The San Francisco call., 1896-01-22
Attorney Stratton Diametrically
Opposed to Attorney Fitz-
gerald.
THE COMMISSIONERS WILL ACT.
Ex-Superintendent of State Dredgers
w. Cruise Was Completely
Exonerated.

new ferry depot. When the board met
yesterday he presented a statement which
began as follows:
At the inception of my employment as
special counsel by your board 1 found that
with reference to the adoption of plans and
specifications and the preliminary steps look
ing to the execution of contracts for the pro-
posed building, you had followed the pro-
visions OF section 2524 of the Political Code,
and it was understood that you had not pur-
sued the method required by the general
building act OF March %, 1876.
Not being responsible, therefore, for the
situation in which l found your board as to
which of these laws should have peen pursued,
have endeayored to view the questions in
volved imparually and judicially.
The result has been to unhesitatingly con-
firm the opinion which 1 have heretofore ex-
pressed to you, that the section of the Political
1876, should control.
Unfortunately, however, the Attorney-Gen-
eral has all along dissented and has expressed
himself in writing convinced that the
building act of 1876 should alone be followed
in the letting of contracts Tor the new
ferry and passenger depot.
He then referred to the fact that the At
torney General as chief law officer of the
State would have great power with the
Board of Examiners, and pointed out that
he (Stratton) had "labored assiduously to
harmoniZe the building act and the Politi-
cal Code, " in order to show that the proper
steps required in each had been pursued.
Attorney Stratton then goes on to say:
The building act requires that all specifica-
tions and plans must first be approved by the
Governor, Secretary of State and Treasurer,
after which proposals inviting bids shall there
upon be published
But the building act does not require the ap-
proval of the Governor, Secretary of State and
Treasurer to be evidenced in writing, and l
am OF the opinion that il they were orally ap-
proved by them then this preliminary and
important objection will have been success
fully met.
The Governor. in his conversations with me,
had In your presence, is positive as to the ap-
proyal by himself and the Secretary of State,
and it has only remained to determine whether
or not the Treasurer had, through his deputy,
likewise given his approval.
The Attorney-General has, as / understood
him, announced to me that if such approval
had been made by the deputy OF the Treasurer,
and if the Governor would further so certify
such facts in any written communication, then
we could doubtless harmonic all the remain
ing steps to be followed by both the building
act and the Political Code.
The various contractors and their attorneys
have all along, and with propriety, bitterly
complained at the embarrassments of the situ-
alton and have sought at your hands some So
luton OF the difficulty, and think, therefore,
that you should take some definite steps with
out further delay, so as to determine what your
position would be, and, if necessary, enable
any person or officer aggrieved to test the mat
ter in some appropriate proceeding.
do not think that the board should, unless
their duty is plain, disavow their own jurisdie-
| ton and impugn the correctness of the steps
which they have already taken in this matter.
L call your attention to the fact that al
| though the Attorney-General is the highest
law officer in the State, and while any opinion
| given by him should undoubtedly receive the
consideration and should be entitled to the
| pect which the known ability and learning
OF that officer entities it, still such opinion no
more determines the law Than does the opinion
of any attorney to whom the questions might
| be submitted.
The Attorney-General himself freely con-
| cedeS this and. provided Won act in good faith
any steps pursued by you in this matter would
free you from all criticism and question OF per-
| SOnal liability.
The lowest bid in each case and for the vari-
Gus parts of the depot work have been accepted
| by you. This, therefore, constitutes a con-
tract between the State and the various con-
| tractors. The execution of the written instru-
| ments embodying all the terms to specifca-
! tions and proposals, together with the accept
| ance of any bid, while perfectly proper and
necessary for certain purposes, does not, how
| ever, render the rights of the contractors any
more binding than they now are.
Should you continue to refuse, or to delay en-
! tering INTO such contract, then, as a PROPOSE
! tion of law, the contractors would have an
election either TO enforce their rights as evil
| denced by the acceptance of their bids, or they
could treat the contracts as Tescinded by
mutual consent,
| Mr.. Stratton then recommends that the
board go ahead and act on its original
| plan, and concludes by saying:
!
prove any warrant issued by you for this work,
| then, as 1 have heretofore argued the same
| question before Judge Sanderson, which was
| followed by favorable decision on his part I
should be very glad to avail myself of any OBJ
portunity to appear in the Supreme Court as
amicus curie and present my views on the
points involved.
l therefore recommend that you, by resolu-
ton, call upon the contractors, ana each of
them, to forthwith appear at time and place
named to enter into the contracts heretofore
submitted TO you for adoption.
After the reading of the report it was de-
cided by President Colnon and Commits
sioner Chadbourne that all the bondsmen
should be required to be in attendance at
2 p. NJ. tomorrow. AT that hour the con-
tracts will be signed and the contractors
can begin work at once. Then when the
first bill is presented to the Harbor Com
missioners they can refuse payment, and
the case will be carried to the Supreme
Court.
II is all not plain sailing, however. Gov
ernor Budd does not seem to be satisfied
about the matter. After the Harbor Com
missioners adjourned yesterday telegram
was received by President Colnon stating
that in view of the fact that there was
difference of opinion among the attorneys
in regard to the law of 1876 and the code,
that it would be better to have an agreed
case submitted to the Supreme Court.
This mixes up matters considerably, but
signed tomorrow, and that the first pay
ment for work done will carry the case
into court.
When the depot question was disposed
of the Simpson Lumber Company ap-
peared by it's secretary and objected to be-
ing charged wharfage for lumber that was
allowed to remain on the wharf over
twenty-four hours. 1t was shown that it
was not permanent occupation, but that
every lumber vessel that discharged left SO
much of a surplus which was carted away
as quickly as possible. In the circum-
stances President Colnon moved that the
chief wharfinger be instructed to deal
leniently with the company.
Superintendent of Construction Patter-
son got into trouble with Commissioner
Chadbourne. The former 0. KID a bill of
D. Kelso's for teaming work done in haul
ing rock to the seawall lots. The account
went back to last September, and nothing
accompanied it to show what the money
was being paid for. This made Chad
bourne angry, and he refused to pay the
money until an itemized bill was sub
mitted. Patterson attempted to explain
Al