STEAM HEATED HOT AND COLD BATHS
\ Copper Block Hotel
• VALDEZ, ALASKA
“The House of Comfort”
phone 7 - FOR MEN ONLY
Do Your Christmas
Shopping Early
An Excellent Line of
Nugget and Ivory Chains; Rings, Scarf Pins, Brooches,
Fobs and Cuff Buttons from which to choose.
A Brand New Selection of
Hand Painted China in Writing sets; Ash Trays, Placques.
A Large Assortment of Toys.
OWL DRUG CO.
Same Location New Management
If You Want
strictly fresh Eggs, Butter, Fruit
and Groceries, and appreciate
prompt deliveries, try
KING’S GROCERY
Phone 1SS
Independent Laundry Co.
Satisfaction Guaranteed | I Foot Keystone Ave
Telephone 86 ' I Rouirh Dry lCc lb
When in Chitina Stop at the
CHITINA HOTEL
Finest Hetel in the Interior—Well Heated, Clean Rooms.
Bar in Connection. Rates Reasonable
NOTICE OF RECEIVER’S BARE.
Notice is hereby given that the un
dersigned, receiver of the Cameron
Johnson Gold Mining Company, will
■ell at public aution to the highest
oidder for cash, on Tuesday, Decem
ber 21, 1915, at 10 o’clock a. m., at
the front door of the federal court
house in Valdez, Alaska, the follow
ing real and personal property, to
wit: _ _
Divide. Columbia Gold Certificate,
Treasury Note, Walloper, Muzzier,
Spike No. 1,, Spike No. 2, Spike No.
J, Spike No. 4, Spike No. 5, Spike No.
«, Spike 'No. 7, Spike No. 8, Alvarez,
Gazook, Quartez, Gazabo, Lallapa
ioosa, Mazumsv, Montezuma, all being
lode claims, a'nd the Gold Basin,
Cashier and Paymaster placer claims.
One-fourth interest in the Lorraine
Fraction lode claim and a right of
way over said Lorraine Fraction lode
mining claim and the Nellie placer
mining claim for pipe line purposes;
together with all buildings on said
claims.
Also the following personal prop
erty, to-wit:
1 5-stamp Kisden mill with plates
and ore feed complete.
1 7-foot Lane mill with full equip
ment.
1 7x9 ore crusher.
2 concrete tables.
1 Pelton water wheel, shafting, belt
ing, pulley wheels, etc., to equip
mill.
1 gasoline hoist 15 h. p.
2 extra sets shoes and dies for stamp
mill.
1 gasoline hoist 8 h. p.
1 Trenton Iron Work's tram, 3800
feet tn length with terminals, ore
towers, buckets and complete
equipment.
1 steel pipe line for power, graduated
11-in. to S-in., 1400 feet in length,
with a diversion dam, head gates,
nozzles, etc., complete.
1 mine car.
2 blacksmith equipments complete.
Approximately 600 feet mine rails.
600 lbs. drill steel.
1700 lbs. powder.
1000 ore sacks, new.
800 ore sacks, old.
125 cases distillate.
15 cases coal oil,
25 cases gasoline.
1 2-horse wagon, new.
2 complete cooking equipments.
Complete bedding for five bunks.
1 dory.
1 small rowboat.
4 miles insulated telephone wire.
4 telephone instruments complete.
1 ton oats.
Sundry miners’ and carpenters' tools.
Such sale will be made pursuant to
an order duly made and entered in
the district court for the Territory of
Alaska, Third Division, on the 20th
day of November, 1915.
W. M. GOODWIN,
Receiver of the Cameron-Johnson
Gold Mining Company.
First publication Nov. 22, 1915.
Last publication Dec. 13, 1915. 5t
Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh
TO-NIGHT
Charlie Chaplin
The Funniest Man In the Movies
"' in a Two-Reel Special Feature
“HIS PREHISTORIC PAST”
AT THE
LIBERTY THEATRE
nm pi
(400 A HEAD
(Continued from Page Two.)
nance making it a penal offlse to use
the service of such company, and for
the company to make any charge for
its service? Would this not be con- j
flscation of property without just
compensation, and indeed absolute
destruction of property in violation
of all constitutional principles?
