The San Francisco call., 1910-10-20
MCNAB GIVES HIS
BOND ISSUE VIEWS
Tells Why He Thinks Property
Should Not Be Bought
by State

Editor. Call: In The Call this morn
ing you make a misstatement in regar
to the India basin bond proposition in
stating that the opposition to the pro-
ject is personal to myself. You surely
must have knowledge of the resolutions
unanimously adopted by the represen-
tatives of the great shipping interests
of the port. the Ship Owners associa-
tion of the Pacific coast. which read
as follows
Whereas This association considers It
would be a great injustice TO divert reve-
nues from chipping for the purpose OF buying
real estate for a so called inland barhor. as
San Francisco does not need such harbcr.
as the natural water front IN our safe and
land locked harboT when properly equipped
with modern docks will take care Of all
the commerce that will ever come 70 this
port. and that without buying one foot OF
additional land. and
Whereas The proponents OF this so
called India basin act bond issue claim
that the people OF the state viii not con-
tribute TO the payment of these bonds, and
that the herbor revenues will meet the IN
terest and sinking fund, but every shipper
10 San Francisco hsrbor and every consumer
VIII pay his pro rata. the tolls aud
dockage. already too high. will be raised to
meet this added and unnecessary burden.
Resolved, That the Ship Owners asso-
citation Of the Pacific coast indorses the
COO bond issue for needed harbor i'm
provements for San Francisco hafbor and
urges the favorable consideration Of them by
every voter In the state.
Resolved That the Ship Owners associa-
tion of the Pacific coast does not indorse
the 81 10000 bend issue for what is known
as the India basin act bonds. and earn
estly urges that all voters throughout the
state vote against this unnecessary and
pernicious bond issue.
The American Shipmasters' associa-
tion of the Pacific coast has unanimous
ly passed similar resolutions. as have
other maritime and harbor organiza-
tions.
On vote of the Merchants exchange
of this city, when this measure was up
for consideration before. the vote stood
207 against the proposition. SO for.
While the trustees of the chamber of
commerce have felt it better to indorse
the India basin issue, fearing that op-
position might defeat the $4,000. .OOe
issue for harbor improvements, great
many feel that the $4,000, 900 bond is
sue will stand a better chance if voted
upon on its merits and the India basin
bond issue dropped.
According to the views of The Call it
would be imagined that if the real es-
tate owners in the India basin lands
and the group of aggressive Mission
promoters should agree on this matter.
the general interests of the harbor
should quietly acquiesce. whereas those
two interests are minor to the great
question as to the needs and future
of our harbor. You state that if the
harbor question stands the $4,000. 900 in
bonds for development and construc-
tive work, it should not object to the
81 200. 600 for this real estate purchase.
The s9.000,000 bond issue will be voted
for by the people of the state under
the belief that the money from those
bonds will only be expended at such
times and under such conditions as the
revenues of the harbor will make
profitable. The s1,O0O.O0O India basin
is for fiat purchase of real
estate that in the very nature of it
can only be a dead load on the rev.
enue of the harbor for generations to
come. JAMES McNAB.
San Francisco, October Is.