■i n r

■!. T:JL Hi

mm park,

^HPi

I rap
m m

£873 -1887.

I :

■

Mill

SSSK

BR

H8£nHI

111111
IMS

1 ' SB

hhHHH

NEW ENGLAND
HISTORIC, GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY.

Is it not lawful for me to il<> what I will with mint own! — Matt. \\ : 15.

HISTORY

OF TILE

West Roxbury Park:

HOW OBTAINED

Disregard of Private Rights.

ABSOLUTE INJUSTICE.

Arbitrary Laws. Right of Eminent Domain.

1873 TO 18S7.

Let us consider the reason of the case, for nothing is law (hat is twt
reason. — Sir John Powell.

GLOUCESTER:
CAPE ANN BREEZE STEAM BOOK AND JOB PRINT

1SS7.

p

DEDICATION.

The following pages, briefly outlining Ihe history of
the West Roxbury (now Franklin) Pai Is, ai e respectfully
inscribed to the enterprising, public spirited citizens of
Boston, who, the writer is assured, will be glad to know
something of the modus oj)tra7idi by which the lands
were secured for the great public Park.

b'. E. S.-

a

WEST ROXBURY PARK.

Sometime during the spring of 1873 the question of
establishing a system of Public Parks for the city of
Boston was first suggested and brought before the
citizens, who heartily and earnestly approved the project.

It was felt that a large enterprising city like Boston,
the metropolis of New England, possessing ample
wealth and enjoying such a wide-spread reputation at
home and abroad for refinement and culture, should
not fall behind other noted cities of the world in provid-
ing for its citizens broad fields and acres for a public
domain, where our own citizens and strangers alike
could meet together with freedom, on common ground,
to breathe the pure air of heaven; to bask in the health-
giving sunshine of the country; to enjoy its sylvan
shade, its rustic scenery, and the pleasure of friendly
meetings and friendly greetings.

The city government, after a long delay interspersed
with hostile conflicts and hard fought battles, finally
concluded to follow the example of other thrifty cities,
and commence a series of public parks, to be estab-
lished in different parts of the city, in order to accom-
modate, and at the same time to satisfy the tax payers
and tax grumblers in the various sections.

Thus was inaugurated an enterprise worthy the high
standard Boston occupies as one of the leading com-
mercial cities in this country.

6 HISTOEY OF THE

With strong assurances that the citizens of Boston
will be interested to know something of the process, —
the modus operandi, the scheme by which the great
West Roxbury Park lands were obtained for luxurious
purposes, the indulgence of her own citizens and the
surrounding and rapidly increasing population, — the
writer felt that it became his especial duty, being one
of the foremost movers in the enterprise, as well as
owning the largest and most valuable interest within
the park area, consequently being the largest sufferer
by the several seizures, to expose the cupidity of the
city government in coveting and dooming these lands,
and then reducing the valuations to meet the small
appropriation made to pay for them.

There were no doubt many obstacles to be overcome
before obtaining the appropriation, because of the
opposing action of some members who did not favor the
park scheme from the first, but finally voted for it
grudgingly.

These members did not choose to consider that every
great public improvement, whether for practical utility
or for luxurious purposes, gave instant employment to
a large number of the laboring classes, thus creating a
ready demand, and at the same time lessening the sup-
ply, or surplus, of labor-seeking men.

They should have borne in mind also, that the monej^
spent in either case comes out of the pockets of the
capitalists, or the enterprising middle classes mainly,
and not from those who are struggling for their dail}7
bread by the work of their hands. These are facts that
should not have been ignored in making a miserly
appropriation at first.

WEST ItOXBURY PARK.

Prompted by his conviction, and by assurances of good
will and support, the writer at once diligently began to
examine the unoccupied fields and wooded hills in the
neighborhood of Boston, especially those tracts of
massed lands within an easy distance and conveniently
accessible to the citizens by steam, horse-cars or by
carriage.

Such a region, admirably adapted for the purpose
was found and approved; first, by its proximity to the
city; next, for its nearness to the horse-cars, or to the
more rapid transit by steam power, both of which con-
veyances were located on either side of this great area,
and both running at short intervals during the day and
night, to and from the city, the fare being only five cents
each way.

These frequent and cheap conveyances were strong
inducements to encourage the selection of this territory
for park purposes, but furthermore the attractiveness
was increased by the charming locality; its undulating
surface, composed of upland and meadow, hills, terraces
and valleys, woody slopes, copses and fields, all
embraced within an area of 366.80 acres, and lying
between three and one-half and four and one-half miles
from the City Hall.

This beautiful tract of land, bounded northerly by
Seaver street, easterly by Blue Hill avenue and Canter-
bury street, southerly by Morton street, westerly by
Scarborough street and Walnut avenue, with two cross
streets running through it, east and west, was embraced
in twenty-seven different lots, held by about as many
different owners.

To see personally or to communicate with these sev-

HISTORY OF THE

eral parties and obtain plans of their estates was the
arduous work of a whole winter, and to have these
plans (many of them in a ragged condition, and nearly
all drawn on different scales,) so arranged as to form
one large, perfect plan or map of the whole area com-
plete, was finally accomplished by the skill and careful
arrangement of William A. Garbett, civil engineer, at
the writer's expense. This plan was dated April 9, 1874.

These preparations having been successfully accom-
plished, the writer next called together several of our
prominent citizens, to whom was presented the project
of establishing a park. These gentlemen were the
Hon. Marshall P. Wilder, Hon. Alexander H. Rice,
Colonel William V. Hutchings, and others who were
known to be interested in every movement or suggestion
looking to the advancement, prosperity and ultimate
welfare of the city.

On the submission of the plan to them, together with
a letter descriptive of the location of the property and
its availability for park purposes, the project was highty
and unanimously commended and approved, and the
earnest hope expressed that the suggestions would be
speedily adopted; and this anticipation finally became
a reality.

The following is a copy of the original letter which
was sent, with the plan made by Mr. Garbett, to the Park
Commissioners as soon as they were appointed, which
was in 1875, together with the names of the several
owners of the lots according to the plan submitted.
It will doubtless be of interest to the public:

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 9

Boston, Sept. 6, 1875.

Messrs. T. Jefferson Cooltdge,
William Gray, Jr.,
Charles H. Dalton,

Park Commissioners.

Gentlemen : — In submitting my plan for one of the
public parks now proposed for the city of Boston, I
wish to call your attention to the fact that, although
there are twenty-seven different lots of land embraced
within the area, and nearly as many different owners,
scarcely any of them know that such a project is on
foot, my object being to avoid expectation or an incen-
tive that might lead to speculation.

I own within this area only 476,360 feet of land, but
I wish to present to your careful consideration a few
facts showing the advantages in the selection of these
lands, and the beauty of their location for one and pos-
sibly the largest of the several parks now contemplated.
The outline of these premises, as will be seen by the
plan, commences with a frontage on Seaver street, about
3.4 miles from the City Hall and running back to Morton
street about 4.5 miles, bringing the whole of the park
area within a short and convenient distance from the
city. Taking the lines of Walnut avenue and Scar-
borough streets on the west, and Blue Hill avenue and
Canterbury street on the east, you have in the whole
area 15,946,636 feet or 366.80 acres, together making a
well shaped area for a park.

The particular advantages and attractions of this
locality will be seen and appreciated by your commis-
sion at a glance: the short distance from the city,

10 HISTORY OF THE

which is of primary importance; the comparatively low
price of the lands, especially as they recede toward
Morton street; the limited number of valuable buildings
and other incumbrances upon the premises ; the fine and
altogether delightful means of approach to it either by
Columbus avenue extended and Walnut avenue, or
Warren street by carriage, thus avoiding the face of
the sun in driving out in the afternoon during the hot
weather, which, by the way, may be considered of much
importance; the proximity to a large and rapidly
increasing population in the Highlands; Jamaica Plain
in the immediate vicinity, and the old District of Dor-
chester, and South Boston also, all being within con-
venient distances. Then the excellent facilities of get-
ting to it by steam or by horse cars; the Hartford and
Erie Railroad, and the Grove Hall horse cars on one
side, and the Providence Railroad and Shawmut avenue
(now Washington street) horse cars on the other, all
being within a few minutes walk, either of which can
be extended much nearer or even carried directly within
the area, at a moderate expense, when required to accom-
modate increasing numbers of visitors.

These are good and ample reasons for the selection
of this particular site for the chief of the park system,
and they can not fail to impress your commission in
favor of it. Then withal it will be difficult to find
within the 3.4 or 4.5 miles circuit of the city, so large
a tract of land and one so beautiful in its undulating
surface; such charming natural scenery, it being par-
tially wooded, with an ample supply of good water, and
possessing so many striking recommendations*

The Austin Farm, containing about 50 acres border-

WEST POXBURY PARK. 11

ing on Canterbury street, already belonging to the eit}',
can also be annexed to the park.

I have nothing more to add except to earnestly
request your commission to examine the premises care-
fully, and would suggest that you take a view from the
two towers on Seaver street, giving a commanding view
of the whole area. You can not fail to admire the
beauty of the landscape and scenery, as well as to
appreciate the great advantages of the location, and the
facilities of access from the city and vicinity.

The city is spreading out in every direction, but
nowhere with more certainty than toward West Rox-
bury and Dorchester.

Respectfully submitted,

SAMUEL E. SAWYER.

JSTames of the Land Owners.

No.

1.

Eliza R. Houghton,

1,217,763 feet

2.

Samuel B. Sawyer,

476,360

3.

Horace B. Sargent,

1,750,000

4.

Cornelius M. Vinson,

261,360

5.

C. M. and T. M. Vinson,

547,828

(i.

J. D. W. Williams,

707,170

7.

George Billings,

180,300

8.

Sarah Parker,

133,400

9.

J. D. W. Williams,

207,600

10.

Billings and Parker,

58,900

11.

Billings and Parker,

103,400

12.

Mrs. M. B. Sewall,

131,000

13.

T. C. Wales,

168,529

14.

J. B. Hildreth,

1,998,900

12 HISTORY OF THE

No. 15.

Jeremiah Williams,

186,300 feet.

16.

Dr. W. E. Woodward,

1,136,090

17.

Heirs of Thos. C. Cook,

1,591,210

18.

T. C. Wales,

155,375

19.

Charles Ncwhall,

753,349

20.

J. P. Cook,

606,315

21.

John Fottler,

917,685

22.

Heirs of Joseph Morton,

431,023

23.

Andrew J. Peters,

119,315

24.

Andrew J. Peters,

437,025

25.

John Galvin,

718,030

26.

John Galvin,

548,725

27.

Dr. W. E. Woodward,

403,884

15,946,636

After preparing the plan and the above letter describ-
ing- the property, the writer became still more deeply
enlisted in the work : — a project looking to the inter-
est, the comfort and the pleasure of every citizen of
Boston, the poor as well as the rich, and especially with
a feeling of natural pride that the old city of Boston
would no longer stand behind other large cities of the
world in having a common breathing ground for its
citizens, nor her glory be dimmed by longer neglecting
to purchase the necessary domain for this purpose.

The citizens may now rejoice together, and with
heart and voice commend the work so well advanced,
(except the manner of doing it,) the well chosen site,
the opportunities that proved so propitious for the
selection and purchasing of some of the land required.
We can now try to forget the conflicts and struggles of
the past few years in the city government; the spirit

WEST KOXBURY PA UK. 13

exercised and the limited appropriations made for the
attainment of this grand municipal achievement.

But amid all the congratulations and rejoicings, the
writer can not forget the great injustice done to these
land owners, and the loud condemnations by those whose
property has been ruthlessly sacrificed, being seized or
condemned by the commissioners for this magnificent
park scheme. The property thus taken was arbitrarily
cut down from the former assessed valuation to about
twenty or twenty-five per cent, of the real or prospect-
ive value; many of these owners had not the means to
contend or to go to the courts for redress, therefore
they Avere obliged to submit to arbitrary dictation, and
take what they could get; the grinding price offered,
sometimes being made, it is alleged, with the remark,
"take it or leave it;" adding as a plausible excuse that
"we take your property from you under the right of
eminent domain," against the will of the owner, after
the wholesale reduction in valuation by the assessors or
commissioners, or both, until the point was reached
whereby the limited appropriations would cover the sum
required, these owners being sacrificed for the public-
good.

The reader of the above statements must not lose
sight of an important fact in connection with these
arbitrary acts, that during all these years from 1874,
when the public park movement earnestly began, the
park commissioners being appointed the following year,
when the plans and the general development of the
park features were more clearly defined, these lands
were doomed or condemned, and not one strip within
the area could be advantageously improved by the

14 HISTORY OF THE

owners nor offered for sale, thus taking their property
in fact out of the market. I say that during all these
years, running through that dreary period of mercantile
depression, the land owners were obliged to pay their
taxes on this property annually, even while it was under
the clutches of the city of Boston ; not only did they
pay these unrighteous taxes, but many of them whose
estates were encumbered by mortgages were obliged
also to pay interest on the same. In this way thousands
of dollars were paid into the city treasury and to money
lenders, while their property was virtually doomed and
tied up from their control, thus robbing the pockets of
the land owners, and saving to the city time, price,
interest and taxes. Who would believe that the city of
Boston, acme of refinement and culture, could be gov-
erned by such a spirit in acquiring a public park for the
indulgence of its citizens?