In addition to any property righto
the defendant has, the situation is
shown to be that many valuable im
provements, business houses and oth
er structures, have been erected ad
jacent to defendant’s wharf; the town
has been built largely with reference
to the main artery or thoroughfare
established by this public wharf or
dock. If this wharf is suddenly ■
closed, all of these other property j
owners will necessarily be greatly i
damaged; some of the buildings and
improvements will be rendered nearly
worthless, if not quite so. Surely a
court of Equity would feel compelled
to intervene to prevent such an un
reasonable and unconscionable act of
destruction.
The defendant company has no per
petual franchise, it has no franchise
at all, but it is in such a position as
raises an equitable estoppel as against
the town authorities to deal such a
blow at the very business center of
the town as is proposed.
McQuillan Municipal Corporations, j
Section 1622, says—
“As against the municipality, an j
express grant of the right to use;
the streets is not always necessary. :
Such a grant may be waived by the i
municipality or the municipality;
may be estopped to object to the
use of the streets on that ground."
See also Sec. 1687 McQuillan Mun.
Corp. Vol. 4.”
In the case of the City of Branford
vs. N. Y. & P. Telephone & Telegraph
Company, a Pennsylvania case report
ed in 56 Atlantic Rep. at Page 43, the
Court says:
“While the authorities with us
are not numerous in holding that
laches may be imputed to the com
monwealth and municipalities in
denying them equitable relief which
might otherwise be granted, that
rule that it can be imputed to the
public is clearly laid down in sev
eral cases. 'Laches may be imput
ed to the commonwealth as well as
to an individual.’ Commonwealth
ex rel. Attorney General vs. Bala
& Byrn Mawr Turnpike Co. 153 Pa.
47. 25 Atl. 1105. In Penn. R. R.
Co. vs. Montgomery Co. Pass. lly.
Co.. 167 Pa. 6231 Atl. 468, 27 L.
R. A. 766, 46 Am. St. Rep. 677,
we said: ‘But we know as a mat
ter of current history that street
railways have been projected, and
actually constructed and are now
in operation over country roads
where no legal consent has been
obtained, and where no attention
has been paid to the rights of prop
erty holders. Such railways cannot
now be torn up or enjoined along
their routes. Where such enter
prises have been allowed to proceed
and the expenditure of large sums
of money has been permitted, it
would be inequitable to correct at
this time what was a mutual mis
take under the influence of which
these enterprises have been pushed
to completion.' What was said in
Attorney General vs. Delaware and
Boundbrook Railroad Co., 27 N. J.
Eq. 1, in denying an injunction
asked for by the state, may well be
regarded as applicable to the facts
in the present case: ‘The work
has been, from its commencement,
a matter of public notoriety, and
yet no action has been taken on the
part of the state authorities, nor
even any warning uttered by tjjem
against the work. The defendants
have been permitted to make their
immense expenditure upon their
enterprise, in the confidenc of their
convictions they possessed all re
quisite legislative authority, with
out even a word of protest or re
monstrance. Under such circum
stances, equity will refuse its aid,
even to the state.”
In the case at bar, the use of the
street complained of by the Town of
Valdez, by its authorities, is not a
burden, not a hindrance or an ob
struction, nor even an unsightly
thing, as telephone or telegraph poles
may be, but is an important and val
uable improvement and betterment of
360 feet of the lower end of the street
used, and a carrying out of a public
street or highway where none before
existed, and where, if this ordinance
of the town council could be obtain
ed, it would simply mean the destruc
tion and abandonment of a very val
uable and necessary planked road
way to no one’s gain, and to the loss,
not only to the defendant, but to the
City itself, which would have to erect
a new structure over exactly the same
ground, before such projected street
could be of any possible use. Surely
tiie law does not require so senseless
and wanton a destruction.
The defendant has no vested right
to unrestrained frqedom of action and
to remain uncontrolled in its charges
for wharfage. The power of Congress
or of the Territorial Legislature can
surely be exercised to prevent any ar
rogant assumption of power on its
part. This might have been done
long ago; it can still be done. For
many years Valdez suffered a great
loss of revenue and inconvenience, by
reason of the fact that the so-called
reservation part of the town was uot
included within the city limits, and
it suffered such inconvenience for
many years before legislative action
was Anally taken, resulting in bring
ing said portion of the town within
the corporate limits; and yet the
Town Council did not attempt to take
the law in its own hand, to pass or
dinances declaring things It liad no
power or rightful authority to de
clare, to remedy the situation. What
Is needed is united actions to secure
needful and necessary and reasonable
legislative relief in such matters.
