The San Francisco call., 1908-07-03
FIRE DAMAGE LAID
TO SPRING VALLEY
Dockweiler Says Burning ot
City Was Due to Errors on
Part OF Company


main feeders Been laid ON solid ground
with view of avoiding the filed In and
marshy ground, water would have been
available for the fire department and
the destruction of the city would have
been avoided."-From afIidavtt of j. III.
Dockweiler, engineering expert for the
city.
"This proceeding may tie the hands
OF the city In the matter of water
rates, but should the court permit the
other party to disturb the status of the
wafer rate situation as 1T exists nowf'
"The question is, Whether this de-
fendant (thc city, could be restrained,
leaving the complainant free to act in
the rate matter."-Comments Of Judge
u. ,. harrington I'm the injunction suit
between the Spring Valley water COM
pany and the city.
United States Circuit Judge Edward
.. harrington brought out the crucial
point or the Injunction suit between the
spring Valley water company and the
city and county of San Francisco dur
ing the hearing yesterday afternoon
ana cleared the ground for argument
on the question OF what leeway the cor
poratlon would have if the petition for
an injunction in the pending rate case
were granted
Ihls proceeding may tie the hands
Oh the city in the matter of water
rates declared the court in discussing
point raised by the opposing counsel,
but should the court permit the other
party TO disturb the status of the water
rate situation as it exists now?"
Assistant City Attorney Thomas E.
raven responded that that was one of
the vital points at issue
All other orders in these injunction
n an
nave restrained the city from enforcing
other rates than those of 1902" he ex-
plalned He added that if the injunc-
tlon prayed for in the pending suit
were granted there would be no desig-
mated rate to be enforced.
The question is whether this defend
ant could be restrained, leaving the
complainant free to act in the rate mat
ter, continued Judge harrington.
The rate which is objected to in this
proceeding is a better rate than the
1902 schedule" Haven insisted There
is no object in this action other than to
leave the complainant free to do as it
pleases. This court should not disturb
the status which has been in existence
since 1902"
PARTRIDGE's AFFIDAVIT
Judge harrington suggested that it
would furnish a matter for argument
and Haven declared his intention of
going into the subject when the time
for the arguments came
Consideration of the far reaching in
fuences of the injunction demanded by
the Spring Valley water company came
early in the afternoon session. Haven
had introduced an affidavit of John S.
Partridge. former assistant city attor-
ney. who represented the city in pre-
vious suits brought by the water cor
poration. Partridge's affidavit was in
regard to the stipulation which he en-
tered into with NJ. B. Kellogg when
the latter was attorney for the Spring
Valley company. Kellogg had agreed
that no further petitions for tempo
rary injunctions should be filed by the
corporation during the tendency of the
actions then on trial
Attorney E. ]. McCutchen for the
complainant objected to the admission
of the affidavit on the ground that such
stipulation was beyond the power of
Kellogg to make and could not bind
the company. He added that Kellogg
was now dead.
Judge harrington agreed that the
corporation could not be bound by such
a stipulation and sustained the obiec-
ton. Then he took up the discussion
of the effect that an injunction would
have in tying the hands of the city
while 1T left the company free to collect
what rates it desired. The point that
the court might limit the scope of a
possible restraining order by leaving
the established rate in temporary ef-
feet was not introduced into the dis
cussion.
CITY PRESENTS ITS CASE.
The attorneys for the water COM
pany closed their case early Yesterday
,iro ToC,
the interstate commerce commission
and of the public service commission of
New York to the effect that a deterior-
alton fund was a proper expense Of a
corporation. Attorney Frank Powers
acting for Spring Valley. read affidavits
and testimony given at the former
hearings and then Haven began the
defense for the city. He read from and
summarized the formal answer of the
city to the complaint of the water com
pany. He stated that the city's case
would be in the form of affidavits, be-
cause, Ge declared, that at the prelim-
mary hearing 1t was not necessary to
introduce the main features of the
case.
In answer to the complaint, which
Haven read, the value Of the Spring
Valley water system was placed at be-
tween $20,000,00O and $24,000, 900 and
the allegation was made that the COM
pany had been paying dividends on g.
valuation in excess of the real value
of the property.
DISCUSS INTEREST RATES
McCutchen questioned the facts of
the answer, stating that the super
visors, in placing valuation on the
property, had deducted $SS0,000 as
damage done by the earthquake and
had made no allowance for $571 900
said to have been spent in repairs
Haven consulted with Supervisor
Murphy, who was in the courtroom,
and replied that some allowance had
been made.
In the afternoon Haven read from
the affidavits of City Attorney Percy v.
Long, giving the history of the pro-
tracted litigation, and of Supervisor
]. A. Johnston, chairman of the water
rates committee of the board, relating
the history of the fixing of the 1908
water rate and showing that the COM
pany was given sufficient hearing
McCutchen objected to the Johnston
aff1davit, and Judge harrington stated
that it did not seem to him that the
motives of the supervisors were i'm
portant. Haven pointed out that un-
der the state law it was important
that it be shown that the supervisors
gave the company full hearing be-
fore fixing the rate