One of these owners, a well known merchant of Bos-
ton, who paid his taxes there for more than forty years,
now well advanced in years, possessed a section of these
park lands, expected some time to realize a handsome
surplus over the mortgage incumbrance, sufficient to
place himself and family in comfortable circumstances
during his declining years. He looked hopefully upon
the constant and rapid growth of the city and its sur-
roundings in population and wealth, as surely promising
to reward him for his long and patient waiting. But
his property was cruelly taken from him just as the
wave of prosperity and demand began to move toward
his estate; for the location of it was such that it would
first feel the benefit of the advancing population.

This old gentleman told me after a suit at law, which

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 15

cost him a great deal of hard labor, money and per-
plexity, that alter paying his mortgage note of fifty
thousand dollars he had given upon it, and the cost of
road improvements, interest, taxes and other expenses,
there would not be a dollar left for him.

This same property, containing 1,217,703 feet, was
sold in February, 1872 for 18 3-4 cents per foot, or
$228,3)30.57, and it certainly ought to be worth as much
now as it was so many years ago, allowing even lor the
speculative movements supposed to exist at that time.
The valuation by the assessors, however, was cut down
and cut down until it reached the shameful sum of
$4:2,600, when as if their conscience smote them, it was
feebly raised ta $18,400, and then seized by the park
commissioners; a mortgage of $50,000 and other liens
then existing to the extent of many thousands additional.
In 1872 the writer offered him a large sum for this
property, or ten cents per foot for a part of it, which he
prudently refused to accept.

After long and tedious efforts he found it impossible
to make a satisfactory settlement with the park com-
missioners, and was reluctantly compelled finally to
take his cause into the Superior Court, this being his only
redress. There he reasonably expected to obtain a
verdict of about 18 3-4 cents a foot, or at any rate a price
approximating thereto, as the evidence of some of our
best merchants in the city and competent real estate
experts warranted such a conclusion.

He was therefore dragged through the labors, anx-
ieties and perplexities incident to a court at law, in
December, 1884, and he obtained a verdict of $103,232.-
11, about half the real value of the property, but more

16 HISTORY OF THE

than twice the amount offered by the park commis-
sioners, when he was notified by the city solicitor that
he could keep him out of the money one year at least,
threatening to apply for a stay in arrest of judgment,
and file a bill of exceptions, intending thereby to try the
case over again, thus forcing the old gentleman to the
risk of another trial. This was too much for him, con-
sidering the feeble condition of his health and that he
was indebted to others nearly the whole amount that
was due to him, which he desired to cancel. He was
finally pursuaded to make some concession. At this
stage in the proceedings he began to negotiate with the
city solicitor and others of the city government, and
after much trouble he was compelled to give up the
accumulated interest of one year and many thousands
of dollars before a settlement could be effected.

This is a fair specimen of the treatment to others
who had claims againt the city for park lands; and does
not the relation of these facts make the ears of all fair-
minded men tingle, creating a spirit of just indignation?
The writer's experience in the treatment of his own
property will be given more in detail, as follows:

His valuable estate in question lying on Walnut ave-
nue, (see park plan of lot JSTo. 17,) contains 476,360 feet,
also another large and charming property on Walnut
avenue, Glenroad, and Ravenswood Park Circle; the
road-ways included 1,492,510 feet, both together con-
taining 1,968,870 feet, in which the writer has been
directly interested, or held solely in his own right for
more than thirty years, but not for speculative pur-
poses; and having cut up Monteglade into twenty-two
house-lots, awaited the time when the demand for

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 17

elegant country dwellings in this lovely neighborhood
would bring them naturally upon the market, but not by
forcing in anticipation.

During the year 1853 a contract was made to con-
struct Glenroad, 1,345 feet long from Walnut avenue
to the western boundary of the estate, to be made 40
feet wide, G feet sidewalks on each side, with a good
stone culvert running through the middle of the same,
and the road-bed substantially filled with two or three
feet of stone, handsomely crowned with fresh gravel the
whole length, as well as the circular park road. These
were expensive avenues, both on account of the land
required for their construction, which was very valuable,
and the cost of building them. When finished, 190
thrifty elms were set out on the borders of these beauti-
ful avenues, which have required much care and expense;
meaning thus to improve the beauty of these lands by
the embellishment of nature.

During the year 1854 a continuation of Glenroad,
between the western boundary of this estate and Forest
Hill street, a distance of 753 feet by 40 feet roadway,
including 6 feet sidewalks, was constructed in like man-
ner with the former avenues, taking 30,120 feet of land,
which was bought at that time of George William Bond
and paid for, which now stands at over forty cents a
foot, receiving from him a deed of the same. An agree-
ment was then made with Mr. Bond that he, or whoever
else might build on this continuation of Glenroad,
should have a perpetual right to pass over this part of
the road extending as far up as the division line, but no
further, intending thereby to retain the control of Glen-
road as a private avenue.

18 HISTORY OF THE

In furtherance of this plan and in order to preserve
the exclusive legal right, control and possession of this
road for private uses, on Tuesday, the ]3th day of May,
1873, J. P. Shaw, a carpenter, was employed and ordered
to erect two substantial wooden fences across Glen-
road, one on the Walnut avenue entrance and the other
on the western boundary line, as before described, and
to have them both so guarded as to prevent effectually
all passing over said roadway from Tuesday at 1.30
o'clock P. M. until Friday at 9 o'clock A. M., which
order was faithfully executed, according to the certificate
hereto annexed, signed by the guards.

To wit: Alonzo W. Sherburne and Henry Wait
alternately stood guard on Walnut avenue sixty-five
hours, and James Leary and William Watson alter-
nately stood guard on the western division line sixty-
seven and one-half hours, as appears by the certificate.

May 16, 1873.
I the subscriber on oath depose and say, that at the
request of Samuel E. Sawyer and James Haughton,
owners of the Sumner Farm, so called, in West Roxbury,
I built two fences across the private way owned by
them, called Glenroad, which leads over said farm from
Walnut street in a westerly direction towards Forest
Hill street. Both of these fences were completely fin-
ished as early as half past one o'clock on the afternoon
of May 13th, and they remained standing until the Fri-
day following at nine o'clock A. M., when they were
taken down and piled up by my order. One of these
fences was built across the road near Walnut street, and
the other near the end of the road toward Forest Hill

WEST POXBURY PAEK. 19

street. They were substantial in character, and intended
to prevent all passage from May 13th at 1.30 o'clock
P. M., until May lGth at 9 o'clock A. M.

In order to protect the fences from injury and more
effectually to prevent all passage, a guard was placed
at each fence. At the fence next Forest Hill street
James Leary was stationed on May 13th, Tuesday, and
stood guard from 1.30 o'cloek P.M. till G.30 o'clock
P. M., when he was relieved by William Watson, who
stood on guard from that time till 5.30 A. M. Wednes-
day, the 14th of May, when Leary ] elieved him and stood
on guard till G.30 P. M., when Watson again relieved
him and stood on guard till 7.30 o'clock A. M., May
15th, Thursday, when Leary again relieved him and
stood on guard till 6.30 o'clock P. M., when Watson
relieved him for the last time and stood on guard till
9 o'clock A. M., May 16, Friday, when the fence Avas
taken down.

In a similar way the fence next Walnut street was
continuously guarded from the time of its erection, May
13th at 1.30 o'clock P. M., until it was taken down and
piled up, May 16th at 9 o'clock A. M., by Alonzo W.
Sherburne and Henry Wait, except only for the space
of one hour, viz., between the hours of four and five
o'clock on Wednesday A. M., during which hour the
fence was unguarded but remained standing.

In witness whereof I have set my hand.

Signed, Joseph P. Siiaav.

Witness, Alden Bartlett.

20 HISTORY OF THE

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Suffolk, ss. Boston, January 21, 1874.

Then personally appeared the above named J. P.
Shaw, and solemnly swore that the above statement by
him subscribed, so far as it states facts within his own
knowledge was true, and so far as it states all other
facts was true according to his best knowledge and
belief.

Before me, Alden Bartlett,

Justice of the Peace.

May 16, 1873.

Each of the undersigned being a person mentioned
as a guard in the foregoing statement, do on oath
depose and say, that each and all of the facts therein
set forth in relation to his acts and doings are true, and
that during the times he was on guard at the fence, as
described in the foregoing statement, there was no
passage of any vehicles or persons over Glenroad.

In witness whereof we have hereto set our hands.
Witness, Signed, James Leary,

Alden Bartlett, (tow.^.fd William Watson,

J. B. Finn, (to a. w. so A. W. Sherburne.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Suffolk, ss. Boston, January 21, 1874.

Then personally appeared the above named James
Leary, William Watson and A. W. Sherburne and sev-
erally solemnly swore that the above statements by them
subscribed were true.

Before me, Alden Bartlett,

Justice of the Peace.

WEST ItOXBURY PARK. 21

Boston, January 26, 1874, at 12.05 P. M.
Received and entered with Suffolk Deeds, Lib. 1195,
Fol. 158.

Attest: P. Temple,

Register.

This charming property through which the Glenroad
runs contains 1,492,510 feet of land, embracing the most
diversified and picturesque scenery to be found any-
where in the vicinity of Boston ; on one side a large
tract of thrifty forest trees with natural walks diverging
from the main avenues, and leading to the southern and
western terraces; one overlooking the village of Jamaica
Plain in the foreground, with its towers, steeples and
dwellings, and distant views of the city of Boston and
the neighboring towns; and from the southern terrace a
fine view of the far outstretching landscape and valley,
dotted with cottages and church spires, to the enchant-
ing hills of Milton, slumbering in their dreamy blue
atmosphere. The frontage of these several avenues,
including Ravenswood Park circle, measures nearly six
thousand feet; to be exact, just 5,814 1-2 feet. Since
Glenroad was made, a number of dwelling houses have
been erected, and quite a handsome village has sprung
up on that and the new cross streets, particularly on
Sigourney and Robeson, where land has been sold at
from 25 to 35 cents a foot, and higher prices are de-
manded for house lots in that vicinity.

Ravenswood Park circular road was built also in
1853. It is 893 feet long, at the entrance 38 feet, and,
in the circle 32 feet wide, with five feet sidewalks, and
like Glenroad, it was substantially constructed and

22 HISTORY OF THE

crowned with gravel. This lovely estate called Mont-
glade was well laid ont by Alexander Wads worth into
twenty-two house lots numbered from 2 to 23, the con-
tents of each running from 20,460 to 219,580 feet, and
a plan made of the same. The lots were intended
mainly for building large and elegant dwellings; the
charming locations on Glenroad and some on Walnut
avenue are worth at least 50 cents a foot; they are all
within six or eight minutes' walk from the steam cars
at the Green street station, on the Providence Railroad,
whose trains run about fifty times during the day and
evening, the fare being only 5 cents. The horse cars
on Washington street, about half the distance, run
every fifteen or twenty minutes, the fare being the
same, so that the accommodations are ample.

To give an idea of the value of land in the neighbor-
hood, the writer will enumerate certain sales that have
been made, either by public auction (which is an uncer-
tain criterion of actual value, as these sales are often
forced,) or private sale; of the latter, several sales have
been made of lots adjoining on Glenroad, Sigourney
and Robeson streets, at 25 to 35 cents a foot, and higher
prices are now asked; on Forest Hill street, 25 to
27 1-2 cents; on Walnut avenue 25 cents was refused;
the city paid for a school house lot on Egleston square
38 1-2 cents; on Rockland street a number of lots were
sold at 22 to 40 cents; on Bird and Magnolia streets
25 to 28 1-2 cents; on Aniory and School streets 50
cents. The Williams estate on Walnut avenue, Hum-
boldt street and neighborhood, was sold at auction at
from 18 to 41 cents, also on Sigourney and Robeson
streets, at 15 to 30 cents — forced sales at auction, and

WEST ROXRURY PARK. 23

out of season — and besides these sales, the city bought
on Walnut and Sigourney streets a large lot at 28 cents
a foot, adjoining my property; on Blue Hill avenue at
21 cents, and on Ruthven, Crawford, Harold, Humboldt,
Seaver and Walnut streets, a great many sales have
been made at auction, the prices ranging from 17 1-2
to 40 cents or more. Even higher prices than these are
demanded for lots on Elm Hill and vicinity.

The rise and appreciation of real estate near by, when
favorably situated, may be shown by the prices often
paid over the assessors' valuations: the city paid for one
lot $30,000, which was assessed at $ 4,700; for another
lot for the Marine Park at South Boston, taxed on
$7,400, the owner obtained $20,635; and for still another
lot taxed on $14,800 the city was obliged to pay
$55,125.11. These real estate transactions are sufficient
to convince any conscientious, fair-minded men that
there is a positive value in real property.

The low boggy lands beyond Monteglade and ISTew-
stead, running down to Forest Hill street southwesterly,
and along on Morton and Canterbury streets, would
bear no comparison with the charming uplands embrac-
ing Monteglade and Newstcad, no more than a coarse
piece of bagging would compare in value with a fine
piece of silk or satin.

The following letter was written to the chairman of
the Park Commissioners on learning that they thought
of condemning Monteglade:

Boston, November 4, 1875.
T. Jefferson Coolidge, Esq. :

Dear Sir: — I have seen by Mr. Keith's plan which

24 HISTORY OF THE

you now have under consideration, that you are enter-
taining the idea of taking possession of the western side
of Walnut avenue, embracing the whole of Montglade,
including Ravenswood Park, containing 1,492,510
square feet of land. The writer in his great anxiety
hereby gives you this early notice that he will strenu-
ously object and herein remonstrates against the seizure
of this valuable property, intending to hold it at present
to be sold in lots for elegant dwellings; and moreover,
the price I should demand for it would be a great deal
more than the city can afford to pay for park purposes;
and besides it contains inexhaustible ledges of great
value, which are so well adapted for the construction
of culverts, cellar- walls, foundations, the filling of road-
beds and the natural faces are very valuable for the
construction of public or private buildings. The prox-
imity to the Providence Railroad would render the
teaming a moderate expense, and after disposing of the
stone the land would bring as much as before.
Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.
Chairman Park Commission.

