The San Francisco call., 1898-02-12
THE FAIR
 HEIRS ARE
 VICTORIOUS Judge Hebbard Says They Are Entitled
 to the Lots. Court Finds That the State Legally Disposed of
 the Property. HarbOr OnnissiOners and the Pacific Gas Improvement Company Also Lose.
INJUNCTIONS TO BE ISSUED
All the Claimants to the Land Win Now Have to Cease From
 Interfering,

The State has lost its suit against Charles A. Warren and Edward Malley, James s. Angus, executor of the last will of James G. Fair; Charles G Fair Theresa A. Oelrichs and Virginia Fair which was instigated some time ago tc recover possession of a number of so- called water lots" at North Beach.
 Judge J. c. B. Hebbard yesterday rendered a decision in the case, and besides declaring the claim of the State illegal, decided against the State Board of Harbor Commissioners and the Pa cific Gas Improvement Company, and ordered that permanent injunction be issued restraining the claimants from interfering with the rightful owners of the property in litigation. In part, Judge Richards decision is as follows:
 The State of California sues to quiet title, claimed by 1t by virtue of its sovereignty under the act of admission into the American Union to certain prop erty, being about 100 acres of land lying under water at a depth varying from one to twenty-three feet and comprising an inlet of the Bay of San Francisco lying north of the city between the Govern ment reservations. the PreSid1o on the west and Fort Mason on the east, and to prevent by injunction certain alleged treSpass thereon
 The defendants, Warren MaLey, are contractors, who have been engaged in retaining the property, under contract with the representatives of Fair and with permission of the Board of Supervisors
 The other defendants, the representa- tives of James U. Fair, deceased and his heirs at law, admit the acts which con- stitute the alleged trespass; admit that the State originally had title, but claim hoT tha +afa a troVersy to the predecessors in interest of Fair, and that he acquired title there to in his lifetime and held the same at the time of his death, and that. as own CTS of the property and having permits from the Board of Supervisors, they have the right to proceed with the work of re- claiming and improving the blocks and
 The case Involves the two main ques- tions:
 F'irst-Did the State have power to con-
 secondNDid the State convey these lands to airs grantors?
 The court on these points decides the decision being based on numerous precedents-that the State had the eDower to convey the lands in question. and by a preponderance Of evidence 1t was proved that James G. Fair during his life did acquire the title to the lands through a legal transfer on the part of the State Such being the facts of the case" the court continues:
 The only remaining question is as to the dedication of the streets involved. This the board did, and all of such streets appear upon the map adopted by the board under the act.
 A further dedication of these streets is shown by the sale of blocks and lots ac- cording to the map, delineating the blocks as being bounded by streets laid down thereon and being uniform with the streets running through the uplands ter minating at the inlet
 It is therefore the opinion Of the court. after carefully considering the rights Of the people of the State of California, as well as the rights of the States grantees of this property, that the State, as sover- eign, has right to convey into private ownership parcels of it's submerged land, where the same can be done without det- riment to commerce, and that the Legis- lature, in the absence of fraud, has the right to determine as to that fact.
 The State issued its patent to portion of the land; subsequently, water-lfne front of the city was established, and thereafter the State, through it's officers, authorized thereto and under acts of the Legislature passed for the purpose, exc cuted deeds to the property lying within the water-line front conveying that por- ton thereof not called for in the patent and confirming the title to the portion contained within the patent.
 The State has parted with its title to these premises; that title passed to the predecessors in interest of James G. Fair: Fair bought it and was possessed of 1t when he died, and Fairs heirs and rep resentatives are therefore entitled to a decree herein quieting their title as against the State, and dissolving the tenn porary injunction issued herein at the in- stance of the State, and to the effect that the other defendants herein the contrac- tors, may proceed with the work of re- claiming the property from the waters of the inlet, under their lawful authority so to do.
 It is likewise the opinion of the court, in the case of Angus ct al, executors of the last will of James c. Fair, deceased, against Colnon ct al., constituting the Board of State Harbor Commissioners and the Pacific Gas Improvement Com pany, submitted to the court for decision with this case, that the preliminary in- junction issued. restraining defendants from interfering with plaintiffs in the possession of this property, or from in- terfering with Warren & Malley, their contractors. be made perpetual, and that any other injunctions, issued in either of these cases. at variance or inconsistent with the conclusions above stated, be dissolved. It is the prevailing opinion among lawyers who read the decision that | Judge Richards interpretation of the law involved in the case is the correct one, and that the decision will stand In the higher courts
 --