The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-05-24

granting an extension. and that that discretion
courts. unless in case Of fraud. or hANRnt and
violent abuse.
No Right to BE Heard.
'rhe fact that petitions have been fled By own
ers Of tide lands falling within the operation Of
this contract would seem TO intimate that an
opinion entertained that the owners Of said
tide lands possessed some rights 10 be heard by
the commissioner On the application for an extern
sion unable 70 agree in this view. What,
owners BY The comuis,ioner would be s. privilege
and not a night. All tide land contracts entered
t1ac. were entered into with the express condition
attached that such tide lands were subject TO the
attach thereto upon the completion Of the con
ditions Of that contract The commissioner misht
advise with any che, as to the exercise Of his
discretion. but that Is matter for him alone
"second-Tt appears from the record transmitted
from your Office that on the ith day Of May 1900.
under T the pd DE
sppears Tat After due co1sideration on your part
and after consultation with this office as 70 your
granted the application and entered an order
tending the life Of said contracts for the period
Of four years beginning on the 9th Of October
This appears to have been done after a hearing
held by you at which the petitioner was required
to present evidence as to what had been done
by il during its contract and as 10 Its good feita
a condition precedent, tina. being that the petit
toner should recommence the construction Of said
waterway within ninety days from the date OF the
extension. tovit, from May I, 1900. This extension
given under the seal Of your Office WAS en-
tered Of record in your Office and was delivered
to the corporation petitioner.
II am Of the opinion that your discretion In the
premises Is exhausted and that the execution and
delivery of the extension Of the time. under the
terms Of the statute, erges said extension into the
original contract and makes it part Thereof. sub
ect always to the express condition and therefore
indefeasible
1T is alleged in the letter Of the president Of
the waterway company, accompanying the papers
handed by you, that certain financial nfgOtia-
tions and arrangements were dependent upon the
extension granted by you and closed and
executed immediately after the delivery TO the com
pany Of the order OF extension. and that the com
pany have entered into certain business arrsnge-
ments and extended certain moneys on the faith
Of the executed extension. These evidential mat
tiers 10 which l have no information and with
which I have concern
The condition Of the extension permitted and
required the resumption Of construction work with
in ninety days from May T. 1900. and the extension
may be avoided and defeated in way by
the failure Of the contractor to fuldl thN condi-
tons precedent
I'm conclusion. therefore. advise you that you
have power to cancel annul avoid the extern
sion Of this contract until ninety DAYS from the
date Of its execution, then unless the company
shall have failed to renew in good faith the work
Of construction Of the waterway Inclosed hand
you the files received from your office: Very re-
spectfully. "THOS. NJ VANCE,
Assistant ATTORNEY General"