The San Francisco call., 1895-07-17
VICTORY FOR THE CITY.
Judge Ogden Follows the
Rulings Laid Down in the
Chicago Decisions.
AN APPEAL is TO BE TAKEN.
The Old Deed to Carpenter Was
Void, as 1t Was Against Pub
lie Policy.

Judge Ogden decided yesterday that the
waterfront property which was illegally
decided by Amadee Marier to Horace Car
pentier in 1852 is and always has been the
property of the city of Oakland.
His Honor had given notice that at the
opening of court yesterday he would rem
der his decision in the celebrated suit
brought against the waterfront COM
pany and allied corporations by the city
of Oakland. The courtroom was crowded
and every body was in suspense, for, con-
trary to precedent, there had been no leak,
and attorneys for both sides were conf
dent and fearful up to the fateful hour.
Promptly at 10 o'clock Judge Ogden
assembled the bench. The proceedings
were somewhat of disappointment to the
large lobby, which had prepared itself for
a grand-stand play.
CITY of Oakland against The Oakland
Waterfront Company" said the court.
Decision in accordance with the written
decision fled That was ALL and Judge
Ogden was preparing to leave the bench
when Attorney J. G. Martin of the water
front company said, 81 suppose that the
opinion will take the place OF findings"
Attorney w. R. Davis OF counsel for the
CITY replied: IF the decision is in our
favor we will prepare findings with pleas
ure and serve the other side with them"
Then dozen attorneys eagerly scanned
the voIuminous opinion. 1t was necessary
to go entirely through it before a correct
opinion could be formed as to what each
party received under the terms OF the de-
cision. The railroad company is left in
e, s-I,& Is
front land actually in use for purposes o
commerce. The company also retains ali
wharves that have been built since 1868,
although the land under them belongs to
the city. The decision throughout is
based upon the general principles laid
down in the Chicago Iake-front case, and
shows that the course of judicial decisions
in California for many years before the
Chicago decision had not been contrary
thereto, but in accordance with. it.
The principle is clearly laid down that
the grant to Carpenter was against public
policy. The titles held by the water
front company numbered fourteen, and
the court destroys all of them and holds
that the title to the waterfront lands is
invested solely in the city. The city gains
1870 acres, as computed from the maps,
charts and other evidence introduced dur
ing the trial. The rights of third parties
who may now occupy parcels of the prop
erty do not figure primarily in the de-
cision, although Judge Ogden establishes
a principle that the city may have title,
but must make compensation in these
cases. Each OF these cases, however, must
be determined on its individual merits.
All improvements that have been made
under the provisions of the compromise of
1868, referred to in the decision. are not to
be molested. A large portion of the origi-
nal grant to Carpenter of the town of
Oakland is found not to be affected by the
decision, as it is not now within the cor
porate limits of Oakland. This land is
located south of the center line of the
estuary. Title to it, under the decision,
will rest either in the city of Alameda or in
the State.
AS the Central and Southern Pacific
companies were not parties to the suit, the
title to the land held by them could not be
directly passed upon in this action, but the
grounds of the present decision are such
that when case against these two corpor-
ations is presented, their asserted title
must go the same way that the t; -Se of the
waterfront company has gone.
AS soon as Mayor Davie heard of the de-
cision he ordered the biggest flag in the
city's possession to be hoisted over the City
Hall.
Ex-Judge Harvey Brown, counsel for the
waterfront company, said yesterday
''I have not yet read the decision, but 1
understand it is in favor af the city. The
case will, of course, be appealed to the
Supreme Court"
WHAT IT MEANS.