Circular — Stone or Ledges for Sale.

The undersigned would call the attention of con-
tractors and builders to the inexhaustible ledges on
Walnut avenue and Glcnroad, near Green street station,
about 3 1-2 miles from the city, where stone can be
conveniently quarried for foundations, culverts, cellar-
walls, highways, and the natural faces for buildings.
Address, Samuel E. Sawyer, Boston.

WEST ROXBUKY PARK. 25

Another Latter to the Pari' Commissioners.

Messrs. T. Jefferson Cooltdge,
William Gray, Jr.,
Charles IT. D Alton,

Park Commissioners.

Gentlemen: — In answer to your communication

authorizing yon to obtain bonds for such tracts of land
as you have selected for the Public Parks for the city
of Boston, I have only to say that while meeting with
heavy losses by the great fire, together with large
shrinkages in the value of other properties, I have still
confidently felt that my real estate, now temporarily
depressed, will, by its certain advance in value by-and-
by, serve to restore in part these depreciations.

The wealthy city of Boston, with its already large
and constantly increasing population and wealth, can
not expect me to sacrifice my valuable estate for park
purposes, nor shall I consent to be thus doomed, or in
other words robbed of my property.

These lands of mine, embraced within the area of the
lines on the park plan, are admitted by everybody who
knows, to be more charmingly diversified than any
others, and may well be considered the gems of all the
park grounds; in fact they form a lovely park in
miniature already within their own area, requiring but
little or no expenditure for embellishment.

It cost me the diligent labor of a whole winter, be-
sides the expense in preparing the original plan of the
anticipated park, embracing 27 different lots, or 360.80
acres, not dreaming that more land than this would be
required, on account of the greater value.

26 HISTORY OF THE

It seems that you have adopted identically the plan
I submitted, which I feel is complimentary to my judg-
ment and taste, but I can not consent to the bonding
or the parting in any way at present with Montglade,
as it is the chief gem for elegant private dwellings of
all the estates around Boston.

The lot of land on the eastern side of Walnut avenue,
called Newstead, being numbered 17 on the park plan,
was sold to a party in February, 1872, at 18 3-4 cents
per foot, while another stood ready to negotiate at
about the same price. Now by adding interest and
taxes to the present time (Sept. 20, 1876) it will stand
to cost 28 cents a foot, or $133,380.80.

The city of Boston can purchase this strip of land by
paying a fair equitable compensation for practical public
uses, or it may be seized under the arbitrary right of
eminent domain for luxurious purposes as well, but con-
scientious citizens would scarcely enjoy roaming or
driving over these lovely grounds, knowing that they
had been wrung from the owner at one-fifth of their
value.

This lot, containing 476,360 feet, I shall be willing to
part with at a fair price, in order to facilitate the accom-
plishment of the park project, but you can not reason-
ably expect me to sell this property at bankrupt prices.
JSTo, I prefer to hold these estates until another wave of
prosperity reaches us; and moreover, I consider it a
sacred privilege to do with my lands as a merchant
would wisely do with his merchandize when the market
is depressed; viz., to wait, and store his cargo till the
prices improve.

My charming estate on the western side of Walnut

WEST ROXRURY PARK. '27

avenue, called Montglade, containing 1,492,510 square
feet, is not only lovely in its natural scenery and pictur-
esque beauty, but it contains a fine forest and inexhaust-
ible ledges that will some time prove to be a treasure.
If the city of Boston want these choice lands for a public
park, it ought to be willing to pay handsomely for them,
or else let them alone. Precious gems must command
corresponding prices. I ask no favors. The population
is now spreading out in a southerly direction, and these
attractive sites with all their facilities of access will soon
draw to them the growing population. These, gentle-
men, are my reasons for not bonding this elegant estate
to the city.

Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.
Philadelphia, Sept. 20, 1876.

On the 25th day of November, 1879, the writer, at
the earnest solicitation of an agent authorized by the
city government, consented, very much against his
wishes, to give a bond to expire on the next first day of
January, that he would sell the following described lot
of land called JSTewstead, on the eastern side of Walnut
avenue, for the sum of eighty thousand dollars. To
wit: Beginning on Walnut avenue at land of Eliza P.
Haughton, and running by her line to land formerly
belonging to Horace Binney Sargent, thence by said
Sargent's line to land of Jacob Fottler to Walnut
avenue, thence by Walnut avenue to the point of begin-
ning, containing 476,360 feet.

Signed, Samuel E. Sawyer.

Witness, Charles W. Cram.

28 HISTORY OF THE

This bond expired on the first day of January, 1880,
without effect, and the writer was very glad of it, as it
was bonded for $9,317.50 less than the same property
was sold for in February, 1872.

Park Department, >

Boston, December 21,1881. S

Samuel E. Sawyer, Esq.:

Dear Sir: — The following order has been passed by
the City Council:

Ordered, That the City Treasurer be and is hereby
authorized to borrow, under direction of the Committee
on Finance, the sum of six hundred thousand dollars;
the bonds or certificates of debt to be issued in nego-
tiating this loan to be denominated on the face thereof
"The Public Park Loan," and to bear such rate of
interest as the Committee on Finance shall determine,
and the Commissioners are hereby authorized to expend
said sum for the taking in fee, by purchase or otherwise,
for the purpose of a public park, lands to the amount of
six hundred thousand dollars, in assessed valuation,
within the limits of the proposed West Koxbury Park.

As land owned by you is within the limits where the
park will probably be located, the Commissioners would
be glad to see you at this office between 10 and 12
o'clock A. M., at as early a day as may suit your con-
venience.

Yours truly,

George F. Clark,

Sec'y of the Board.

WEST KOXBURY PARK. 29

Iii answer to this summons I called and saw one of
the Commissioners, who proposed to settle with me by
adding 25 per cent, to the assessed valuation of thai
year, it being $28,600, which with the 25 per cent, would
have made the amount $35,750. This I at once declined,
saying that this small sum for Newstead was a great
deal less than the property was worth, it having been
sold in good faith eleven years before at $89,317.50, but
that I was still open to further negotiations.

I heard no more from them till they, or the assessors,
or both, had cut the valuation down to the incredible
sum of $18,600, and then had the audacity to inform
me that they had seized it.

We certainly need no further evidence to show to the
citizens and the public that an unscrupulous spirit was
exercised by somebody representing the city govern-
ment in so undervaluing property, in order to make
the insignificant appropriation of $600,000 suffice to
secure for the public park $2,000,000 worth of property,
and I doubt if such an instance of overbearing injustice
and down-right oppression can be found in any other
city in the world.

"Who could believe that all these several pieces of
real property, as shown by my first great plan, embrac-
ing 366.80 acres, could have been fairly and honestly
cut down in valuation from $1,136,900 in 1875 to $532,-
200 in 1879! But such was the fact, and then, forsooth,
it was condemned, — doomed for the great West Rox-
bury Park. Such an outrage ought to bring a blush to
the cheek of every honest citizen of Boston.

The next communication received from the Park
Commissioners was as follows:

30 HISTORY OF THE

Park Department, >
Boston, June 4, 1883. )
Samuel E. Sawyer, Esq. :

Sir: — By an act of this Board passed May 25th a
public park was located and laid out in the city of
Boston, by taking lands belonging to several persons
and parties, whereby two certain parcels of land belong-
ing to Samuel E. Sawyer, as appears by said act; and
the Board having estimated all the damages sustained
by the said Samuel E. Sawyer by the said taking to be
$18,600, I hereby notify you of the same.
Respectfully,

George F. Clark,

Secretary.

In reply to the above significant insult, I sent the
following letter forthwith to the commissioners:

Boston, June 8, 1883.
Messrs. Charles H. Dalton,
William Gray, Jr.,
Henry Lee,

Park Commissioners.
Gentlemen: — I am officially advised by your Secre-
tary, George F. Clark, that by a vote of your Board on
the 25th ultimo, you have taken two parcels of my land
within the "West Poxbury Park area, and furthermore,
that all damages are estimated by you at $18,600.

Surprise and indignation are but feeble words to
express the thoughts that stirred me on reading of this
shameful act of injustice. On referring to my tax bills
paid during the last ten years, I find the assessed valu-

WEST ROXBUKY PARK. 31

ations of this property as follows, and taxed accord-
ingly: Lot No. 17, 470,360 feet, 1874 on $42,900;
1875 on $37,100; 1870 on $33,300; 1881 on $28,600;
and now the time having come, and the land being
wanted for park purposes, it is seized under the cut
down tax of 1883 for $18,600, a reduction of $24,300
since the park was projected, and $10,000 reduction
since 1881. This transaction is criticised by everybody
as an extraordinary exercise of arbitrary power, to be
condemned by all good citizens.

If you wish to negotiate amicably for this valuable
estate, the assessed valuation must first be restored by
at least $12,000 or even $15,000, before I shall consent
to listen to any further proposition. My desire is to
deal fairly and honorably with not only the Park Com-
missioners but with everybody else, and I shall expect
and insist upon being treated in the same way by you,
as the representatives of the city of Boston.

In reviewing the history and incidents of the public-
park scheme from its inception, ten years ago, you will
find that I have the honor of being one if not the chief
mover at that time, and I heartily worked in preparing
the great plan, and in promoting the final consumma-
tion of the grand project, not dreaming that my property
would be taken at 20 per cent, of its value. The first
park plan was arranged and paid for by me; it cost
much time and money. After your appointment as the
commissioners, the plan, together with my letter relating
to it, were both sent to you, and you have adopted the
main lines and features as then suggested, embracing
the whole area of 366.80 acres. Within this area 1 own
only 476,360 feet, the handsomest swell of land to be

32 HISTORY OF THE

found east of Walnut avenue. In 1872 it was held at
22 1-2 cents, but finally sold at an offer of 18 3-4 cents
a foot; the party, after some delay, not fulfilling his
agreement, it was decided to hold it.

Now nothing is more certain than that all the availa-
ble lands in the vicinity of a growing city like Boston
will gradually advance in price and will so continue as
the population increases. These lands were indeed
wisely chosen for the public park, but it must be remem-
bered that many of them are very valuable also for
dwellings, and they are the first to come into the market
as unimproved locations.

After waiting all these years through business de-
pressions, all the time losing interest and paying taxes,
then came the long looked for day of improvement in
values; and while the patient owners are anticipating
the benefits of better times, you seize their property at
a moiety of its value with a firm grip, for the indulgence
and enjoyment of the citizens.

If the city of Boston wishes to indulge in the luxury
of a park or parks, why not do justice to the owners of
these lands, and pay, without jewing, a fair equitable
price for them, but not act with such a miserly spirit in
making the appropriation? Six hundred thousand dol-
lars can not be made to pay for property worth two
millions of dollars without sacrificing the owners.

On looking over one of the Park Reports I was sur-
prised to find the names of some of our worthy citizens
attached to a petition, dated November 29, 1879, urging
the Commissioners to secure park lands at once: "Be-
cause the lands required for the West Roxbury Park
can be obtained at far less prices than hereafter, as real

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 33

property is beginning to feel the influence of the revival,
which is showing itself in all business."

Now I would simply like to ask, who are best entitled
to the benefits of this revival? the rich eity of* Boston.
or the patient owners of this property? We all know
what the honest reply would be.

I happen to know parties who thought themselves, at
first, very fortunate in owning these lands now wanted
by the city, hoping thereby, after so long waiting, to be
able to realize a fair price for their property; but after
many conflicts and sore disappointments, they were
driven to dispair by the beggarly spirit exhibited, and
by the seizure of their property at undervaluations, and
then offering a small compensation, leaving some parties
largely in debt.

I know whereof I write, for I have offered in one
instance ten cents a foot for the same land the com*
missioners have taken at less than four cents a foot, and
the party refused to accept my offer.

Again, a bonafide offer of one hundred thousand dol-
lars was made for a parcel of land, which was declined ;
afterwards the assessed valuation was cut down to
$42,600, and condemned by the commissioners for park
purposes. Do you not think this sharp practice? I do
hope the officials will soon realize the injustice of these
acts of confiscation, or that the citizens may be informed,
before they indulge in the luxurious enjoyment of parks,
how they were obtained.

Another party was offered four hundred thousand
dollars for his estates, which he refused to accept;
this property was afterwards cut down to $60,000, and
finally the commissioners settled for it at about $80,000,

34 HISTORY OF THE

because the parties therein interested were unwilling to
go into Court.

Again, a charter was granted to the Highland Horse
Railroad, when the question was often asked, " Why do
they defer putting down the rails on Walnut avenue?"
the reason being given that it was because the park
lands would thus be enhanced in value, costing the city
a few dollars more. The records show that four and
even seven times the taxed valuation was paid for lands
in South Boston for the marine park.
Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

Not hearing from the Park Commissioners in reply
to my letter of June 8, I wrote the following note :

Gloucester, July 5, 1883.

Gentlemen: — Before taking another step which must
be necessarily an important one, I wish to hear from
the commissioners, and I should be glad to know that
Col. Lee has also read my last letter dated the 8th
ultimo, and then to know your conclusions in regard to
my claim for ISTewstead, Lot. 17, on the eastern side of
Walnut avenue.

