The San Francisco call., 1909-11-14
JAMES A. JOHNSTON

question by asking: In your opinion.
then, judge. the city can consider no
offer unless il is an outright offer 10
sell the whole plant for stated
price?"
That is my view replied the judge.
Suppose We wanted only part of the
system?n asked Supervisor d'Ancona.
The offers as presented must con-
stitute a public utility" replied Lind
ley.
Supervisor McAIlister thought the
city could proceed TO acquire Spring
Valley by adjustment, as IL had school
lands, but Mayor Taylor answered that
the charter provisions made that i'm
possible.
What effect will this have on the
legal aspect of the coming bond elec-
tion?" asked Michael Casey.
In the opinion of the law depart
ment," responded Lindley, 1T could
have no legal effect"
These offers" cut in Mayor Taylor
amount to nothing legally They are
so much waste paper, as far as they
are legally concerned"
WOULD RAISE RATES
Supervisor Murphy pointed out that
the purchase Of the distributing sys-
TEN and water at the company's fig
ures would mean a so per cent raise in
rates.
It's bad. therefore, economically as
well as legally" commented the mayor
I understand" interposed Lindley,
that under the first offer the COM
pany's receipts would equal the present
figure, and it would be released from
the necessity of keeping up its distrib-
uting system
The first proposition" said John
ston, is impossible economically
Mayor Taylor inquired as to the
status of the pending litigation
The final arguments will be made in
March before Judge harrington" an
swered Assistant City Attorney Nourse.
Judge Harrington is pretty good
arbitrator if we're going to arbitrater
said the mayor dryly.
The offer of arbitration should not
be lightly cast aside aside" observed
Supervisor Connolly. Let us bear in
mind that this corporation is the one
public service corporation that refused
10 corrupt public officials. We ought
TO give that matter consideration.
do not see how the offer to arbitrate
can - accepted. but l would not cast it
lightly aside
CORRECTs POPULAR ERROR
THE pending bond issue must be
submitted at this time or indefinitely
postponed, asserted Lindley. There
viii be new registration next Jan
uary- The question has arisen as to
the effect on the Spring Valley propo-
sition OF this bond issue. Let me cor
rect a common error. The ability of
the city to bond does not depend on the
bonds voted, but it depends on the is
sued bonds. If the city carries the
bond issue and the question of acquir-
ing Spring Valley should come up there
would be no difficulty in the city TAX
ing the proper action on the situation
as it arises. There is no reason why,
with Lake Eleanor under development
Spring Valley could not be acquired
The bond issue does not preclude us
from dealing with Spring Valley"
Mayor Taylor desired that the point
be emphasized that the city incurs no
debt by voting bonds, but only by is
suing them.
Many of us believe" he added that
we need Sierra source. even if we had
Spring Valley. The city will never be
on a firm foundation until we have
both"
Suppose" suggested Connolly. "the
arbitrati ton board fix price what is to
prevent the Spring Valley company
from submitting an offer at that price?7
This drew from Lindley a bit of
"Reminiscences which indicated his loss
of faith in the pretentions to SINCERITY
IN Spring Valley. He told of a long
friendship with ]. MeCutchen lead
ing attorney for the Spring Valley.
Every day I talked with McCutchen
of this matter. said Lindley Il sim
cereIy believed that was in a position
to do some good. to put an end to the
differences and bring the question to |
solution. told McCutchen on one oc-
casion that it was time for Spring VAL
ley to call its stock holders together
and TO submit to the city an offer to
rrf
He said that he would not invite the |
supervisors to any conference. / said, |
We will invite you. VIII you consider |
that? He said he'd consider it, The |
next day l heard that Spring Valley |
had gone to Washington. The next I !
heard the company was in Washington !