In 1906 Shenk was appointed a deputy city attorney in Los Angeles, California, and in 1909 he became city attorney when Leslie R. Hewitt resigned from that position.[5][3] During his term, the cities of Wilmington and San Pedro, were merged with the city of Los Angeles, and Shenk later recalled "a midnight trip midst irate farmers and sharp-toothed watch dogs as he hurriedly listing polling places and secured names of election officers for the required ordinance calling the annexation election." Shenk was in charge of the city's legal office when Los Angeles annexed the San Fernando Valley and began the Owens River Project to bring water to the city through the Los Angeles Aqueduct.[3]
In a memorial tribute to Shenk written after his death, U.S. Judge Stanley N. Barnes recalled Shenk's role in a controversy between the city and the Pacific Electric Railway, which wanted to lay a spur railroad track to some land in San Pedro to which it claimed ownership. Barnes said:
It was necessary to cross First Street in San Pedro. City Attorney Shenk said this required a franchise. By way of answer, and over the Labor Day weekend and holiday, the Pacific Electric hurriedly installed the track over the street—relying on the absence of judges and injunctions over the holidays and a fait accompli. The Board of Public Works, acting on the advice of John Shenk, paid back in kind on the following weekend. It took men, horses and equipment to the harbor, took possession of the empty railroad cars after removing them, tore up the tracks and announced the city was and would remain in possession. The Outer Harbor was saved for the people of Los Angeles.
In 1912, the mayor asked Shenk to investigate an incident in which African American businessman C.W. Holden was charged a dollar for a beer at a saloon where white customers were charged only five cents for the same order.[6] Shenk's decision "that businesses had the right to charge whatever they desired and could change their prices at will,"[7] resulted in unprecedented discrimination against African Americans throughout the city. The effects of the Shenk Decision were chronicled in Los Angeles's African American newspapers, which included the California Eagle and the weekly newsmagazine, the Liberator[8][7] which asserted, "by a ruling as city attorney, Mr. Shenk completely nullified the Civil Rights bill in this state."[9]
The 1913 Mayoral Race
Shenk in 1913.
In 1913, Shenk ran for Mayor of Los Angeles as the candidate of the "good government" Municipal Conference. Based on Shenk's discriminatory decision the year before, African American newspapers urged their readers to vote against Shenk. Shenk lost to the independent candidate,[10] city Police Judge Henry H. Rose[11][12][13] by just over nine thousand votes[12] at a time when, according to the Liberator, African Americans represented fifteen thousand votes.[9]
In July 1913, after stepping down as City Attorney Shenk returned to private practice with E. R. Young, who had served as chief assistant City Attorney.[14]
Among his more notable decisions was the 1945 decision for a unanimous court in Alfafara v. Fross that Filipino-Americans were not aliens under the definition of the California constitution and therefore were eligible to buy and sell property in the state.[18][19]
The power of a state to regulate and control the basic social relationship of marriage of its domiciliaries is here challenged and set at nought by a majority order of this court arrived at not by a concurrence of reasons but by the result of four votes supported by divergent concepts not supported by authority and in fact contrary to the decisions in this state and elsewhere.
... such laws have been in effect in this country since before our national independence and in this state since our first legislative session. They have never been declared unconstitutional by any court in the land although frequently they have been under attack. It is difficult to see why such laws, valid when enacted and constitutionally enforceable in this state for nearly 100 years and elsewhere for a much longer period of time, are now unconstitutional under the same Constitution and with no change in the factual situation. It will also be shown that they have a valid legislative purpose even though they may not conform to the sociogenetic views of some people. When that legislative purpose appears it is entirely beyond judicial power, properly exercised, to nullify them.[20]
Death
Shenk died on August 3, 1959, while still in office.[3]
On June 28, 1907, Shenk was married to Lena R. Custer in Los Angeles.[22] They had two sons, Samuel Custer and John Wesley Jr.[1] During the last 35 years of his life, he lived in Los Altos, California, where he was active in establishing a union church.
^ ab"Final Returns for Every Candidate". Los Angeles Herald. No. 211. California Digital Newspaper Collection. 4 June 1913. p. 1. Retrieved September 21, 2017.
^"Society: Shenk-Custer Wedding". Los Angeles Herald. California Digital Newspaper Collection. 30 June 1907. p. 2. Archived from the original on 21 September 2017. Retrieved September 21, 2017.
External links
John W. Shenk. California Supreme Court Historical Society.