I shall be exceedingly sorry to enter my demand
against the city in the court, costing me so much vex-
ation, labor and expense. It must be borne in mind
that this estate is altogether the handsomest parcel of
land on the eastern side of Walnut avenue.
Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

Park Commissioners.

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 35

Department of Parks, \
City of Boston, July 9, 1883. ]

Samuel E. Sawyek, Esq. :

Sir: — Your communication of* June 8th was consid-
ered at a full meeting of the Board held this morning.
While the Commissioners regret the necessity of an
appeal to a jury, as you suggest, they think that with
such difference of opinion as to the value of the land in
question, it will probably be the most satisfactory method
of settlement for both parties.

Yours respectfully,

Charles H. Daltox, Chairman.

Still dreading, and with a strong disinclination to seek
redress by litigation, I again wrote on the 28th inst. the
following note, which shows conclusively how much I
regretted the necessity of being forced into court, and
the strenuous efforts I made to keep out of it. To the
Park Commissioners this was no bugbear, because they
have the machinery of the Law Department, always in
good working order, constantly at hand.

Brookbank, Gloucester, July 28, '83.

Charles H. Daltox, Esq.,

Chairman Board of Park Commissioners:

Dear Sir: — I have now to own the receipt of your
note of the 9th inst. in reply to mine of June 8th. Since
receiving your note, I have made careful enquiries of
competent men from abroad, and of friends at home, and
gladly find but one opinion in regard to the exercise of
the arbitrary power of the right of eminent domain, the

36 HISTORY OF THE

right of taking private property for public uses, and that
in all cases where property is so condemned against the
will of the owner, either by municipal corporations or
by other parties, a fair, equitable compensation, if not a
liberal one, is always allowed to the owners of such
property, instead of the mean spirit shown in under-
valuing my land to less than bankrupt prices, and then
seizing it without the exercise of justice or mercy.

In setting your own prices upon my property you do
me a great wrong, if 3^011 allow yourselves to be gov-
erned by the forced sales recently made by the poor
victims who were obliged to submit to dictation because
they dreaded an action in Court, and could not afford
the expense of defending their just rights.

I am informed that the rights of private citizens are
always respected in such cases, either abroad or at home,
especially when they yield unwillingly their property
for the public good, but I find no such recognition in
my experience with the Park Commissioners, but that
my sacred rights are trampled upon without mercy, and
my wishes are entirely ignored.

We are supposed to be living in a christian commu-
nity, where a just regard for individual lights is held
sacred as the real safeguard of our liberties, and securi-
ty of private property. Who could believe that such
bare-faced injustice as has been perpetrated upon my
rights could be done with impunity?

As a merchant of Boston, I have always been a law-
abiding, tax-paying citizen, and can not recognize the
right of any corporation to seize my private estates, or
in other words, to confiscate them, for luxurious public
uses. Am I not entitled to honorable treatment? Then

WEST ROXBURT FARE. .'{7

why should any official or officials of the City Govern-
ment presume to ignore my rights?

We all know that unimproved hinds are not intended
to be taxed for more than half their real value, yet I
have paid my taxes annually on my N"ewstead estate,
lot No. 17, these ten years past, at valuations ranging
from |42,900 in 1874, to $28,(500 in 1881, which is sud-
denly reduced to 18,600, in order to make the small ap-
propriation of $600,000 cover your seizures.

These lands, embraced within the area according to
my original plan, which you have condemned for the
West Roxbury Park, were assessed in 1875 on $1,136,-
900, which was supposed to be about half their real
value, but summarily cut down in 1879 to much less
than half the above amount. Thus, you see, that the
short space in time of only four years, made alarming
inroads upon all our real estate possessions. Did any
of your Board suffer during the same time such mar-
vellous shrinkages?

When the park question was first agitated, this
property, Newstcad, was assessed on $42,900, and I
considered it worth more than twice this sum ; in fact
it had been sold at $89,317.50, and I expected this part
of my real estate would be taken by the commissioners
at or near the price it was once sold for, not for a mo-
ment suspecting that my property could be unscrupu-
lously undervalued, and then seized at 1-5 the amount
of my own valuation and sale, certainly a very poor
recompense for my efforts originally exercised in the
park scheme. I can not be reconciled to the belief that
the citizens of Boston would willingly accept the use of
these pleasure grounds, if the}^ knew the methods by

38 HISTORY OP THE

which they were wrung from the long-waiting, patient
owners.

You may say that others have accepted similar terms.
It may be so ; but you well know that they submitted to
the arbitrary prices offered, because there was but one
alternative, and many of them had no money to spare
to pay court expenses and lawyers' fees. The city may
therefore congratulate itself in its cupidity, that it has
had such an open field of " lame ducks " to roam in at
will. But my case is very different and you know it.
I have owned these lands for thirty years, waiting
patiently this long time for the city to stretch out its
borders, and thus compensate me for holding them,
always feeling that the time would surely come when
they would be wanted for elegant country residences,
fully intending that the proceeds of such sales should
some time go for educational purposes, — our public
schools, our library, and for numerous charities, — and
is it right that the wealthy city of Boston should thus
deprive me, in a measure, from accomplishing these
christian services, — the great and leading objects of
my life.

Eleven years ago the price of this charming lot of
land was 22 1-2 cents, but finally sold at 18 3-4 cents a
foot, or $89,317.50, and were it not for the methods and
depreciating influences of the public park scheme, it
certainly would be worth as much to-day. At any rate
I ought to have the right to set my own price upon my
own property, and if it is not wanted at my price, I
impose no obligation upon anybody to buy it; if the
price is not satisfactory, it can be let alone; this is not
unfair. Nor do I wish to press my property upon the

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 39

market out of season. This property was bonded once
to the city, very reluctantly, for sixty days to -Jan. 1,
1880, for $80,000, deducting $9,317.50 from a former
sale, simply to help you carry out your plans. And I
have shown every disposition, from the first inception of
the park project, to favor its establishment, except to
sacrifice my fortune.

These arc my views and honest convictions, but I will
try to reconcile our differences.

Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

The following correspondence with the Park Com-
missioners will, perhaps, more clearly explain the situa-
tion of the owners of these lands in their relation to
the undervaluation process, to which they so strong^
objected.

In November, 1879, an agent employed by the city of
Boston, after earnest appeals to the owners, succeeded
in obtaining bonds from most of them within the park
area, aggregating $1,135,125. This was done after the
valuations had been so unmercifully cut down to $532,-
200. But the Park Commissioners concluded that they
were smart enough to do a better thing for the city by
ignoring the bonds, and after the time had run out they
put the screws upon the bonded values, and many of
the poor owners were forced to accept the extortionate
prices of about one-fifth of the real value of their
property, not having the means to contest the wrong.

These lands in question were all on the eastern side
of Walnut avenue; one of the lots, called Newstead,
containing 476,360 square feet, belonged to me, which

40 HISTORY OF THE

was taxed in 1874 on $42,900, sold two years before for
$89,317.50, and reduced in value by the assessors to
$18,600, a remarkable history of one parcel of real estate,
being an unaccountable depreciation!

The writer has already shown that the process of
reduction in assessed values — the downward move-
ment,— was gradual, until the final taking, when the
"jump" was sudden and more effectual, there being a
much larger slice cut off at one time, and the property
was then doomed for the park scheme. Meantime the
taxes were annually levied, and paid by the owners,
until the valuations suited the appropriation of the city
government. A large sum of money was thereby paid
into the hands of the city treasurer, while the estates
were beyond the control of the real owners and tax pay-
ers ; and besides, many of them were also obliged to pay
interest on their mortgages, thus saving to the city
large sums of money both in prices and taxes, the writer
alone having paid at least $20,000 in taxes to the city
since the park inception.

Moreover, in rendering my tax bill on JSTewstead for
1883, the full amount for the whole year was charged,
and paid under protest, the estate having been seized on
the 25th day of May. This, however, was in keeping
with other transactions.

The writer has already alluded to a petition gotten
up by twenty-nine of our most respected citizens, which
is here copied verbatim, simply to show that the treas-
ury of the city of Boston is paramount to the patient
land owners and tax payers. It appears on the last
page of the commissioners' report for the year 1879:

WERT UOXP.TTRY PATIK. 41

To wit:

Boston, November 29, 1879.

To the Pari: Commissioners :

"The undersigned, tax payers of the city of Boston,
believe that the time has arrived for action in regard to
the West Roxbury Park. It is believed that the lands
required therefor can now be obtained at far less prices
than hereafter, as real property is beginning to feel the
influence of the revival, which is showing itself in all
kinds of business. It is stated that about four hundred
acres can be obtained for about nine hundred thousand
dollars, and we think you should direct the attention of
the city government to the subject and urge its imme-
diate action thereon." And' again: "If the lands are not
taken or bought at once, it may be more difficult to buy
them at prices they can be bought at now."

Who on earth is better entitled to the rise in value of
this property than the owners who have patiently held
it for many years, and through the long period of busi-
ness depression; in fact they have been waiting for just
this welcome revival. By what moral or equitable
right does a rich municipality or other corporation
undervalue the property of a private citizen 500 per
cent., or from $89,317.50 to the paltry sum of $18,600,
making its own price for it, regardless of the owner, and
then seize it for luxurious purposes? The writer stren-
uously protests against this gross wrong, and in con-
clusion can only add, that if the city of Boston wants my
estate, the following are my figures:

42 HISTORY OF THE

Boston, May 25, 1883.

Messrs. Charles H. D Alton,
William Gray, Jr.,
Henry Lee,

Park Commissioners.

To Samuel E. Sawyer, Dr.

To Parcel of land east of Walnut avenue,
within the West Roxbury Park area,
being Lot "No. 17 on the commission-
ers' plan, containing 476,360 feet, at
18 3-4cts., 189,317.50

This is the most charming swell of land east of Wal-
nut avenue, overlooking the Milton Hills, and other
picturesque views, it being near the entrance to Glen-
road, leading direct to the Providence Railroad, at the
Green street station, or to the still nearer horse cars on
Washington street. In February, 1872 it was sold at
18 3-4 cents a foot, and in November, 1879, it was
reluctantly bonded to the city until January 1, 1880,
for the sum of $80,000, or 16 13-16 cents a foot.

The writer can not forbear to repeat that he can not
recognize the power of any government or people to
claim the right to enter upon, and take possession of
private property without paying therefor, at any rate a
full and ample compensation.

Can the city of Boston or the Park Commissioners be
justified by the public in condemning my lands for park
purposes, against my will and consent, at only 3 7-8
Gents a foot, that were sold thirteen years ago at 18 3-4
cents a foot? The city is spreading out in that direction,

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 43

as is shown by the increase of population since 1878, of
fully 24 per cent., against G per cent, gain in the cit}r
proper.

The following letters were written to the Chairman
of the Board of Assessors, protesting against the
injustice of reducing the valuation of my real estate,
preparatory to its being taken for public uses:

Brookbank, Gloucester, Mass., Oct. 25, 1883.
Thomas Hills, Esq.:

My Dear Sir: — In acknowledging the receipt of
my tax bill, as assessed on my real estate for this present
year in Ward 23, I am impelled to express herein m3T
indignation that a certain section of my land on Walnut
avenue, being lot 17, within the Park area, should have
been cut down in valuation from $42,900 in 1874, to
$18,600 in 1881, or $24,400 reduction during the whole
time, or $10,000 less than in 1881. A most remarkable
reduction in so short a time, near a growing city.

This action in itself was not so objectionable to a tax
payer except that it was then immediately seized by the
park commissioners, and virtually confiscated; this
great wrong being committed for the luxurious enjoy-
ment of the citizens of a rich old city. You well know
that unimproved real estate, like mine, in the immediate
vicinity of any large municipality is seldom or never
intended to be assessed at more than half its true value.

I therefore solemnly ignore the moral or legal right
of the park commissioners, acting in behalf of the city
of Boston, to treat my private property in this summary
way, regardless of my sacred rights, and I hereby enter
my protest, declaring to you, as Chairman of the Board

44 HISTORY OF THE

of Assessors, that I will never accept payment for this
land based upon 3 7-8 cents per foot, which was sold
in 1872 at 18 3-4 cents, a reduction of about 500 per
cent. Meantime the city has been constantly increasing
in wealth and population.

This property was bonded to the city for $80,000, at
the urgent request of an agent, to Jan. 1, 1880. On
the 16th day of July, 1873, I offered for the adjoining
lot of land one hundred thousand dollars, or ten cents
a foot for a portion of it, say about two acres, which
the city reduced the valuation of to $42,600, and after-
wards seized it at $48,400, being less than one-half the
sum I offered for it, and both prices were refused by
the owner. The city offered only 4 cents a foot. If I
were a bankrupt, I might be obliged, as some other
owners in the park area may be, to submit to this mean
usage, without the power of resistance. Is the city
willing to take the advantage of these poor owners, and
call "might right," or will it adopt for its action the
more noble and praiseworthy policy of paying for the
lands, now wanted for luxury, a fair, equitable price?

I have written two letters to the park commissioners,
explaining more fully my views in regard to this matter,
which you can see if you so desire.

Having paid my taxes promptly these last forty years,
I should be glad to do so now; but to pay on such an
undervaluation would be construed as approving, or
quietly submitting to this treatment; therefore I must
withhold payment until I am fairly treated, and all my
rights preserved.

Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

WEST ROXBURY PARE. l.">

On the 31st of October I received an answer to the
above communication, and on the 9th of November J
wrote the following reply :

My Dear Sir: — I have the pleasure to own the
receipt of your favor of the 31st ult., which seems to call
for an answer.

