The San Francisco call., 1898-04-20
TO SAVE THE \ WATER FRONT Many Reasons Advanced for Preventing Any
 Change.
E. c. Sessions Publishes His Views on the Subject at
 Some Length.
Does Not Believe a Change in Pier head Lines Advisable at
 Present
Oakland Office San Francisco Call.

sos Broadway, Aprl ls
 It being realized that the apparent in- activity of the Water Front Company at the meeting in San Francisco yesterday does not properly represent the feelings of the corporation in the proposed change of the pier-head line, a protest has been drawn up by the special attorneys for the city of Oakland and is to-day being ac- lively circulated. This protest is as fol- lows:
 -N To the United States Board of Engi- < e neers: The undersigned residents and 4 @ property owners of the city of Oakland, 4 ! respectfully and earnestly protest % d. against the proposed change of the pier 4 4 head line in front of the city of Oak < -h land. on the following grounds. viz: < -A That the change will be greatly to the < A injury of the United States. of the State 4 < of California and of the city of Oakland 4 \ and of the harbor itself < To the injury of the United States. in < 4 this. that if the pierhead line, at which * 4 ships may now lie in twenty feet of < -A water. is receded to the shore line, < 4 which is bare of water at low tide. deep 4 < water for ships must be made at the 4 < new line, necessarily at an enormous ex- 4 < pense to the Government. To retire the 4 4 perhead line is to efface the present < 4 harbor, which must be restored by < -S dredging or digging to a depth of twen- 4 < " feet. The effect of the change would 4 ( be not only 10 give Il WAleT lIOAIaSe v < t5 the owners of the shore line but to ' N force the Government to make harbor % % for their accommodation. A To the injury of the State of Califor- 4 < n.a in this. that the change would take 4 < from the State a large area now devoted < < to the erection of wharves and other < 4 aids to commerce under the dominion < 4 and control of the State, which would ! < be to deprive the State of the use of < ' its property without due process of law ' @ To the injury of the city of Oakland, ' < in this. that the change would under | 4 the present holdings of the courts shut 4 4 up all the avenues of commerce of that % < city by giving them into the hands Of 1 < private corporation, at whose mercy ao- < soiutely would lie the whole trade of the 1 < city and all the approaches by water < < To the injury of the harbor. in this, 1 < that the tidal flow would be sluggish 1 4 and not sufficient to SCOUT this portion 1 > af the estuary if the width in increased 4 between the points proposed. and the < curvature of the line is made greater ., within and | a distance from the mouth 4 of the estuary if the width is increased < be a continuous filling in front of the 1 < city.
 And further the petition asking for 1 < the said change of the pierhead line Is { < obviously not made in good faith. but I < solely for the purpose of vesting in the | < Oakland Water Front Company. mo- ' < nopoly q the entire water front under < < consideration.
 The protest will be presented at the con ference Thursday.
 E. C. Sessions. the agent for the sale c the water front in this city, made public long statement tonight in which he ar eues that the proposed pier-head chang is not only legal but practicable. althoug he admits that there is no need or In
 He says. T concur. however, in tn opinion that no sufficient argument az pears to be presented to warrant chang in the line in front of Oakland as at pres ent established"
 While it is not clear to the large major ity of the citizens what the proposed pier head change means, and how It conflict with the lines as already designate5 there is a general feeling based on nearl half a century of experience that if tn proposed plan were not for the benefit Q the Water Front Company, nothing woul have been heard of 1t. It has once mor called attention to the compromise of 1S6 upon which the people of this city vote favorably, and which was sanctioned b the Legislature. One of the best poste and most reliable residents of Oalllan said to-day: "The compromise of 1868 wa undoubtedly the best solution of the wa ter front question yet put forward Ha it been carried out in good faith by bot the city and the Water Front Company Oakland's water front controversy woul have ended then and forever. Unfortun ately the Water Front Company did nc improve it, did not do anything to furthe it's development by sales to others. bu hedged its leases around with all kinds c restrictions. all having but one end, tha of keeping out railroad competition. Q the other hand the city has per1odicall brought up the matter by throwing a kinds of clouds over the Water Fror Company's title, so that 1t could do notf ing. At the present time there is reall nothing more definite in regard to tit and boundary lines than there was in 1s6