The San Francisco call., 1904-02-04
MAYOR SIGNS
GARBAGE LAW
Ills Honor Declares That to
Veto CremstOry Bill Would
Involve City in Litigation
ToLERATES NO NUISANCE
Plant Must BE Conducted on
Sanitary Lines Is the EX-
ccutive'S Firm Resolution
Oakland Office san Francisco call,

90 Ills Broadway, Feb. B.
Mayor OInay approved the garbage
crenatorv ordinance to-day. His Hon
or's chief reason for signing the bill
v-az that 10 veto il meant prolonged
litieation and the strong proDaolllty
that the incinerating company would
take up the first contract made WAh
the corporation by the city and WIN
if. the courts That contract. the May
or be1eved was a bad one for the city
and. IN short he accepts the new oIul-
nance as a matter Of making the pest
OF a bad bargain.
IN a written statement OF MS reds-
ors for signing the ordinance Mayor
Olney declares;
F1rst-It sis an eleynentarT principle that
The executive 0f any Government shQulo hSt
set itsef iu opposition te the lesis.aIlle o,Iy 10y
vince6 beyond a reassaahle doubt that The law
is bad-
veto sustained. then the ineil , c,llll
pany wogid fall Hacl. i'n the ordina6ce passed
bv The preceding Council That ordinance as
most Objectionable Its worst features are
er.rliuarel from The new one, and it mas been
acoertad Do lieu of the 0l& tTgier the decision
of the United states Esrcuit Ceurt ~ SppeaLs
tn a g1n Francis60 case. decided in November
laet. D.. is probable that the courts would ~
hol6 rAe ril ordinance. thereby n;slidsg scsir
situation much wor@e than IL ss possible 10 ee
under TIE new ordiuaree
LITIGATION WOULD RESULT.
AT amy rate. expensive litigation swould re-
sult There is mistaken l5fssl that our Su-
pericr Court Judges decided the old ordinSncs
Invalid AID thats was. before the court and.
therefore, al rhats c0eid De decided So as -
have aay bindins effect. was that the start
inE Ct Che creUat-ry could nSt pe enJoined
public nuisance. that is. its Rctual Op-
cation must 1rove Is. be nuisance before
tle courts VIII interfere
Thirt-It is claimed that recent scientific
methoc@ can burn sartf-Ee WsSnOur ouenss to
any ~ Che senses anas the a3rdinaner contsm-
plates tle e-ecuon-o 20 such a crema1ory. But
d. when The crcmarorr starts mp, this claim Is
shown fo he uuf0undel and the cre5ratOry in
its Operation becomes offensive 10 health, or
creates bad smells. sse courts viii undOubt-
AS it is on the windward sfle y cur citys
it BIS F4t West oakland proper that viii suf-
@ -l--.lat lail t- sNaAidlu ~ lnF
cast ~ me clematcry-. y II Is offensive IN
actua3 operation "a large part OF our city viii
BE IN arms against eit9 and the result Of pro-
eeeqines to anate IL cannot be doubted.
FouTth-lt seems 10 be the cons ansus ot
cpinlon that the best way 10 dispose Of gar
baEe is no burn it o. Assuming chat such is the
case. where shall the place ~ burning be 10
catee. Where ought it 70 be located in Oak
,a',e "a Aanitestly as far sWay from human
tirne reasonably accessEle 70 teams
SITE Is REMOTE.
The proposed SITE iss Tweuty-f5urth and
Woe streets. about three blocks e-est Of the
present public pCuuds and in q silt marsh
vsthtut = residence within three blocks. It
is near the tracks Of r41e Southetu Pacific
ffzilroad With or without the CreruatOry. all
The land about the proposed site ~lu surely
b. 5evCted 10 manufa ctlsrfnss purposes and not
10 residences If thera are fumes that Will be
come offensive. IL VIII be so only To those
places gnere the wind csrries the tunes.
TINS administration viii certainly insist
thai the crematory shall not be offensive, and
IT. is natural TO suppose that any succeeding
administration VIII do iksV-ise. In fact pub
Die ssntlplent al ever the city viii demand
thare no part ~ our people shall be required
20 endLre "a public nuisance The law and
public sentiment T8lls be in accord on thet
proposition.
nave csrefuily considered all the reasoRs
SO atly presented by delegations from West
and North Oakland Ehy 7 Should veto the
ordinance. and. after such consideration, the
foregoing reasons indace me- not 20 take
issue with the Council unou this question
ResDec -ully. WARREN OLNEN, Mayor
Since the foregoing was written a protest
hy the Women civic Impr0VemenDo Club has
been handed me. The foregoing should also
be considered as my reply TO that protest
] do not willingly &c counter Il the wishes
a. that organization. hUt cannot take the re-
reason that 7 am not satisfied that il IS my
duty 70 do SO. That ssiuty sRosld be impera-
tive 70 call for such drastic action and thereby
plunge the city into litigation and into the
chaotic randiticn. as tcfhis important subject
that has So iong obtaieed
WARREN OLNEY.,