The San Francisco call., 1905-01-04

| Oakland is, and the need of a State
policy in respect to water fronts appears
to be indicated. Such a policy should
be carefully considered, in order that
laws framed in accordance with it may
De liberal enough to- encourage enter
prise and yet conservative enough to
prevent monopolization of valuable
privileges and to protect the rights and
interests Of the State in waterfront
property. Commercial opportunities
are beneficial only as they are utilized.
and the building Of wharves, piers and
docks promotes the general welfare.
There should, therefore. be some we'll
guarded law under which the right to
occupy submerged State land, within
or near Incorporated cities for these
purposes may be facilitated and regu-
lated.
AS the LANDS under navigable water
are held by the State only in trust.
for the promotion of commerce, it can
never entirely ALLEVIATE such lands. and
it is question to be determined by the
State Government what the tenure OF
the occupants shall be. Some States,
like the State of Washington, on this
! coast, and the State of Massachusetts,,
on the Atlantic coast, grant leases for
long terms of years, and charge rentals.
If legislation should be had on this SUBJ
ject, and 1T should be determined that
the leasehold policy is the most expedi-
ent one for California, the rentals
should not be fixed so high as to deter
enterprise. The primary aim should
be to develop commerce; the collection
Of revenue from this source, while de-
sirahle in itself, Is secondary.
In referring to the filling in of State
land by the deposit of dredgings, the
Attorney General expresses the opinion
that lands raised above the water by
artificial means are not subject to the
principle that controls accretion, and
no legal title can be based on such act.
Several newspapers having published
articles making charges that the ex-
aminations of candidates for licenses by
the State Board of Pharmacy were not
fairly conducted, decided to order an
investigation. For this purpose Hon.
John F.. Davis, Code Commissioner;
Hon. G. r. Lukens, member of the
Senate, and Dr. F. w Hatch, general
superintendent of State hospitals, were
appointed a special commission and in
structed to inquire in a general way
into all the transactions of the board.
On August Is, 1904, the commission as
sembled in San Francisco and began
the investigation, which continued from
day to day until August %. The men,
bers of the Board of Pharmacy, a num-
Der of persons who had been candidates
at recent examinations and others were
examined, and the report of the COM
mittee, with a transcript of the testi-
mony taken, has recently been put in
my hands.
In brief, the conclusions reached by
the commission of investigation are
that the State Board Of Pharmacy has
served the purpose of it's creation by
regulating the practice of the profess
sion; that the charges made in the
newspaper articles before referred TO
had little foundation so far as they al
legged intentional unfairness or discrim-
ination between different candidates.;
that, nevertheless, sufficiently strict
regulations to exclude the possibility of
improper practices at examinations had
not been made and enforced; that it is
q mistake to maintain the Office of the
Board Of Pharmacy in the building of
one of two rival colleges of pharmacy;
that it is unjust, If not Illegal, to col
lect under the name of arrearages a
charge Of 81 q year from former Ii
centiates for all the years they may
have been out of practice or practicing
in some other State before they are al
lowed to recommence practice here,
and, finally, that there are a number
of amendments to the law which it
would be very desirable to make.
In accordance with the law which
prescribes that it shall be the duty of
the Governor to report to the Legisla-
ture at each session all judgments rem
dered against the State and not there
tofore reported, the following list OF
judgments is submitted, all of them be-
ing coyote scalp" cases: