Los Angeles herald., 1906-06-20
BUTLER REPLIES
TO GOV. PARDEE
DISCUSSES FAR-FAMED AND
UNSIGNED LETTER
Members OF Consolidation Commission
Take Up Statements Of Psrdee.
Declare Provisions Of Amend
n1ent Mlslnterpreted

dation commission has addressed a
communication to Governor Pardee, In
reply to the governors letter to the
guests at the dinner recently given
by the Municipal league. and which
was published several days ago. AT
the time the governors letter was re-
celved in Los Angeles Mr.. Butler was
in Inyo county on a business trip and
he did not learn of the position taken
by the governor until his return to
this city last Monday.
In his reply to this letter the presi-
dent of the commission takes exception
to several statements made by the
states executive regarding the efforts
which were made to secure the In
clusion of constitutional amendment
in the call for an extra session of the
legislature, and makes reply to a num-
ber of questions that were asked in
language that is Enthusiastically plain
Accompanying President Buffers let
ter to the governor is letter from
Walter F. Haas and addressed to Mr.
Butler as president of the commission,
in which the legal aspects of the case
are carefully considered.
Mr.. Haas contends that the gov
ernor and his advisers have grossly
mIsinterpreted the provisions both of
the amendment prepared by Mr.. Haas
and the general incorporation act.
President Buffers letter is as follows:
Replies to Governor
los ANGELES. June 1s. 1soe.--Hon.
George c. Pardee. governor State OF Cali
fornia, Sacramento. California;
Your Excellency-UP my return 10
Los Angeles ! found your letter o. June
a. In my communication To You Of the
18th inst 1 answered fully all your con-
tentfons regarding the useE1uE with your
self, Judge Snooks- Motley n FLINT and
myself You ask me Does De gMorlsy II.
Flint say that either Judge SrsQ.1ss Or
myself made the statement EJgsU attribute
TO usT Yes, Mr.. Flint eDrrultorEEss my
statement regarding tine U-Esrvusw when
you promised TO insert tire eic1.S'1ll1z 51on
matter in the call.
"As regards any fntsrTisr that have
had with newspapers. do MT deny OF az
firm any of them. / have been interviewed
so frequently and miS1uotsi upon so
many occasions that 1 VIII not permit
you to draw me into a newspaper contro-
versy to extricate yourself from your
awkward position.
Your attention is directed to the en-
closed statement from Walter F. Haas.
ex-city attorney and member OF the law
sion, who drafted said section of the con-
stitution, as bearing upon the general
municipal incorporation act, as contained
in General Laws, 1903, page 63S, ct seq.,
1t is apparent that your position is un-
tenable, and you will also see that it re-
mains for the legislature to pass a new
law authorizing supervisors, or some other
properly constituted body, to call an cleo
ton for the new district, which power the
board of supervisors does not now possess.
You will also observe that said act does
not provide means by which communi-
ties could be forced into consolidation
without their consent, so that all you have
written win reference to forcing COM
munitieS into the consolidation on account
of existing general laws is absurd.
You seem to want to maintain that
whatever was Incorporated in the call
would become law upon the statute
books of California, while you ought to
know that in placing any matter in the
call with reference to consolidation 1t
would be necessary for the state legislat-
ure to pass upon the proposed amend
ments. and the legislature also. could
make anv substitutions desired. You had
ample opportunity to bring out all of these
they are now being used by you for the
first time, and they have come as an
afterthouGht. When the Los Angeles
committee appeared before you and the
San Francisco committee, your sole eX-
cuse for not inserting the matter In the
call was that it would let down the bars
for various legislation. Now that was
the only excuse you gave until you were
taken to task by the Los Angeles news
papers and then you looked around for
additional excuses and then, and only
then, was the so-called Young amend
ment, ETC., made use of.
You ask If you consider your re-
quest had been granted, why did you
again appear at my temporary office and
arrange for a meetin~ between Messrs.
Washburn, Koepfi and myself? I did
not appear at your office and arrange for
the meeting. / understand that both
Washburn and Koeptli called on you to
brace you up and urge you to keep faith
with our committee, as a member of the
consolidation commission had learned that
you We're getting 'wobbly' on the mat
ter OF including consolidation in the call
1t was rumored that pressure was being
brought to bear upon you to cause you
to change your mind, and friends of the
Sonsolldation plan deemed 1t advisable to
have you keep the promise given me upon
my first visit to your office.
In your now far-famed and unsigned
letter that you sent out broadcast to
members of the consolidation commission
and the gentlemen who attended the BAN
quet given here, you stated that at the
first meeting that had with you that you
referred me to the San Francisco com
mtttee. You state this in your character
istic way as cold fact l am sorry to
disabuse your mind along that line, for
nothing about the San Francisco com
mittee, nor had 1 ever heard of such a
committee, nor did you state to me that
such committee existed at that time
In answer to your other question and
why II YOU considered your request had
been granted, was it considered necessary
70 1olloW up my suggestion that the mat
ter be laid before the San Francisco COM
mittee by the Los Angeles committee p
You had weakened to such an extent and
passed up the matter to the San Fran
cisco committee so that it was necessary
for us to go before this committee lest
the whole matter should fail. We were
earnestly trying to have the consolida-
tton matter In the call, and did not hesi-
tate 70 again thrash out the matter be-
fore the committee.
Il now consider this matter between
you and me closed incident.
Yours very truly,
IS. A. BUTLER"
Mr.. Haas Writes Letter
Following is the letter addressed by
Mr.. Haas to President Butler, to which
reference is made in the communica
tion to the governor:
June 19-To S. A. Butler, president OF
the Consolidation Commission:
My dear Mr. Putler-With all due def.
erence 20 the legal ability Of Hon TireS
i. Fofd, JucBe Snooks and Judge Davis,
deslfe TO say that insofar as the opinion
that seems to have been given by these
gentlemen to Governor Pardee as pub
nshed In a recent issue of the Express 1.
concerned. II Is apparent that these gen,
tlemen ala not carefully consider the pro
visions OF the amendment proposed an(
drafted by myself, and proposed by ia,
committee, nor did they carefully eonsidel
the language Of the so-called municipa
incorporation act as found on page b3S
et seq. OF general laws of California 1909
referred 10 In said opinion.