The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1895-02-26

half century to bottle up city for pri-
vate gain and every step of which has been
characterized by such rottenness the whole
presents picture of a creeping mass of
corruption, official and otherwise, which
has no parallel known to him. 1t is a
strangely interesting bit of history. but
very vaguely understood, even in Oakland,
except by the few who have had occasion
to follow its details.
The question: "Has there ever been &
case where successful breach in the
waterfront company's claim has been
made?" brought out the story.
The answer was: Eyes; Jim Fair broke
through it with his narrow-gauge road.
The Southern Pacific cried 'haltp when he
turned into the estuary to get to water.
Fair refused, and the company squared
itself in all its portentous majesty to bring
suit.
Every WE'LL said Fair; we will Just
take this occasion to test your title. Now
bring on your works.
They drew up all the formidable papers
and made every appearance of serious
Intention to go into court. But they knew
better. l may just say here that the South
ern Pacific Company has stack of opin-
ions on file from dozen different and
eminent attorneys employed by them to
look the matter over and all-and they in
clude no less shining light than ex-
Governor Haight-advise them that their
title is not worth continental So, as
Fair meant to fight, they finally decided to
compromise, as they have in every single
instance where they could. They know
their title is no good, but by the constant
parade of their bugaboo they have created
the impression that there is something to
it. j. G. Martin was Fairs attorney in
this case, and when the Southern Pacific
bought Fair out they also ACQUIRED or
adopted his attorney, so as to remove a
danger that was possible from man who
had looked the matter up and knew what
he was talking about. Here is the pro-
hibitory clause that they put into every
lease of their lands on the water. sucb as
the nail works, and which is their special
weapon as terrifier:
This conveyance is made and accepted upon
the express condition that no part of the
premises snail ever be used for the
purpose OF terry landing or wharf for the
transportation of passengers, goods, wares or
merchandise, cars or freight.
I'm the case of the waterfront company
VS.. Cameron ct al, resistance is offered by
private parties to the claim of the company
TO Title and judgment, and was served
against them with a resolution abandon
ing this clause. That case took five months
in hearing, and when the plaintiff had
finished, the prosecution, without Offering
any further evidence, moved for Ia nom
suit, and secured it as they had not made
out a case. Thus, the only case where the
matter has been thoroughly gone into by
this company in an attempt to gain re-
cOgnition from the court of the title at
which they have been working for forty
years has failed. Subsequently this judg-
ment was hung up on plea for rehear-
ing, and is still in that state
"The company claims fourteen deyia-
tons of title, their multiplication being
simply an attempt to strengthen what was
n the first place no good, and each of the
thirteen being confession of. the impo-
tency of all that preceded it.
"Their alleged title sprang from Horace