I am not ignorant of the fact that tax payers, as a
rule, do not complain of low valuations, and consequently
light taxes, but after the payment of my taxes the past
ten years on this charming lot of land, from 1874 on
$42,900, and in 1881 on $28,000, to 1883 on $18,000, thus
cutting down the valuation $24,300, from the first date,
and then to summarily seize the property, by the right
of eminent domain, at these small figures, it seems to
me, is to have the right to exercise the arbitrary power
of robbing me to the extent of about four-fifths of the
real value of my property for the public good. It is
enough to make the holder of real property howl at such
gross injustice.

Are we living in a christian community, breathing the
atmosphere of civilization, or are we living in a land of
bondage? Not even at 18 3-4 cents a foot do I wish
the city to buy this estate ; to me it is worth more, and
will produce a profit over this price. Ten years ago
this property was valued by competent experts at 15 2-3
cents a foot, four times the assessors' present underval-
uation, but it was not for sale.

Why do you tax me at all on property already doomed
for the uses of the city, after it is thus seized and beyond
my control? Do you call it just? And moreover, my
tax bill calls for the whole amount of taxes for the year

46 HISTORY OF THE

when the land was taken from me, by notice from the
park commissioners, on the 25th day of May. So you
see that injustice encourages and breeds like injustice!
You well know that English laws protect individual
rights, as sacred; and these laws are our natural inheri-
tance. Shall we admit that the daughter has fallen
from grace?

Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyek.

On the following day, November 10th, I received a
short note in reply to my letter, which was answered at
once. To wit:

I thank you for your suggestion and advice in regard
to my rights being adjusted by a jury, but with my
present experience, and the treatment I have already
received by the city government, or the park commis-
sioners, or both, I have lost faith that justice would be
found in Court.

No ; it is already a foregone conclusion that the city
means to capture my property through its officials, so
that your 360,000 citizens may indulge in the enjo}r-
uient of it for a bagatelle. It is, however, very certain
that I shall never consent to a settlement for this valu-
able property on the basis of this unjust valuation. Do
as they will, I shall still have reserved to me the
satisfaction of placing before the public a true statement
of the mean spirit exhibited in obtaining the luxury of
a public park for the citizens of Boston.
Yours respectfully,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 47

The tax bill was paid under protest, as follows:

Protest.

Tremont House, (
Boston, Dee. 29, 18813. \

James W. Ricker, Esq., City Collector.

Sir: — The undersigned is the owner of a certain
parcel of land in Ward 23, West Roxbury, being No.
17, on the park commissioners' plan, containing 476,360
feet. This lot was sold in 1872, nearly twelve years
ago, at 18 3-4 cents a foot, or $89,317.50, which was
assessed in 1874 for $42,900; in 1875 on $37,100; in
1876 on $33,300. Since 1876 the valuation has been
varied, and in 1881 on $28,600. On the 25th day of
May last, the park commissioners took this lot of land,
by right of eminent domain, together with another small
lot, No. 20, on the same plan, and notified me that the
damages were only $18,600, for which I have rendered
a bill to the park commissioners, aggregating $93,983.-
88. It is unusual for tax payers to complain of low
valuations, nor would the writer be an exception, were
it not that immediately after reducing this property to a
nominal value, the city of Boston authorized it to be
seized for park purposes.

The undersigned therefore, in paying his taxes for the
present year, hereby remonstrates and protests against
this unjust treatment, as partially described above; and
for the reasons set forth, and for others not named, he
hereby pays the taxes assessed upon the lands so taken,
only to save loss, damage and expense; waiving no
right to recover said taxes, and full damages for the

48 HISTORY OF THE

property so taken, either in equity, or by due process of
law. Respectfully submitted,

Samuel E. Sawyer.
Witness, E. E. Patridge.

I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of
the protest made and presented to James W. Ricker,
City Collector, this twenty-ninth day of December, 1883.

Signed, E. E. Patridge.

The following letter was written on the receipt of a
notice from the park commissioners, dated May 2, 1884:,
stating that they had also taken all of Montglade, on
the western side of Walnut avenue, embracing the
property on Glenroad and Ravenswood Park, with their
charming forests, lovely lawns, and domes of stone, con-
taining 1,192,510 square feet of land, which was like
taking the apple of my eye.

Boston, May 15, 1881:.
Messrs. Charles H. Dalton,
William Gray, Jr.,
Henry Lee,

Park Commissioners :
Gentlemen: — Although I firmly protest and remon-
strate against the exercise of such arbitrary power that
deprives me, without my lief or consent, of a large,
elegant, and very valuable property, yet when I consider
its position in relation to other sections of the park
domain, its only elevated hills, its charming terraces, its
views of the valley of Jamaica Plain, and the city of
Boston in the distance on the north, and on the south

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 49

the Blue Hills of Milton, slumbering in their dreamy

atmosphere, .spanning the long extent of valley inter-
vening, dotted with cottages; also its glades and glens,
its native forests, slopes and lawns, I can not but feel
that the loss to me of this lovely estate is almost inevit-
able. I have therefore, but with the greatest reluct-
ance, and against my pecuniary interest, made out the
inclosed bill or claim, which, if accepted by your board,
will cost me much regret, and many thousands of dol-
lars in money.

Mr. Olmstead knows, you all very well know, that the
natural beauties of this valuable estate, with its lovely
valley, its glens, copses and fields, and with its Ravens-
wood Park, possesses rural charms unsurpassed, and
variety enough to be a lovely park within its own
borders, in fact a gem, the treasure of the whole
park area, besides being the chief high gateway to the
entrance of the great West Roxbury Park, and nature
without adornment has done the needful.

Your commission has already secured three or four
hundred acres for park purposes, which are all very well
in counting acres, and cheap enough, but what would
your great West Roxbury Park amount to, some of it
being low and boggy land, without Monteglade ? Where
else within the city limits, can be found another estate
to compare with it for the grand entrance to the park
domain?

Gems and precious stones must bear corresponding
values; therefore, if the citizens of Boston desire such
treasures for their indulgence, they must be willing to
pay for them, or let them alone ; it is not my wish to
sell this property now, even at the prices named for it

50 HISTORY OE THE

in the bill, as it is constantly increasing in value,
although, perhaps, imperceptibly. Before long it will
be wanted, being the first to come into the market; nor
wonlcl I sell a lot on Glenroacl to-day, one mill less than
fifty cents per foot. Yon must be aware that the front-
age of this property is very extensive, running a long
distance on Walnut avenue, bordering both sides of
Glenroacl. and Ravenswood Park circle.

Both of these roads were constructed with much care
and at great expense. These twenty-two lots were
handsomely laid out thirty years ago, in ordor to im-
prove this charming estate, and to gain access to it by
carriage; both avenues, however are private ways.

The frontage of this whole property is now 5,814 feet
and 6 inches, bordered by thrifty elms, and besides the
excellent qualities of this estate as already stated, it has
upon its surface domes of stone and granite, that will
become more and more valuable in future years, and
after these are sold and taken away the land will still
be left, not much diminished in value.

Is it a fail* and honorable transaction for the city of
Boston to take from me this valuable property without
the assurance of a full and ample compensation? Why
should I be deprived of my present or prospective for-
tune to secure the indulgence of a luxury to the citizens
of Boston? I regard these valuable estates as being
fully worth the amount of my claims as rendered.
Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyee.

WEST ROXBURY PARE. 5]

Boston, April 29, L884.

Messrs. Charles II. D Alton,
William Giiay, Jr.,
Henry Lee,

Park Commissioners.

To Samuel E. Sawyer, Dr.

To 10 lots of iand, Nos. 2 to 11, West Rox-
bury, according to Alexander Wads-
worth's plan, July 2, 1853, containing

538,085 feel
Glenroad 1345 x 40, 53,800

591,885
at 35 cts. per foot, $207,159.75

To 12 lots of land,Nos. 12 to 23, same plan,
containing 870,710 feet

Ravenswood Park circle, 20,015

900,025
at 25 cts. per foot, $225,156.25

$432,310 00

To Construction of Glenroad and culverts;
Ravenswood Park road, circular ave-
nue; 0 feet sidewalks both sides of Glen-
road; 190 elm trees, 1850, setting out
and care of them; paid Geo. W. Bond
for roadway, connecting Glenroad with
Forest Hill street, 753x40 feet, 30,120
feet, 1854, 30 years, would stand to-day

52 HISTORY OF THE

$12,800; blocking and fencing Glen-
road May 13th to 16th, 1873; guarding
same two nights and three days, on rec-
ord; William J. Bowditch examining
title, surveying, etc., $12,500.00

To Ashler stone from dwelling house built
by Geo. W. Bond, afterwards bought
by Henry Cabot, Winthrop square,
Boston, $3,500.00

$448,316.00
List of Montglade Lots, West of Walnut Avenue.
East of Glenroad. West of Glenroad.

Lot No. 2

79,204 feet

Lot No

.12

51,977 f(

3

20,460

13

68,183

4

50,210

14

49,530

5

45,672

15

62,690

6

79,744

16

81,100

7

61,220

17

40,900

8

29,760

18

70,650

9

60,500

19

26,080

10

31,940

20

80,500

11

79,375

21

94,400

Glenroad,

53,800

Dirf'lp

22

219,580
24,120
29,915

591,885

Park Road,

900,625

WEST ROXBURY PARK.

East side Glenroad, 591,885 feet at 35 cts., 1207,150.75
West " 900,625 " 25 " 225,150.25

1,492£10 ^m^U(m)

Including roads, trees, stone, etc. 16,000.00

$448,316.00
The following- correspondence was suggested by my
desire to make a satisfactory settlement with the park
commissioners, by having a private interview, and an
opportunity for negotiation and exchange of views,
which, however, proved to be futile.

Tremont House, (
Boston, Jan. 20, 1885. S

Messrs. Charles H. D Alton,
Henry Lee,

Park Commissioners :

Gentlemen: — On the first day of February next I
shall be under obligations for a large amount of money,
and as the park commissioners owe me for the amount
of my bill rendered for lot No. 17, within the park area,
476,360 feet at 18 3-4 cents, or $89,317.50, I thought
it advisable to request you to pay this claim, and I trust
you will not disappoint me.

I already begin to realize that all my material inter-
ests in these valuable real estates, my present and pros-
pective fortune, are now in your hands, subject to the
arbitrary power or otherwise of the park commissioners.
You can deprive me, as you have already done, by the
exercise of the right of eminent domain, of my sacred
rights in m}r own property, ignoring at will m}T wishes,
and thus confiscate my lands; or jon can leave them
subject to my control as it ma}T suit your dictation or

HISTORY OF THE

pleasure, as I have no voice in making a price between
20 per cent, and 100 per cent, of my holdings.

Now in the exercise of this arbitrary power accorded
to your commission, ostensibly for the benefit of the
public, it should be so modified and tempered with jus-
tice, that it shall not trample upon individual rights, but
that equitable, not niggardly terms, shall be made to
satisfy the owner for his sacrifice in parting with his
lands. Instead of fair and honorable treatment, as above
suggested, I feel that my property has been ruthlessly
seized by your commission, after marking it down, down
and down, from its previous valuation by the assessors,
which was $42,900. On this sum the writer has annu-
ally paid his taxes, even down to the absurd valuation
of $18,600, simply to accommodate the stingy appropri-
ation of only $600,000, made by the city government
with which to buy this large area of park lands, worth
$2,000,000 at least.

If the city requires my charming property for luxu-
rious purposes it must pay for it fairly, and not jew me.
I ask no favor, but simply to let my lands alone, that I
may continue to hold them in nry own right.

It has often been said to me that Walnut avenue
is destined to be the court end of Boston, both on
account of its accessibility and its elevated position, for
aristocratic dwellings. But whether this prediction is
hereafter proved to be true or not, I do know that the
lands in this section of the city are most picturesque
and attractive, and they will soon be wanted for the
erection of fine mansions.

Since my property was doomed, and so tied up that
I could neither improve it nor offer it for sale, I have

WEST ItOXRURY PAPJv. &>

paid into the city treasury more than $20,000 for taxes.
Why should I, strictly in justice, pay taxes on property
beyond my control, when virtually held, except in fee,
by the city of Boston? My last tax on Newstead, lot
No. 17, was paid under protest for two reasons: one for
undervaluation, and the other because the taxes were
unjustly levied on it for the whole year, when your com-
mission seized it on the 25th of May, of the same year.

The reduction by the assessors' valuation of city prop-
erty since 1875, averages 14 per cent., to wit: In 1875
the valuations were $793,000,000, and in 1883 the valu-
ations were $682,000,000: while my property has been
reduced by undervaluations 58 per cent., and seized for
the great park.

The English laws are so sensitive in guarding and
protecting private rights that not even the sovereign
could violate them with impunity; these laws are our
own heritage; shall we ignore them?

The fact must be kept in mind, that the prices at
which the park lands have been taken from many of the
poor owners should be no criterion for settlement with
other parties, because they had no means of redress, no
money to spare for litigation; and knowing, as we all
do, the uncertainties of the law, they submitted to the
exaction, took what they could get, and then groaned
over the compulsion forced upon them by their neces-
sities. Who will thank you, now, or in the future, for
exercising the arbitrary power of the right of eminent
domain, to an extent that robs me, and other owners, of
a few acres of land, for the benefit of the citizens of
Boston. Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

56 HISTORY OP THE

Department of Parks, Board of Commissioners. >
City of Boston, January 24, 1885. )

Samuel E. Sawyer, Esq. :

Sir: — In reply to your letter of the 20th inst., which
was laid before the board at its meeting to-day, I am
directed by the commissioners to say, that as they do
not find that it contains any new proposition fo.r a set-
tlement of your claims against the city, no action there-
on could be taken, and that before considering the mat-
ter further, they desire to have from you a proposition
for a settlement of all your claims for land taken for the
West Roxbury Park.

