The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-08-04
Law on TIDE LANDS.
CORPORATION Counsel Scott Rem
ders an Opinion.
HE THINKS BOTH PLeTs VALID.
City Had Power 70 Exr1 nd streets, but
the State Could Plat It's own Lana
How 10 Correct Errors

Ernff
~ him by the tide land committee Of the
CITY council as TO the powers OF the city
and the board OF appraisers IN regard 10
the Mat of the tide lands, was yesterday
handed to the committee, and Is cream
exposition OF the law in the case me
general effect OF Dir. Scotrs opinion ~
that the streets extended BY the city over
tide lands TO deep water legally exists.
hut that the appraisers plat. having Oesh
validated by the legislature. - also N
force. Thus the two acts OF streets sun
have legal existence -. =.
The first question asked Mr.. scott ls,
.sTJad the appraisers az the tide lands.
at the time % appraising the same, me
right to establish therein boulevards.
streets and aleys2'
In answering this question Mr. SCOTT
calls attention 20 the Gtct that the act
IF March % 1855. providesf that all alleys,
streets avenues bouIegs lrds and otner
public tboroughfares plated on toe Ianas
OF the first class by boarIs or toe lana
appraisers arc validated 6 phDsic hlen~
ways and dedicated TO the alse OF the pun
lie for the purposes for which they were
INTENDED: and no mprover, upland owner
or other person shall have the right TO
bug the whole or any part thereof he
says the act OF March 70. ls9u. dld not
authorize the local board 10 establish
bou.eVart.s. etc. but provided that IT
should prepare plats. showing all shore
and tide lands, on which shall be marked
the location or such lands, extending tho
United States survey over the same, ana
deposit q copy OF the plat with the audi
tor. lie says as far as he was informed
the board plated the lands into blocks
and lots and filed the plat with the audi
tor instead OF marking the lands by ex-
tending the United States survey over
them. and If IL we're not for the progiS
tons Of The act u 1895 validating the ac-
tion Of the local board ia laying OF
9Afe IN ana
The negative, buf be believes That the
legislature hal the power 20 validate the
streets rs public highways and dedicate
them 20 tho use Of the public. ana says
''The state IS sovereign and can do what
* will with It's own lands so long az the
legislature IN expressing this sovereign
Will does not violate some provision OF
the constitution"
In answer To the contention that, be-
cause the plat was not approved by the
city council, IL is not legal, he says the
difficulty is that IL is the state that made
the plat and the puplic could not be both
''grantor and grantee"
The City Had Power to Extend.
In referring to the power Of the city to
extend it's existing upland streets over
the tide lands, Mr.. Scott is OF she opin
ion that the question has been settled by
the supreme court IN two cases. namely.
Seattle g. Montana Railway Company VS..
state. in which the court says: I'VE con-
Htrued this statute, rs II reads, to enlarge
the authority expressed in the constitu-
tion 50 as TO authorize city to extend
fits streets across any tide lands al
though the streets extended may never
touch the harhor lines" and IN Columbia
& Puget Sound Railway Company VS..
city.
He holds that by virtue OF article u of
the charter all streets were extended to
the harbor lines westward. and all streets
abutting on the seashore TO the south
were extended and established over and
across the tide lands to the south limits
of the city. and says this provision of
the charter has all the force and effect
of an act OF the legislature as the power
TO frame charter was delegated 10 the
people OF the city and whatever has
heen done within the limits of this power
Is the law OF the land, and cites authori-
ties in defense OF same.
Believing. therefore. that the power,
both constitutional and statutory, confer
red upon the city To extend its streets as
in this opinion referred 70. is of as high
authority as that conferred upon the To-
cal board OF tide land appraisers as vail
dated by the act Of 1895. IL is his opinion
that the streets extended by the city are
valid and existing streets. and reasoning
from the same premises the streets laid
of by the local board are likewise public
dedicated them 90 the public use and
withdrawn them from sale, and gives rs
his reason that the supreme court has
held that the ownership OF the tide lands
IL in the state. and the power 10 deal
eonelusively with them is i'm the state
subject only to the power OF the Federal
government 10 prevent the Obstruction or
injurious modification OF navigable
waters. ane that even the tmprover has
no vested right as against the state.
Tho city Has Control.
To the question IF such boulevards
streets and alleys were so laid out by
said appraisers and legally SO. and are
not satisfactory TO the city. What ac-
ton in the premises NAV the city now
legally takeF" the corporation counsel
says there IL no doubt but that the in
tention Of the legislature was to place
the control Of the streets laid out by
the local board In the cities According
20 the act Of March IS, 1890. he goes on
20 say. no powsr was conferred on the
local hoard 70 lay out streets, nut what
ever was done m thar matter Cy such
hoard received its lfe-giving force by
Virtue % the validating act OF lsg5 and
h. the terms % the latter act the state
land commission succeeded TO all the
powers aud duties previously conferred
on the local beard. IN addition 70 other
duties and responsibilities lie thinks
that the legislature could not have 'r-
tended that the work done by the local
board should be independent OF any con
troll % the cBt}. while that az The state
land commission should be subject 10
such control. and as both boards derived
their power 10 Law ont streets and alleys
from the same law. the rights of the CITY.
in his opinion. are ne less nor greater. SO
Tar as tho plating cf tho streets IS con-
cerned. whether the same IS done by one
beard or the other
serious question Is raised hv asking
What control has the city over these
streets further than 20 improve them Nv
taking possession or TO vacafe them in
the manner provided nv law The act re-
ferred 70 does NOT authorize "a .enlattinr
or even "a Tcadiustmsnt OF the Mat by the
state lana commission. ami without leci--
fattve authority the hoard cannot do Ii.
THAT duty having heen performed hv tht,
local board AND lis acts validated. 49,,
function - either hoarf 20 that extent
ceased when che Plat was sled
AS The terms ~ office 81 she local
hoard has expired hv limitation saws
NJ SCOTT "it may - contended that an
anueN Will nor be from the orders or a
tribunal whitA has m longer an ~
fstence, hot for the purposes ~ protect
Ing ar securing Tire RIGHTS ~ thc vuhiss.
ms well as individuals. ] think .Nat the
hoart - state iaut commissioners has
Jurisdiction 70 correct any errors whirN
tte facts of the ease NAV demand. ez.
reciaily since th~ judgments ~ me local
hoa~3 have the force ana effect 81 valid
acts by virtue 81 The provisions - the
act allowing stch appeal"
How Errors May BE Corrected.
lie cites another act 81 the }ertslat,.r-
&c 3>.5. which makes ample provision IL,
tho submission 81 such piats - she ctts
y