The San Francisco call., 1897-09-05

richer by nearly hundred thousand dol
lars in consequence OF the decision.
In 1874 the Legislature passed an act
permitting the Board of Education of this
City to partition the hundred-vara lot on
the corner of Market and Fifth streets,
known as the Lincoln School tract, and to
lease the lots for term of years. Adver-
tisements were published calling for bids
by lessees, and a lease OF the entire tract
in parcels was given for term Of twenty
years. The contract for lease stipulated
that the lessees should remove from the
land after thirty days notice all buildings
that were erected by them or their success
sors in interest, or upon failure to do so
would forfeit all right TO title of the i'm
proyements. Another provision OF the
contract was that the lessee, at the time
of the expiration of the lease, would
"peaceably and quietly leave, surrender
and weld up unto the said party of the
first part (the City, all and singular the
demised premises, reasona bic wear thereof
and damages by the elements excepted" ="
The lessees erected several frame and
brick buildings on the property, and
when the lease expired refused to move
claimin that the Board OF Education had
reserved the right to purchase the I'M
provements, which was beyond the power
given to 1t bv the act Of the Legislature.
The Supreme Court only considers the
written contract of the parties, and hold s
that it certainly was the intention of the
board to permit the lessees to remove the
buildings if they chose TO do so before the
expiration of the lease, but upon their re-
fusal to do SO they reverted 10 the owners
of the land, the City.
The action in the case now finally de.
cided was brought by the Board of Educa-
ton against the lessees, John Grant and q
mum Der of others. to obtain possession of
the improvements on the property in
question. The action was brought by the
board acting upon the opinion rendered
by City and County Attorney CreswelI
that the Improvements belonged to the
City. In the Superior Court, however,
Judge Seawell decided that The buildings
belonged to the lessees. At the time that
Attorney CresweH declared that the City
owned the buildings there was loud
howl from the lessees. Yesterday's de-
cision will probably reawaken the indig-
nation.
The City has been represented in the
litigation by Attorneys CreswelI, Rodgers
and Paterson. The attorneys for the
lessees were Michael Mulaney and Ryland
Wallace. Ever since the expiration of
the lease, over two wears ago, the tenants
have been paving monthly ground
rental of about $500 for each 25-icot lot.
In view OF the decision 1t has been Sug-
gested that the City give only a short lease
on the property until bill can be passed
by the next Legislature allowing the City
to lease the land for lon /, term ana TO
SPECIFY the kind OF improvements to be
erected. If this was DONE" said prom
inent City official yesterday, .'the City
could see 10 it that only such improve
ments should be erected as were suitable
and in harmony with the surroundings
as they would be at the expiration of the
lease, say at the end of iorty years. Blu.
if long leases are made before such a law
is obtained the City would either have to
buy the tenants out or wait, before suit
able buildings would be erected"