Los Angeles herald., 1907-10-25

relative no the water deal in Pasadena
has had the effect Of forcing the present
administration to make public part Of
the correspondence between Dillon &
Hubbard and two former city attorneys
of Pasadena.
Dillon & Hubbard were engaged by the
Vedder administration to advise as to
the procedure in all matters relative to
the issuance of bonds for the purpose of
acquiring municipal ownership OF water.
All of the correspondence between the
attorneys for the city and Dillon &
Hubbard, which is now accessible to The
Herald representatives discloses the fact
that the advice of the special counsel
engaged at cost to the city of $500
was ignored and that counsel was allowed
to draw inferences from premises which
were not true.
When asked as to whether the city
should allow the citizens to vote on two
alternative propositions and decide as to
whether the water systems should be
acquired by an amicable agreement and
sale or by condemnation proceedings, the
firm of Dillon & Hubbard replied: 'It
would seem much better, If it is prac-
ticable, to make an amicable agreement
which would be binding upon the water
| companies and binding upon the city
| only in the event of vote of the people
being had in favor of the acquisition of
the plant upon such terms"
The misunderstanding
! Under date of January 81. 1905. C. j.
Willett, who was then city attorney,
replied: IAN agreement has been
reached with two of the said companies.
and with third an offer has been made,
| but not accepted"
4 hou at n
THAT pas binding should be xlsfles ann
1 having received reply that an agree
| ment had been made 1t would be the nat
urai inference that the character OF thu
agreement was in accordance with she
advice.
! Under date of March 80. 1906 Dillon &
| Hubbard wrote: 1--WE suggest that you
should have an abstract of title made OF
! the various properties purchased by the
CITY, showing that the title which the
| city proposes to take is good and free
| from membranes by way of mortgage,
tax liens, assessment liens or any other
incumbrance, and also free from any
pending suits in state or federal courts;
covering all these things down to the
| time of the actual delivery of and re-
cording of the deeds, the same as in any
other transfer of title of property We
assume that you, as city attorney, VIII
also see that the proceedings on behalf
of the vendor companies, authorizing the
| sale and conveyance of the properties
purchased by the city, have been prop
| erly taken, and also that the conveyance
made by the vendor companies are IN
due form and such other matters as may
| occur to you as necessary to give the
CITY a clear title to the property free
| from incumbrance, and also to see that
the city gets full, actual possession OF
| the same.
| ultimately we shall desire to have
your opinion that the city has acquired
free and unincumbered title to the
properties purchased"
Agreement Not Possible
The city at no time had a binding
agreement with either of the companies.
The city never agreed to buy the Pasa-
dena Land and Water company's prop
erty after they asked to have it included
in the agreement that the city would re-
/ spect the obligations of the company
toward South Pasadena.
| The directors of the Lake Vineyard
company also imposed such an obligation
upon the city which was not accepted.
Further than that it has just been made
public and Mayor Farley claims that he
only recently learned the fact that the
! vote taken by the stockholders Of the
Lake Vineyard Land and Water company
was not carried by a two-thirds majority
! of the entire stock. That 1t did carry was
been refuted by the company until
recently.
The lack of the necessary majority
would therefore make an agreement OF
the company impossible. yet Attorney
Willett stated in his letter that such an
agreement had been reached even though
he was advised that he should certify
to the fact of the proceedings Of the
| company being taken in conformity with
| its constitution and the laws of the
state. The California state law holds
that a sale cannot be made in such
a case without two-thirds vote In IA
vor, leaving it implied only that it
can be made with a two-thirds affirma-
tive vote.
No Abstract Prepared
The advice of Dillon & Hubbard rela-
tive TO an abstract Of title was also ig-
nored and no su6h abstract was prepared
except in the case of the "Narrows
1t has been freely stated that It is be-&
lieved to be impossible for either CON-
pany to perfect, certificate of title
their properties. and until such is dq
according to Dillon e. Hubb
no transfer Of the properties could q
l'place.
Dillon & Hubbard further advised un-
der date of March 30. 1906 'Tnasmuch IS
| we suppose the vendor companies are
| selling out their whole properties, the
proceedings of the directors authorizing
the sale to the city should be confirmed
and approved by the stockholders of
the respective vendor companies at the
stockholders meeting regularly convened,
and a vote taken by stock vote and en-
tered on record. II possible II Is desir-
| able that the stockholders shall consent
| unanimously TO such sale.H
| The Lake Vineyard. company dlo not