Yours respectfully,

Geo. F. Clarke, Secretary.

On the 24th of January, I wrote in answer to the
above, that as Lot No. 17 was the first condemned, you
will greatly oblige me by paying for it at once. Any
reasonable concession I can make to further this end,
may be considered at an interview; or if you prefer it,
you can make me a direct proposition for this estate in
writing.

Tremont House, )

Boston, January 31, 1887. I

Messrs. Charles H. Dalton",
Henry Lee,

Park Commissioners.
Gentlemen: — Without the favor of a communication
from you in reply to my brief note of the 21th inst., re-
questing }7ou to pay for the lot No. 17 first, it being the
first that was taken, and offering to make any reason-

WEST ROXBURY PARK. f><

able concession, I have had the charity to presume thai
it did not reach yon promptly, as it would not have been
quite an act of courtesy to delay answering the urgent
appeal of one who has done so much to advocate and
promote the public park enterprise.

I am not, however, so very much surprised at this
lack of courtesy, having witnessed too many of life's
conflicts to be easily moved by trifles. A long experi-
ence in business leads me to believe that I do know
what belongs to courtesy, justice and fair dealing
among merchants and high-minded men, in the various
walks of life, and I must confess that during all these
years I have never before witnessed such an imperious
disregard of other people's rights; such a close prox-
imity to absolute robbery, as the process of getting pos-
session of these park lands, has disclosed. The poor
owners have been squeezed without stint by cutting
down valuations, and then jewed in prices in order to
obtain a public park for the indulgence of a wealthy
city. Apply this same kind of treatment to yourselves
and then you will see how you would like it; probably
you would rebel as I do.

I now hereby withdraw every proposition, or conces-
sion, written or verbal, heretofore made b}7 me, with the
view of settling for the lot No. 17, leaving the price as
per bill or claim rendered, under the date of Ma}7 25th,
1883, at 18 3-4 cents per foot, or $89,317.50.

Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

58 HISTORY OP THE

Department of Parks, Board of Commissioners, )
City of Boston, January 31, 1885. j

Samuel E. Sawyer, Esq.:

Sir: — In reply to your letter of the 24th inst., I am
directed to say that the board will insist upon its deter-
mination, not to consider the proposition for a settle-
ment of your claim for damages upon the lot taken
May 25th, 1883, except in connection with a proposition
to settle at the same time your claims for damages un-
der the subsequent taking.

Respectfully yours,

George F. Clark, Secretary.

Tremont House, )
Boston, Jan. 31, 1885. {

Geo. F. Clark, Secretary Park Commissioners:

Sir: — In acknowledging the receipt of your note
crossed by mine of the same date on the way, the pur-
port whereof being dictated by your Board, I have only
to say in reply, that I have already rendered my claim
to the park commissioners for the estates on the western
side of Walnut avenue, called Montcglade, under the
date of April 29, 1884, which I reluctantly made, hop-
ing that this favorite section of my valuable property
would be waived and let alone. But if the commission-
ers find it indispensible to the perfection, beauty and
completion of the park outline, in establishing it, and if
I am thus compelled to part with it, which is like the
taking of the very " apple of my eye." then I have
only to say that to save further controvers}r, litigation
and dela}r, any reasonable concession I can make from

WEST ROXBURT PARK. HI)

my claim for this valuable estate, lot 17, \ shall try to
make, in order to settle both of my claims at once.

I can meet the commissioners at any time within a few
days to negotiate.

Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

Department of Parks, Board of Commissioners.
City of Boston, February 1, 1885.

Samuel E. Sawyer, Esq.:

Sir: — In reply to your second letter of the 31st ult.,
Mr. Dalton directs me to say that the commissioners
would prefer to receive any modification you may desire
to make of your former proposition in writing*.
Respectfulty,

Geo. F. Clark, Secretary.

Trcmont House, )
Boston, Feb. 2, 1885. j

Geo. F. Clark, Esq. :

Sir: — M}r object in suggesting a conference was
with a view of arriving at some mutual agreement as a
basis for settlement by concession, and then, if conces-
sion should not avail in accomplishing our object, any
verbal proposition made could at once be withdrawn,
leaving me free to act according to my judgment, with-
out prejudice to the full amount of my claims. I still
think it best, at any rate, to confer.

Respectfully j

Samuel E. Sawyer.

60 HISTORY OF THE

Thus ended the wearisome and perplexing efforts
made, and the lengthy correspondence pursued for
months, hoping thereby to come to a satisfactory settle-
ment with the park commissioners for my valuable
estates.

This charming property was summarily taken from
me, or condemned, for luxurious purposes, against my
will and protestations; leaving me no alternative for
redress, but the still greater labors, together with the
inevitable court expenses, and with the harrassing un-
certainties of the law. I was therefore compelled to
employ counsel, and enter my claim on the docket of
the Superior Court, against the city of Boston.

The statements annexed contain valuable statistics,
drawn from the records, relative to the complications
and struggles in securing the lands for the great central
park in New York city, which were carefully prepared
and contributed to these pages.

A striking similarity of the methods followed in ob-
taining the lands required for a public park in New
York and Boston is here graphically shown, together
with some of the results already realized.

By the act of the New York Legislature passed July
21st, 1853, about 773 acres of land, lying between 59th
and 106th streets, and between the 5th and 8th avenues
in the city of New York, were at once condemned for
public use as a park. This action of the authorities
had its advocates as well as its adversaries ; many peo-
ple believed, while others affected to believe, that the
scheme would never be carried out. Every effort was
made, by litigation and otherwise, to defeat it. No
money was voted by the city council until 1857, after

WEST KOXBUKY PABK. 61

the final decision of the courts had left no doubt as to
the legality and constitutionality of the' act.

In 1852, the estimated value of the lands taken by
the act was $1,407,325; but the amount finally paid
for them was $5,406,193. By the evidence produced
in court during the trials, it appeared that for some of
the lands so taken the commissioners had awarded only
50 per cent, of* what the owners had paid for them at
public auction in December, 1852, oidy about six
months previous to their being taken for the park.
Taxes were assessed upon the lands until 1856.

The assessments for betterments on surrounding es-
tates, made in 1860, amounted to $1,661,395, which
reduced the cost of the park lands to the public treasury
really to $3,741,798. Of these 773 acres, taken as a
park, 135 acres already belonged to the city, and 57
either to the state or public institutions, leaving the net
amount purchased 583.45 acres, the average price paid
being $9,266 per acre, or 21.27 cents a foot.

From 153 to 1857 this matter was so obscured with
doubt and uncertainty as to the result, that the value of
three wards, in which the park was located, became
greatly reduced; the depreciation in a single year, from
1855 to 1856, being nearly 10 per cent. Men who had
partly paid for their lands abandoned them in dispair of
retrieving anything from the ruin which impended over
them, and much private misery was occasioned thereby.

In 1859, when the valuation of these wards had risen
33 per cent, above the valuation in 1856, it was deter-
mined to add 75 acres, lying between 106th and 110th
streets. The lands had been unjustly appraised for
taxation at $179,850, and when valued in 1860 by the

62 HISTORY OF THE

commissioners of the Supreme Court, they awarded
$1,499,429, of which, deducting the betterments assessed
$425,900, left the balance upon the city $1,073,523.

This award, being unsatisfactory to the park com-
missioners, they voted to discontinue proceedings under
the act, which, by decision of the court, left matters as
if nothing had been accomplished and a new board of
assessment was appointed, who reported in March,
18G3, total amount, $1,179,590, of which was assessed
$171,085, leaving a balance upon the city of $1,008,-
565. The amount paid for these lands was $15,725 per
acre, or 36.25 cents a square foot. The centre of this
area is about six miles from the city hall.

The proceedings for taking these lands were hardly
consummated before the Central Park commissioners
were showing by their reports that there was a rapid
increase in the valuation of the estates surrounding the
park, and that the tax on the increased valuation would
meet the interest on the cost, and sink the principal in
five years. The valuation of the three wards, 12, 19
and 22, which surround the park, was as follows: — in
1856, $26,429,565; in 1858, $31,002,071; in 1863, $51-
419,499; in 1868, 117,926,230; in 1873, 236,081,515.

Since 1873, the inauguration of the elevated railroads
and other grand improvements have contributed large-
ly to the increase of valuations, but up to 1873 the addi-
tion in values had been in a great degree caused by the
superior attractions given to that entire part of New
York by the embellishments of Central Park.

Up to this time the total cost of Central Park had
been $13,902,515, and the sum paid during the 14 years
as annual payments of interest aggregated $8,440,189,

WEST ROXBUKY PARK. G3

while the aggregate taxes upon the increased valuation,
during the same period amounted to $27,862,839.

A comparison of the cost and interest thereon of
Central Park, with the increase in valuation of the three

wards in whieh it is situated, as before shown, is an in-
teresting study, because of the remarkable increase in
the valuations from the year 185G, $20,420,505, and the
gradual increase until 1873, when it reached the enor-
mous sum of $230,081,515, or nearly ten hundred per
cent., while the taxes followed closely upon the increase,
and rose during the fourteen years from $288,085, to
$5,241,298.

The following letter, written by General Horace
Binney Sargent, formerly of this eity, now residing in
Los Angelos, California, shows unequivocally the strong
spirit of righteous indignation that animated him in con-
demning the unjust treatment he received at the hands
of the city of Boston, by the officials in power:

Los Angelos, Cal., March 21, 1885.
Hon. Samuel E. Sawyer:

Dear Sir: — I have not had the heart to reply to
your letter touching the swindle, that I think should be
called The West Robbery Park.

The mere recital of facts is the argument: Ten years
ago, or more, the city of Boston taxed my forty acres,
that front nearly half a mile on Seaver street and Wal-
nut avenue, on a sworn valuation of their own assessors.
That sworn valuation was over $200,000, and the Park
commissioners asked for a bond at that rate, which I
declined to give. I borrowed $85,000 upon this estate,
giving a mortgage.

64 HISTORY OF THE

The city deterred all private purchasers by including
these forty acres in the park plan until their assessors
had reduced the sworn valuation to about $60,000, in
evident conspiracy with their masters, the city of Bos-
ton, which not merely doomed the estate for a park, but
voted to give only a price based on the valuation of
their own assessors.

At last, when the three conspirators, or rather the
one robber, with its two conspiring hands, the assessors
and the park commissioners, saw the tide of value re-
turning, in spite of their falsest valuation, the estate was
seized for less than half the sworn value of ten years
before, and this in the growing city of Boston, and in
one of its most growing wards.

Does any one believe that this fine estate on the cor-
ner of Seaver street and Walnut avenue is worth 100,-
000 less than the valuation on which I was forced to
pay taxes, ten years or more ago, $203,000?

I was offered $400,000 for this estate then, which the
three conspirators, the city, the assessors and the park
commissioners, now seize for less than $100,000, a sum
that does not liquidate the mortgage debt to the bank in
Newburyport.

That Messrs. Dalton, Lee and Gray may enjoy the
reputation of being smart, sharp buyers, of saving a
shilling to each one of the citizens of Boston, they sad-
dle me, in my enfeebled old age, with a loss of five or
six hundred thousand shillings!

By corporate power, my land is doomed at a valua-
tion based on assessment; then assessed at much less
than half its value, and then taken by the park commis-

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 65

sioners at less than its worth would be if not so doomed
and assessed. If this is not robbery, what is robbery?
Yours respectfully,

Horace Binney Sargent.

I here take the liberty of annexing extracts from
another letter of General Sargent's, in which he still
more forcibly presents the striking points at issue,
which deserve the careful consideration of all conscien-
tious citizens. To wit:

"Can any one believe that in a rapidly growing city
like Boston, where parks and other uses had already
diminished the mass of land in the market, the forty
acres of the beautiful old Sargent homestead were cor-
rectly assessed as worth over $200,000, when the park
commissioners desired a bond, and as worth only $60,-
000 when the city decided to take it, if it could get it at
the tax valuation? No matter what influences swayed
the assessors, was the assessment in both cases correct
under oath?

The appraisers, purchasers, doomers, it must be re-
membered, are but one party, the city of Boston, which
is properly a trustee for its citizens and is bound to act
fairly, when in violations of general principles to prevent
fraud, it becomes both buyer and seller of the coveted
property of one citizen. No one can doubt that there
is a close connection between the fall of assessed valua-
tion from $203,000 to $60,000, and the city's vote to
base their buying price on that valuation, and the park
commissioners' desire to show themselves close buyers.
The heads and hands are several, but they arc all the
city of Boston.

66 HISTORY OF THE

And now, to cap the climax, a betterment tax, on
account of this park, to the amount of $800, is laid by
the park commissioners on a single half acre of adjoin-
ing orchard remaining in the family. For what? The
land taken is unchanged. Change of ownership from
private to public title makes no park, and confers no
betterment as ground for assessment. Private use and
settlement would confer more value than the city's idle
ownership. This charge of nearly $800 levied on
owners who suffered by an undervaluation of at least
$100,000, and are now summoned to pay, overshadow
Dr. Franklin's story of paying for c heating the poker.'
Except in the solemnity of the reports, the whole trans-
action is unworthy of the city of Boston."

