracks for railways along
the property described
This in my opinion clearly prohibits the board
from permitting the belt railroad TO be used
exclusively by any corporation, and further en-
joins them from laying tracks along the front
for general freight and commercial purposes.
III it had been intended by the Legislature
that the board should be prevented from allow
20 ltva
from entering East street It would have been
specifically declared for the reason that such a
state OF things was then existing aud any denial
OF this right 10 prevent the street lines. so
called, from access 10 the water frOntWOuld have
subserved no possible purpose ana would on
the contrary have been harsh and unnatural
exercise OF legislative power.
can only repeat now. therefore, what l have
| heretofore from time TO time advised you, that
! your action IN granting The use of East street
for cable and electric passenger railways, sub
ject al all times TO your control and regulation,
Is within your power as authorized by law. Re
spectfully, f. S. STRATToN.
fort "a ord