An Act can be passed by the Legis
lature of Alaska, empowering muni
cipal corporations to extend their
corporate limits to deep water; to es
tablish harbor limits, to regulate and
control the rates to be charged by
private wharf companies, and to pro
vide for condemning them by the mu
nicipality. But all these powers must
and no doubt will be exercised by the
Territorial Legislature with reason
and moderation, and not in a spirit
of destruction and cbnfiscatton.
Plaintiff cites a number of cases
decided by the Supreme Court of the
United States generally touching the
powers of towns, to regulate the sta
tioning and landing of vessels, estab
lishing harbor limits, etc. These are
all cases arising over such rights and
privileges on the banks of the rivers
like the Mississippi. Counsel for
plaintiff states that Ordinance No. 90
was modeled somewhat after that
mentioned in Packet Co. vs. Catietts
burg 105 U. S. p. 559 et seq. The
conditions there are so totally differ
ent that the case does not seem to be
applicable. There, along the banks
of the river, craft of all kinds sought
to tie up to the bank or to any land
ing place, wherever they pleased,
within the corporate limits of the
town. The town having express leg
islative power over the subject, could
of course, enact an ordinance requir
ing landings at the places designated.
The situation there is shown by the
following from pages 562 and 563:
“The protection of the shore of
the sea or bank of a river on which
a town is situated is a necessity to
the town, and the washing and
crumbling of the bank from the
agitation of the waters, made by
the landing of large steamers, de
mand that such regulations should
exist.
Small vessels, without swam,
rafts, flatboats, keelboats, loaded
to their very utmost capacity, and
liable to be sunk by the waves
which accompany the landing of
large steamboats, have the same
right to land at the shore that the
steamers have, and they have a
right to protection against their
powerful competitors for trade.
This best can be secured by appro
priate regulations prescribing the
places for the landing of each, and
in some instances placing the mat
ter under the control of a wharf
master or some officer whose duty
it shall be to look after it. * * *
There is probably not a city or
large town in the United States sit
uated on a navigable river where
ordinances, rules and regulations
like these of the town of Cattletts
burg are not made and imposed by
authority deprived from State leg
islation, and the long acquiescence
in this exercise of the power and
its absolute necessity, are argu
ments almost conclusive in favor
of its rightfu lexistence."
Here, not only is the legislative
authority wanting, but the conditions
are so dissimlar as to render the case
inapplicable. On these river banks,
a simple inexpensive structure, only,
or none at all. was required for a riv
er boat to tie up to; here a large and
valuable structure, of great value and
service to the town has never been
maintained under at least implied
sanction of the law, for more than
thirteen years. Congress by the Act
of June 6, 1900, provided for the pay
ment of a certain amount per ton an
nually for license tax from public
docks and wharves. It surely con
templated the construction and oper
ation of such public utilities. As this
license money or tax goes to the mu
nicipalities wherein such dock is
maintained, what would be the use
of providing for taxing a town wharf
only to return the money to the town?
If wharves were not contemplated in
towns where people congregate,
where would they be needed? If a
town in its early days, situated as is
Valdez had not money to provide a
wharf, must.it go without? It could
never grow into much a town without
a wharf.
Congress in enacting Section 7 98,
Compiled Laws of Alaska, supra,
providing that private corporations
might be lawfully formed to operate
docks, wharves, etc., in Alaska, it
must have contemplated that such
structures were necessary, and would
•be built under this authority. The
defendant company is formed under
this act. And if towns in Alaska have
no power to license or even permit
3uch corporations to build and oper
ate wharves, we encounter a manifest
inconsistency and absurdity in Con
gress expressly authorizing an act
which the town council says cannot
be done.
I have not attempted to disc uss the
legal question involved as to the right
of defendant to maintain its ap
proach and wharf in front of laud
owned by it, or by another who does
not complain, bordering on the
shore, which in this case is the line
meandering the mean high tide line.
The right of the defendant so to do
would furnish a further defense to
the enforcement of said ordinance,
but in view of the law as 1 underr
stand it to be and as above set forth,
it will not be necessary to determine
the case upon that point.
It has been held by the Court of
Appeals, in the Ninth Circuit, in the
case of Hazelet vs. Dalton, 182 Fed.