H. B. S.

I quote the remarks of the Mayor of one of our large
cities, who in his inaugural aptly said: "The first duty
of government is the protection of its citizens in their
rights to life, liberty and property." Would that the
government of the city of Boston, in all its branches,
especially in the park commissioners' department, had
been, were now, and always will be of this way of think-
ing and acting- instead of sacrificing the property of
honest owners, that the citizens may enjoy the benefit of
it for luxurious purposes.

On the 4th day of March, 1885, finding that all my
efforts in trying to make a settlement with the park
commissioners were exhausted, hopeless and unavailing,
and after having a prolonged and earnest interview with
the full board of commissioners, and with the aid of
Hon. Robert M. Morse, Jr., my case was presented with

WEST KOXBUKY PARK. 67

plans and arguments, showing the picturesque beauty
of the lands, their charming location, the advantages,
and relative position of the neighboring villages, their
proximity to the city, the constant communication and
rapid transit by two railroads ; and being convinced that
all this valid reasoning had proved ineffectual, I finally
concluded that further delay in the prosecution of my
demands against the city, would be futile; therefore I
resolved that there was no alternative but to pursue my
action in court. This I knew would be a hard struggle,
with all the influences of City Hall employees, office
hunters and favor seekers against me. My counsel had
already prepared the necessary declaration, and we
launched our barque on this proverbial sea of troubles,
a court, with all the uncertainties of law, and which even
at this time of writing (May, 1887,) are not yet ended.
Subsequently on the 17th of May, 1880, Moorfield
Story, Esq., was retained in cooperation, or as junior
counsel; thus adding to our legal force and acumen.
My arduous labors involved in so important a case, be-
came, with every step, still more and more earnest and
ponderous.

During these many months of tedious, oppressive
labors and painful anxieties, I called upon more than
fifty prospective witnesses, while wearied and exhausted
in mind and body, an ordeal that 1 could wish not even
an enemy might be obliged to realize.

Franklin Parle.

The following arc extracts mainly selected from a
letter written to the park commissioners, hoping to

68 HISTORY OF THE

effect u settlement for my valuable estates taken from
me against my will for park purposes, including Monte-
glade, Ravenswood Park, Glenroad and Newstead.
These are the gems of the park area, Glenroad Ravine
being the natural gateway. They are all absolutely
indispensable to the perfection of the great Franklin
Park.

Boston, April 23, 1886.

Gentlemen : — A brief outline of the history and the
motives that have actuated the holder of these valuable
properties may not be uninteresting to your Board, giv-
ing you j)ossession of important facts, that will aid you
in estimating the true value of these estates to the city
of Boston, as the chief features of interest in the great
Franklin Park.

These valuable lands came into my possession more
than thirty years ago, and have been held subject to the
loss of interest and the payment of taxes all these years,
amid the depressions and changes in business, knowing
that their beauty would sometime be appreciated, and
that a colon}' of elegant residences would cover the
slopes and the plains of these lovely estates, thereby
reimbursing me for patiently waiting.

The outlooks from the elevations and terraces are ex-
tremely charming, and the drainage perfect, so that
health would be likely to reign in every home. The
undulating surface of these lands, embracing wooded
hills, grassy slopes and charming fields, together with
their natural rural beaut}7, renders this property most
attractive.

Monteglade and Ravenswood Park, together with the

WEST ROXBURY PARK. G9

adjacent property, constituted my future expectations of
a fortune in them. They are indeed a delightful park
in themselves.

To part with these lands is like taking the very r apple
of my eye." And even at the figures rendered to the
commissioners, or city government, being 18 3-4 cents,
25 cents and 35 cents per square foot, I should heartily
rejoice if these valuable estates could be let alone, for I
am sadly unwilling to part with them, except in house
lots. If, however, the city must have them for the com-
pletion of the park proportions, as well as for their
picturesque beauty, then let the citizens of Boston pay
fairty and equitably for them, and not permit the long-
waiting owners to be wronged for their luxurious in-
dulgence. I claim the right to make prices for my own
property. The buyer can not, in justice, make prices
for the owner, especially by first making undervalua-
tions. An unmerciful exercise of the right of eminent
domain becomes a prodigious wrong to a few, for the
benefit of the many, and all for luxury.

Glenroad was laid out more than thirty years ago,
forty feet wide, and substantially built, with two or three
feet of stone for its foundation, and a culvert running
through it, covered, and nicely crowned with gravel.
It was thus kept constantly in order: $135 was paid at
one time for repairs. The sidewalks are six feet wide
on both sides, and handsome elms were set out on its
borders. It is 1345 feet long on the premises, and the
same width of land, 753 feet long, was bought of
George Wm. Bond at that time, (1853) to extend the
road from my western boundary to Forest Hill street,
in order to gain a direct communication to Jamaica

70 HISTORY OF THE

Plain station, on the Providence Railroad. This station
is about six minutes' walk from Monteglade. Ravens-
wood Park Circular Road was constructed at the same
time, the width being 38 feet at the entrance, and 32
feet at the circle; elm trees line the wayside. They
were both expensive roads.

The Hon. Geo C. Richardson and Mr. Bond have
since built Sigourney and Robeson streets, intersecting
with Glenroad, Walnut avenue and Forest Hill streets,
which, having brought their lands into the market, ad-
joining mine, they have already sold several lots at 25,
30 and 35 cents per foot; higher prices are now asked,
and on Forest Hill street sales are made at 37 1-2 cents.
My land is elevated and of greater value.

There are valuable ledges on this property; the nat-
ural faces are admirably adapted for the construction of
elegant mansions, while the blocks and broken fragments
would be suitable for foundations, culverts, and road-
ways. These materials will be wanted and when they
are taken away and the grounds levelled, the land will
still be valuable for houselots.

The steam cars run on the Providence railroad, at
short intervals, more than fifty times a day each wa}T
(time from Boston thirteen minutes), stopping at Green
street station. The Metropolitan horse railroad, on
Washington street, runs its cars every fifteen minutes,
which is only four minutes' walk from Monteglade (fare
five cents), so the accommodations are frequent and
ample.

This property was surveyed and cut up into twenty-
two house lots, by Alex. Wadsworth, in 1853. There
are ten lots on the eastern side of Glenroad and twelve

WEST ROXBtTRY PARK. 71

lots on the western side. The road is private property,
it never having been conveyed to town or city. The
lots on Walnut avenue, Glenroad and Ravenswood
Park are finely located and are worth 50 cents a fool.
The frontage of this property on the several streets is
very large, being 5814 1-2 feet, and eveiy lot is pleas-
antly accessible.

The property on the eastern side of Walnut avenue,
called Newstead, being Lot ~No. 17 on the park plan,
has also been held more than thirty years, waiting for
the growth of population, which now has almost reached
it; these being the first lands to come into the market
for dwellings. An enterprising city like Boston must
have room to spread itself out, and no adjacent lands
are more beautiful, being a natural ridge or knoll, over-
looking the low lands in the vicinity and the long stretch
of valley intervening to the Milton hills, having a fine,
sunny, southern aspect.

This estate, containing 476,300 feet, was taxed in
1874 on $42,900; it was sold in 1872, fourteen years
ago, for 18 3-4 cents a foot, $89,317.50; the price then
demanded was 22 1-2 cents. The assessors commenced
running the valuation down, till in 1881, it was taxed
on $28,600. Then one of the commissioners asked me
if I would take the 25 per cent, additional, or $35,750,
but I declined, believing it to be worth a great deal
more. Two years later, May 25th, 1883, the assessors
ajrain cut down the valuation to the incredible sum of
$18,600, and then informed me that they had seized it ;
to which I cried out, "Robbery! Robbery!"

The object of this summary treatment was, I suppose,
to make the meagre appropriation of $600,000 cover the

72 HISTORY OF THE

purchasing or the condemning of all these park lands,
then 366.80 acres, worth more than $2,000,000. These
facts have become matters of history, and I shall feel it
my duty to place them on record.

By request of an agent of the city government, I re-
luctantly bonded this property in October, 1879, to run
till January 1st, 1880, for $80,000. After the time had
expired, the commissioners again put the screws on to
the poor owners of land within the park area, and many
of them were obliged to submit rather than to spend
money in court to secure their just rights.

During all these years, from the inception of the park
project, nothing could be done with my lands by way of
farther improvements or by selling, because they were
already irrevocably doomed; meantime I was held
strictly accountable to the city for the payment of my
annual tax bills, paying into the city treasury more than
$20,000, while at the same time I was losing the interest
on this valuable property, as it was then beyond my
control. Such is the fact.

The Ashler stone, lying upon the lawn, was taken
from a large, elegant mansion house, built by George
Bond, the elder, on Winthrop square. It was consid-
ered very handsomely hammered stone. It was bought
entire and teamed out there at a great expense, for the
erection of one or more elegant structures.

I have felt a deep interest in the park project, and
was one of the earliest movers to secure a public park
for the citizens, spending time and money to accomj^lish
the object, not, however, suspecting that I might be
fleeced by advocating the enterprise.

Daring the winter of 1873 and 1874, I obtained the

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 73

plans (27) of all the lands embraced within the bounds
of Seaver street, Bine Hill avenue, Canterbury, Morton,
Scarborough and Walnut avenue, containing 366.80
acres; and these divers plans were made into one by
William A. Garbctt, civil engineer, at my expense; it
is dated April 9th, 1874. This was the first plan made,
and it was then submitted to some of our well known
merchants, with a full description of the property, and
it met their warm and earnest approval.

As soon as the park commissioners were appointed,
in 1875, the plan and the letter were both sent to them,
and became the germ of the park movement; the out-
lines being adopted by the commissioners, as there
suggested and described, and the park project was
secured in earnest. This original plan has recently
been returned to me at my request, and it now hangs
on the walls of the Sawyer Free Library in Gloucester,
as a memorial of the West Roxbury Park.

These 366.80 acres were assessed at that time on
about $1,200,000, but were afterwards gradually cut
down to $532,000, in order to accommodate the purse
of the city treasurer, certainly a very great reduction in
valuation, while the population and wealth of Boston
were yearly increasing; the increase in Ward 23 being
26 per cent., against only 6 per cent, in the city proper.

In obtaining a luxurious park for the citizens of Bos-
ton, many private individuals have been sacrificed; one
whom I well know was reduced from comparative com-
fort to almost dependence. He was an old, worthy
merchant, doing business here nearly fort}T years.
Was it right?

I am sure your scientific landscape gardner, Mr.

74 HISTORY OF THE

Olmstead, will tell you that Monteglade is absolutely
indispensable to the beauty and perfection of Franklin
Park. Then why not compensate me accordingly?
Gems and precious stones are not common; there are
enough low and miry bogs anywhere, which you can
almost get by asking; these lands are elevated, and
beautiful, and the railroad, facilities enhance their real
value.

As soon as Mr. Bond offered his property, untram-
meled by park doom, he readily sold several of the lots
on Sigourney street at his own prices.

I now rest in the hope that your board will at once
make me a proposition that I can accept, and save the
wear of litigation, Avhile I remain

Cordially yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

Boston, May 31, 1886.
Hon. Benjamin Dean,

Chairman Park Commissioners:

My Dear Sir: — On leaving you at our last interview,
you facetiously remarked, "You are equal to the strain,"
which has rung in my ears ever since this final effort to
make a settlement of my claims against the city, which
availed nothing. But why force me to part with 4ny
charming estates so much against my will, and then
subject me to this great "strain," a court ordeal?

The magnitude of my several claims aggregated was
the real bugbear that prevented the settlement, creating
in your mind the terror of criticism ; the fear of doing
justice to me by paying an equitable price for my valu-

WEST IIOXP.URY PARK. 7.)

able property. I grant that the amount as a whole
looked formidable, and so docs the handling of every
large thing, but when the thing can be so easily divided,
and a value set upon each part, the claims are at once
simplified.

Now I am to be dragged through a court of law,
with all its perplexities and discomforts, simply to ex-
tract justice from the right of doing wrong; hoping that
if my life and health are spared, the proceeds of this
suit may do others some good.

The exercise of the right of eminent domain may in
some cases be an absolute necessity, as the location of a
railroad, a site for a state house, city hall, court house,
or other public buildings; but in my case, I am sacri-
ficed to indulge the citizens of a great municipality in a
luxury. In all cases of legal seizure, the owners of the
land should be treated fairly at least, if not liberally,
and especially if the property is endeared to them, as
mine is to me, for these estates arc the real gems of all
the park grounds, and their beauty cannot be excelled
in the vicinity of Boston.

But when the property is ruthlessly taken and the
taker has the power of making his own prices, regard-
less of the owners' private rights, with a craving, unjust
spirit, then the right of eminent domain becomes an
egregious wrong.

Then again, why should this arbitrary power to seize
subject the owner forcibly to give up his property, at
the prices of a bankrupt sale, assuming, in order to get
the property for a song, that auction prices are market
values? This is another egregious wrong.

76 HISTORY OF THE

Or, why should I be obliged to part with my lands at
the speculators' prices, such as he or they could make
money on, and I be deprived of them? Am I not as
well entitled to the profits, being the real owner, as
he, a speculator?

'Now, if I am not reasonable in my conclusions, and
fail to advance honest opinions, then condemn me and
my lands too; but my convictions will remain the same,
believing that I stand upon the immutable and eternal
laws of justice and right.

