The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-03-19
OAKLAND GAINS A POINT
So THINKS THE ATTORNEY FOR THE
CITY IN THE GREAT CASE.

SO THINKS THE ATTORNEY FOR THE
CITY IN THE GREAT CASE.
at settles nothing, absolutely nothing,
except that Acknowledgement Hart had no
proper right to bring the suit, and that
have commended all along" said Hon. w.
r. Davis, attorney for the city of Oakland
in her great waterfront contest, speaking
|, yesterday of the decision of the United
States Supreme Court dismissing the case
OF California VS.. the Southern Pacific of
Kentucky for lack of jurisdiction.
''If it indicates anything further than
the exact language states then it is that
the States title is not good. That is what
we expect the court to finally decide. As
for the Southern Pacific it gets no comfort
from the decision whatever unless it
draws comfort from very intangible guam
titles
Acknowledgement Hart brought the
suit Just determined with the purpose of
cutting across lots-avoiding the loss of
time and the wear and tear of reaching the
United States Supreme Court through the
regular course of the series of lower courts.
He was anxious to see the long-pending
case brought to a close during his term of
office. He therefore endeavored to bring
1t before the Supreme Court in its original
lurisdiction-the suit of State against
the people of another State. The title of
the suit was the State of California against
the Southern Pacific Railroad of Kentucky.
Now General Harris position was in
herently weak, however good his purpose
may have been. The State OF California,
by act of Legislature, granted the water
10 &c a.
ern Pacific claims its title through alleged
grants from the city. But General Hart
brings suit against the Southern Pacific to
quiet the title of the State without
the State having repealed the act by
which it granted title to the city of Oak
land. The city of Oakland claims title to
its own water front, and the proper and
logical disputants are the railroad COM
pany and the city.
General Hart when contemplating the
beginning of this suit asked me to Join
him in the case on behalf of the State, but
l could not do so because l did not believe
in the States premises; further than that
did not believe anything would be gained
by trial of the case in which the whole
case, with all parties to it, was not pre-
sented. For that reason l tried to dis
suade him from bringing the suit, and he
promised to call upon me again before he
began. it. He did so, but his mind was
made up. l told him that he was takine
the case that presented the strongest feat
ures for the Southern Pacific, for it singled
out Tor contest their right to the few bits
Of improved property. However, he filed
his suit in the courts here, naming the
Southern Pacific of Kentucky and seventy
other persons as defendants. In the
United States Supreme Court these SEVENTH
others had to be eliminated in order to get
the original jurisdiction, the case standing
the State of California VS.. the Southern
Pacific of Kentucky
"They had been working on the case for
several months, and went to Washington
With about 800 pages of printed matter
presenting their case. Weg got hold of this
ran it through, discovering that they had
few things in it, but that there were 6
great many other things that weren't in it.
took the train to Washington and asked
to be allowed to intervene, but this was mo-
granted. We were, however, allowed tx
get in as friend of the court. commits
sioner was sent out to take further testi
mony and remained here all last summer
hearing new evidence, studying maps
charts, etc. 1t is proper to say that Gen
eral Hart accepted all this in good part anc
took the city's suggestions in many in
stances.
The arguments following all this tool
place last January. The case of the city
was fully presented and we were quite will
ing to have the case decided upon its mer
its. However, this has not been done. Th,
court has evidently passed judgment upor
The case as presented-has taken cogni