562, as follows:
“Where a homestead entry In Alas
ka was bordered on one aide by
the meanders of the tide waters of
Orca Inlet, the entryman as the
owner of the upland, though ac
quiring no title to the shore or soil
below high-water mark, was enti
tled to the shore or soil below high
water mark, was entitled to free
and uonbstructed access to the nav
igable water, and for that purpose
to construct a wharf over such land
without interference by third per
sons claiming the right to use the
shore."
In that case, while it appears that
the building of the wharf was in front
of a homestead, the facts show it to
be in front of the town of Cordova,
where the owner was building out for
the very purpose of constructing a
wharf similar to that of the defen
dant in this case.
As before stated, the defendant
may not have a perpetual or an ex
clusive franchise or license, or be un
controlled in its right to charge
Wharfage rates, but such control must
be exercised by due authority of law
and according to principles of jus
tice and equity, and not by destruc
tion or confiscation.
It follows from the foregoing opin
ion that the plaintiff’s complaint will
be dismissed.
Dated at Valdez, Alaska, this 29th
| day of November, A. I). 1916.
FRED M. BROWN,
I District Judge.
CFFY EXPRESS
MEETS ALL BOATS AND NEVER .MISSES \ TRAIN
Auto for Hlr e Du.v or Night.
Buy and Sell Anything.
Phone 82 J. A. SPENARD. Prop.
Jas. E. Wilson, Freighter
Large or Small Deliveries Made
To Any Part of the Country.
PROMPT SERVICE GUARANTEED VALDEZ, ALASKA
UPPER TONSINA ROAD HOUSE
Best of Meals—Prlces Reasonable
GENERAL STORE. - TRADING POST.
Telephone connects with Chitina.
General Freighting. KNUTE NAFSTED. Mgr.
MERCHANT’S CAFE
FRESH BREAD AND PASTRY DAILY
Phone 08 dins. Fischer, Propr.
VALDEZ REAL ESTATE AGENCY
Real Estate, Insurance, General Brokerage
Absentees Business Properly Handled
Treat Building, Alaska Ave. Telephone No. 60
Mead’s Sheet Metal Works
PEVMBING, STEAM AND HOT WATER HEATING,
Sheet Metal Work, Mine Air Pipe, Pipe and Fittings, Valves, Etc.
Motor Boat Supplies, Paints and Oils,
located on Valde/. Dock, Opposite Prospector Office. Phone
Pacific Alaska Navigation Co.
PUGET SOUND Admiral PUGET SOUND
California Lilia Alaska
ALASKA
Steamers sail from Seattle at 9 P. M. on
5th, 15th, 25th—EVERY MONTH
Steamer Sailing 15tli valla Uinnina aud Kodiak—All Sailing call nt Knik
and Aneliorage.
CALIFORNIA
Seattle to San Franciaco every WedueNdny and Sunday, connecting *»lth
Steamer* Vale and Harvard for Southern California.
Right reserved to change schedule without notice
KICIIAIID J. KING WOOD, Mgr., Seattle; VALDEZ DOCK CO., Local Agt.
>oooo<>o/X8»»3mc»£8xe^ooo:ooooo«oowcrCH^oocH>ocH>o.o.oooc
ALASKA
STEAMSHIP CO.
S. S. Mariposa, S. S. Alameda and S. S. Northwestern
sail from Seattle the 6th, 12th, 18th, 24th and 30th
EVERY MONTH
From Valdez south-7th, 13th, ISth, 25th and 31th for Cor
dova, Skagway, Juneau, Wrangall, Ketchikan and Seattle.
Regular freight service for Ketchikan, Wrangell, Juneau, Sheep
Creek. Treadwell, Douglas, Skagway, Cordova, Ellamar, Valdez and La
touche. Explosives, S. S. Seward, on the B'.h; Latouche, on the 15th; S. S.
Cordova. 25th of each month—right reserved to change this schedule
without notice.
P. II. TRACY, Gen’l Agent VALDEZ DOCK CO., Local Agent.
When You Leave
For the Outside
take the
“MILWAUKEE”
One road—one'management—one service all the way
through to Chicago. It’s the Short Line to the East
over
THE NEW STEEL TRAIL
For information and literature write or ask]
J. C. MARTIN, Agent, Valdez, Alaska.
CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE & ST, PAUL RY.
A. E. HARRIS, Freight and Passenger Agt,
Juneau, Alaska.