The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-05-16
ITS WATER FRONT.
=.
The Great Legal Battle
Opens at LAST.
HOME INSURANCE MIDDLE.
Pacific Coast Baptists Now in
~.....- ~ Session.
HOME INSURANCE MIDDLE.
A COLLISION in. THE ESTUARY
Notice of Appeal From Judge lien
shaw's Decision Is Filed by
II. =. Murphy Heirs. =. -. !.

OAKLAND:-The big suit of the city of
Oakland against the Oakland Waterfront
Company to settle the question of owner
ship was begun in the Superior Court
yesterday before Judges Greene. Ogden,
Henshaw aud Ellsworth. sitting in bank.
The plaintiff was represented by Messrs
Davis. and Hill and. Pringle and Powell
and the defendant corporation. by. A. A:
Moore, j. G.. Martin and Harvey Brown.
The courtroom. was crowded throughout
the day by people anxious to see the be-
ginning OF a case in which six men were to
engage in an intellectual fight for the dis
position of ten miles>of water front worth
Il million dollars or more mile =. -
+ At the opening OF the mornings pro-
ceedDgs Judge Ogden announced .thatit
had been desired that the order. denying a
change Of venue be set aside and the
whole matter submitted to the court IN
bank. The attorneys for the defense -eX-
pressed q willingness to comply with this
BuGges tiOn, but after a consultation the
'city's counsel announced an unWillingness
TO consent ~ =. ::...- e.. -
Judge Ellsworth then said that he had
objected tc. trying the waterfront case
when it was up before. for the reason that
he had his doubts as 10 his qualification so
to dc, for-the following reason: He owns a
piece Of property on the Alameda water
front and feels that the result of the pres
ent litigation win affect the status of the
title to his lots. Under the circumstances
he said ne would try the case with great
reluctance.
The city's attorneys then asked for a
recess OF ten minutes. during which time
they consulted as to just what procedure
they should adopt in order that their posi-
:tion might not be jeopardiZed.
at the expiration of the recess the at
tOrneys returned TO the courtroom and MT.
Davis addressed the court for his side. He
said in substance that as he and his
brethren understood the ruling of Depart
ment (JuGge Ogden upon the motion Tor
change of venue, IL was that the Superior
Court of Alameda County was held to be
the proper cOurttO try the cause.
The court had not decided whether any
particular Judge OF Judges were disquall-
fed. but simply that the Superior Court Of
this county was the proper one to Try the
case.
In a certain sense, he argued. the quail
fcatiOn of trial Judge is always Involved.
The question can be raised at any stage.
If he be actually disqualified what he had
done and was about tn do would be with
cut jurisdiction, and it would not be necps-
.Sary to consent to the vacation of Judge
Ogden's ruling in order 10 get at that ques-
ton. 1t did not appear clear to him and
30 his associates InaU lney would be as we'll
off by giving consent as by Withholding it,
The other side, be said, could have eX-
pedited matters by prohibition, put they
had, in preference, chosen the more cir
cuitOus route of appeal. Believing that
the order as to the venue was right and in
accordance with the law aud of advantage
TO his side, aneither he nor his associates
could consent to vaeate IL.
Judge Greene wanted to know why the
attorneys could not agree upon some out
side Judge to try the case in this county.
Mr.. Pringle said that would be a hopeless
task.
And if you find me disqualified" asked
Judge Ellsworth. what would happen %
1--WE do not look for that contingency"
replied Mr.. Davis.
An adjournment was then taken until
afternoon.
At the afternoon session the question of
qualification of judges was taken up again.
Ex-Judge Harvey Brown spoke for tie
defendants. He said that in this issue
every citizen had an interest. and that is
why the contention was raised as TO the
right of judge VINO was taxpayer or a
resident 10 sit on the case.
Mr.. Brown quoted from numerous au-
thorities in support of his position that a
citizen is an interested party in a suit in
which the municipality is concerned.
At the conclusion of his remarks Mr..