The herald., 1898-02-01
ANGELES HERALD TUESDAY MORNING. FEBRUARY {. 1898

<<&A~&<S 4OGhSAAx Nx&$k<ANA4N\e
board of engineers to pass upon that por
tion of Engineer Dockweiler's plans TO
new water system which pertains TO tn
headworks system. including conduit ant
reservoir. Second. to afford the peopl
| an opportunity to vote for bonds to con
struct said headworks system. provide'
4 no legal objections exist. Third, 10 SUP
init to the water company plan for ar
| bitrating the question of the value OF TN
| improvements made to the plant.
This report at the time of its readlnt
| was referred to the city attorney Tor MI
! opinion as to any legal objections to TN
active prosecution of the work proposed.
| In report filed in council August y 1917
| signed by the city attorney and Messrs
Lee and Scott of counsel, an opinion II
given averse to the first two recommenda
| tions of the committee, but favorable u
| the last recommendation to arbitrate.
Based upon Mr.. Ashman's resolution tt
| Immediately proceed to arbitration, IN
| structions were received from your hon
orable body, August IL, 1897, to notify the
water company that 1t was the desire o.
the city to submit to arbitration the ques
ton of the value of the improvements
! made to the plant. On the same day q
letter was mailed. addressed to the dul!
| authorized representatives of the water
| company. communicating the desire Oh
your honorable body to proceed at once to
arbitration.
Under date of August 10, 1897 reported
to council August %, 1897. a letter was re-
ceived from the water comptny stating
inability to definitely reply to the request
to arbitrate until the return to the city
of their legal advisor.
On September Z. 1897, no further reply
having been received from the water COM
pany regarding arbitration, the city attor-
ney, in answer to request of council. re-
ported that "if the contract entered into
July 20, 1865. which expires July 10Th OF next
year, is valid, the water company cannot
be compelled to arbitrate until after the
expiration of the contract rs provided
therein" At the same session OF the coun-
ell Mr.. Hutchison's motion prevailed re-
questing that the city attorney prepare
an opinion as to the legality OF the water
works contract of 1868. As has been here
tofore stated. this council has ever been
averse to assuming any position which
would in any way commit the city authori-
ties upon the question of the validity OF
the contract. deeming it of prime impor-
tance that the legal department should be
free from such useless limitations in the
conduct of matter of such import, where
such grave legal questions entered so
largely into its solution.
In keeping with this request, the city
attorney reported to council September Il
1897, n letter from Messrs. Lee and Scott
of counsel concurred in by Mr.. Dunn
in which counsel, after citing good and
valid reasons for such advice. admonished
the council against insisting upon fiat
opinion as to the validity of contract.
However, a majority of the council de-
manded a fiat opinion thereon. ana the
same was filed during that session of coun-
ell. Said opinion held that those por-
tions of the contract are valid and bind
ing which relate to property rights in the
improvements and increments made by
the water company to the plant originally
turned over to it by the city. and to the
obligations of both parties to submit the
value of such improvements and incre-
ments to arbitration and obligation of the
city to pay to the company the value
thereof so ascertained. and that the rights
of the city arising under these provisions
of the contract can be enforced
In the presence of two legal opinions.
one of which decides that if contract is
valid the water company cannot be forced
to arbitrate before expiration of said con-
tract. while the other decides that this
is a valid one. the question of en-
forcing arbitration at this time was quite
disposed Of
On November %. 1897, a numerously
signed petition was filed asking that coun-
ell "at once take the necessary steps for
calling a bond election to build an entirely
new water system for the city of Los An
geles.' Said petition was referred to
this committee and by it duly considered
at a meeting held December 2. 1897. of
which meeting the following are the min
utes:
Meeting of the water supply committee,
December 2. 1897.
"Present-Chairman Nickel and Messrs
Blanchard and Toll of the committee.
Meeting was called to consider the Pc
tition asking that steps be taken mmedi-
ately to build an entirely new system of
water works for the whole city.
Upon examination of the petition it
was found to have been signed by 1881 cit
zens of all classes.
ut appearing that legal complications
might arise from granting the request of
the petitioners. on motion the secretary
was instructed. with the City Attorney
Dunn and associate counsel Lee and
Scott for Joint meeting. at which time
the legal phases could be discussed.
Agreeable with this action of the COM
mittee. a meeting was arranged for De-
,ember 8, 1897, of which the following are
the minutes:
Meeting of the water supply committee,
Present-Chairman Nickel and Messrs.
Blanchard and Toll of the committee. the
mayor. members of the council, attorneys
Of petitioners and of city and interested
citizens.
petition was read by the secretary and
the desires of the petitioners explained by
Judge Wright. After full discussion of the
various phases of the question involved,
It was moved and seconded that the COM
mittee report to the council. making two
"First-That no steps be taken at this
time looking toward the immediate con-
of a new system of water works;
and
Second-That steps be taken at once
looking to the determination of the value
lf the improvements made by the water
upon the water plant, in keeping
with the conditions of the contract under
which the water company are now operat-
ing, the object being to perform any acts
necessary to enable the city to provide the
necessary funds to pay for said improve
ments at the expiration of the present
lease, July %, 1885,"