Can the city of Boston, which you so ably represent,
afford to do less than to be governed by the same great
principles, and fully authorize her officials to do unto
others as they would expect others to do unto them?
How would you or any member of your board like it
if you were forced to part with your treasures and then
be subject to the uncertainties of law for redress?

Respectfully and cordially yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

To show the indignation and sense of wrong felt by
another member of the same family in regard to their
unjust treatment, I have taken the liberty to subjoin a
letter written by a son of one of the oldest and most
prominent families in Boston.

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 77

Boston, Juno 1, 188(3.
Samuel E. Sawyer, Esq., Tremont House,

Dear Sir : — This morning I find at my oilice your
paper containing extracts of your communication of
April 23d, 1880, to the park commissioners of this city,
and relating to the taking of your estates for park pur-
poses. I read the paper with much interest and with
more indignation, and feel that I can sympathize fully
with you in this matter, by reason of my own family
being fellow sufferers with yourself.

Let me say that if ever the true history of the taking
of these private estates for the West Roxbury Park
(now Franklin) is ever written, it ought to bring the
blush of shame to the cheeks of those persons instru-
mental in perpetrating on private citizens such a griev-
ous wrong and injustice. "West Robbery Park," my
father calls it, and well he may, for he have a deep and
abiding conviction that he and his family has been
robbed of hundreds of thousands of dollars. He once
received and declined an offer of $400,000 for our old
family homestead, now within the park limits. This
was in the year 1871 or 1872, 1 think. He subsequently
saw the estate included within the proposed park area,
its valuation by the assessors reduced from over $200,-
000 to less than $70,000; its subjection for long years
to a slow and wearisome, dooming process, and the
estate finally wrung at a price vastly below its real
value, from a Bank President mortgagee, by the late
Board of Park Commissioners. He saw himself thus
deprived of a greatly needed surplus; and to cap the
climax a betterment tax of nearly $800 laid upon a sin-

78 HISTOEY OF THE

gle half acre of adjoining orchard remaining in the
family. Can the irony of injustice go further?

It was the pride of the English law that under it the
rights of the individual subject were so sacred that not
even the sovereign could invade them with impunity.
It has been the pride of our form of government that
this heritage from the law of the mother country is de-
veloped, and rendered more secure in our freer institu-
tions. The freedom of the individual citizen, thesacred-
ness of his person and property, lie at the foundation of
a constitutional government by the people.

We have been taught these fundamental truths from
our childhood. The unfortunate and victimized owners
of West Roxbury Park lands surely had the right to
suppose that their public officials would not disregard
them. The result has shown the incorrectness of that
supposition.

In my judgment, a most pernicious precedent has been
established; one fraught with evil for the future, and
which may yet return to plague and torment its authors.

Wishing you the fullest measure of success in your
endeavor to partially rectify the injustice and injury in-
flicted upon yourself and your property, I am
Very truly yours,

Horace B. Saegent, Je.

The following adaptation on Bruce's Address to his
Army, was written on the spur of the moment, while
filled with the impulse of righteous indignation, and is
given here, not for its merits as a literary production,
but as a part of the history of the case:

WEST ROXBUJtY PARK. 7!)

The West lioxbury Parle.

Now "Franklin Park, — a misnomer. Dr. Franklin would have
" scorned the compliment."

(Parody on Brucc's Address to his Army.)

Sons who lived on freedom's soil,
Sons whose lives were spent in toil,
Ye who let your lands despoil,

Awake ! defend your rights.
Ye whose hopes were in yonr lands,
Ye whose pluck all power withstands,
Come and join resisting bands;

In justice God delights.

Come one, come all, who felt the power
That seized our lands! Oh cruel hour
That wrenched by force the widow's dower

And dealt a heavy blow.
These public rights to our domain
Cannot excuse unrighteous gain,
Nor clutch our lands so fraught with pain ;

One moiety they bestow.

Our lands they seized — shame on the crew
That dashed our hopes without ado,
And smote the owners with their cue;

We'll fight them tooth and nail.
By all oppression's woes and pains,
By pleading owners' galling chains,
We will just drain our dearest veins,

These wrongs we will assail.

80 HISTORY OF THE

Our hearts rebel — our blood runs high,
Courage my boys, let us defy
Their craving spirit. Live or die

We will our rights defend.
Now lay the rich usurpers low,
They're smarting now by every blow ;
Just show our grit where e'er we go,

Till vict'ry crowns the end.

West Roxhury (now Franikliri) Parle.

The following letter was addressed to an old friend,
regretting the necessity of calling him upon the stand,
but showing him the importance, in every community
where differences sometimes exist, of calling witnesses
who do know the merits of cases in dispute.

Boston, June 7, 1886.

My Dear Sir : — There are critical times, — anxious
moments in our lives, — when we feel it absolutely nec-
essary to lean upon our good friends for support and
protection against wrong and imposition, and I am un-
fortunately in a position just now to be subjected to a
gross and unscrupulous wrong.

The exercise of the arbitrary power called the right
of eminent domain has deprived me of my valuable es-
tates, sorely against my will, and I am forced to appeal
to the courts — to the uncertainties of a suit at law, for
redress, and at present it seems to me the chances of
obtaining justice bear only a feeble outlook.

You well know about the recent unjust verdict ren-
dered in the "Peters case," and how necessary it is for

WEST KOXBU11Y PARK. 81

me to guard myself tit every point by good, intelligent,
competent witnesses, in order to protect my sacred

rights. This unrighteous verdict, just rendered in our
Superior Court, has properly awakened our best citizens
to the importance of solving the cause of this mysteri-
ous decision, that the saeredness and dignity of our
tribunals of justice shall not be allowed to sink into ob-
loquy and ridicule, for "law and evidenee" no longer
rule the jury, but some evil genius is permitted to bloek
the wheels of justice. I shall therefore protest emphat-
ically against having my claims against the City of
Boston presented and tried by this same jury, preferring
to submit to one clean out-and-out robbery !

I ask no testimony from you, nor anybody else, that
cannot be conscientiously and cheerfully offered as a
witness, nor would I call upon you to do this unpleas-
ant service if I could possibly do without your valued
evidence, knowing as you do the absolute sales, and the
value of my lands, as well as that of the surrounding
property. The question arises, Why, if sueh an aet of
barefaced injustice can by any possibility be repeated
in our courts, prompt and decided action should not
be taken to change our system of jury trials to some-
thing better?

Are our average jurymen capable of determining the
true values of large estates? or any other claims involv-
ing more than the sums of five or ten thousand dollars?
Why not have large claims, in justice to both parties in
interest, always settled by three competent, intelligent
referees, or even one good judge?

In the case of Peters vs. city of Boston, the weight
of evidence was given in favor of 16 to 23 cents per foot,

82 HISTORY OF THE

which evidence was entirely ignored and disregarded in
making up the verdict, which being so clearly against
the testimony given, should have been set aside at once
and a new trial granted.

If it was the result of ignorance or obstinacy, our
good citizen should not be so wronged by submitting
to it, which view of the case I find pointedly confirmed
in the Saturday Evening Gazette, as the following ex-
tracts will show:

Injustice.

To the Editors of the Gazette: — The verdict of the
jury in the suit of Francis A. Peters against the city of
Boston, for damages caused to his estate on Forest Hill
street by the taking of a portion of his land by the park
commissioners, was a great surprise to all who listened
to the evidence, the City Solicitor himself included.

Seldom has such an array of land-owners, improvers,
and occupants of estates in the immediate vicinity, be-
side the most competent and experienced experts, testi-
fied in any case; and though the petitioner's claim was
most thoroughly presented and ably argued to the jury
by Messrs. Richard Olney and Sigourney Butler, the
result of the trial and the small verdict rendered can
only be accounted for on the ground that the average
juryman considers land adapted to the raising of pota-
toes, strawberries and garden sauce, as of higher value
than land whose natural beauty consists of hill, dale,
rocks and trees, many of which are the handsome result
of a century's growth.

Fortunately for the great public, who are to enjoy

WEST KOXBURY PAHK. 83

Franklin Park, the commissioners did appreciate the
great natural beauty of the land for park purposes, and
so, notwithstanding the owner's earnest protest, and to
his great regret, seized the land under the right of
eminent domain, and Mr. Peters is, as is too often the
case in lands thus taken, a sufferer, and all

Pko Bono Publico.

"The auction sale on Friday at the Williams estate,
of lots of land on Humboldt avenue and Crawford street,
at prices from 18 to 32 1-2 cents per foot, must lead our
former park commissioners to think that they under-
valued desirable land which they seized for the Frank-
lin Park, and must naturally affect the values of the
numerous cases now pending in our courts."

Glenroad ravine, the most important gateway to the
great Franklin Park, is noted for its pieturescrue beauty.
It was constructed substantially, at great cost, thirty
odd years ago, but always remained a private way,
never having been conveyed to town or city. The
neighbors and others have long enjoyed its benefits with
the slight exception of three days and nights' blockad-
ing to protect my interests according to the require-
ments of law. Its construction served to open and
make available contiguous land, without cost to the
owner, by which several sales have been made at fair
prices, say 25 and 35 cents a loot.

When the citizens of Boston drive over the Park
roads or ramble through the pathways, lounging in the
shade of the lovely forest, they may have occasion to
feel a sting of conscience that these charming estates
were wrung from the gwners at bankrupt prices, by the

84 HISTORY OF THE

cooperative branches of the city government, leaving
some of the owners in a state of dependence.
Cordially your friend,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

Pertinent to the foregoing, I here copy a newspaper
article directly to the point, dated August 2, 1886,
headed "Jury Reform:"

" Chicago has just found that getting a jury from the
promiscuous drawing from a voting list is a farce,
and all her trade and manufacturers' associations have
united in an appeal for reform. Massachusetts has
found that her system of letting selectmen and alder-
men set up a list to be drawn from, is a mistake, in that
in most cases men are called to pass judgment upon
things they have never had the least conception of.
If a commission could be secured which would call
jurymen for specific cases, who might be supposed to
be somewhat acquainted with the general character of
the issue, greater satisfaction would follow jury de-
cisions.

A case in point was that of a suit in our State Court
last month, when the plaintiff sued for the value of an
estate held at $500,000, which the defendant adjudged
worth much less.

]STone of the jury who arbitrated had ever been in the
business on their own account; only two owned houses,
and not one of them had ever had an income of over
$2,500 a year.

Putting such vast sums into the hands of men inex-
perienced in affairs of finance and estate was evidently

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 85

a mistake, for the verdict was substantially a com-
promise, a splitting of the difference.

The manufacturer sued for the use of mechanism that
he believes does not infringe another's rights, gets poor
encouragement when he faces a jury of hod carriers,
dry goods clerks, teamsters, idlers and numbsculls. He
ought to have twelve men versed in mechanics to settle
the dispute, or as near such a list of qualified auditors
as the country would afford. So, too, the banks, the
brokers and merchants ought to have a jury who would
be considered in the open market at least fairly com-
petent to weigh the evidence.

It were time we cut loose from the ways of the Pil-
grims in this conduct of our business, and adopt a sys-
tem conforming to the progress and advance of the
people. Intelligent jurymen will save a waste of words
and eloquence, expedite business and facilitate justice."

I must apologize for the apparent but unavoidable
repetitions that occur in this narrative, on account of
so many letters, delineating this case of litigation, where
the attainment of luxury, and not utility, was the chief
object to be gained. But I must still crave pardon of
the reader while I summarize some of my experiences.

Nearly six months of constant labors and perplexing
thoughts brought us down to the 17th day of May,
when I had the last hopeless interview with the chair-
man of the park commissioners. Many suggestions were
offered, and among them I requested that three compe-
tent referees be appointed, but on the 12th of June the
city solicitor reported to my counsel that the commis-
sioners would not consent to a reference, preferring, it is

86 HISTORY OF THE

presumed, to keep the case within their own control. It
is alleged that one of the commissioners offered a bet
that my property would not bring over eight cents a
foot in court, — a shady inference that might be subject
to a bad construction, — no doubt u the wish was father
to that thought."

On the 20th day of May, one of my old and most ex-
cellent friends, Hon. George C. Richardson, passed
away, mourned and regretted by a long list of our best
citizens. He was to have been one of the chief witnesses
in my suit, as he owned lands near by, or next to mine,
consequently he would have given valuable testimoity.
On the morning of his death, I called at his office and
was shocked to learn that he was dead.

After repeated delays and reappointments, made by
the opposing counsel, we at last succeeded in bringing
our suit into the First Session of the Superior Court,
Chief Justice Lincoln F. Brigham being the presiding
judge to hear our cause, a most admirable and conscien-
tious judge, worthy his high and responsible station.

On Thursday morning, the 17th day of June, our
case came up and after empanneling the jury they were
at once taken out to Montcglade and ISTewstead, now
within the West Roxbury Park lines, accompanied by
the city solicitor and my counsel, to view the premises.

Next morning the trial was resumed in court and
seventeen witnesses were sworn and examined for the
plaintiff. At four o'clock the court adjourned till Mon-
day morning, the 21st, when six more witnesses on the
plaintiff's side testified to the value of the land; their
united evidence averaging over 18 cents a foot for all of
both estates. This ended our testimony.

WEST KOXBURY PARK. 87

Then the city solicitor, the opposing counsel, opened
his case for the city and offered seven witnesses, whose
rebutting testimony averaged only 5 cents a Cool, thus
reducing the average on both sides; a most extraor-
dinary difference in the evidence given. Surely there
was no "boodle" in my case. I am not disposed to re-
flect disparagingly upon the testimony offered by the
opposing counsel, but would simply recall to the mem-
ory of those who were present at the trial the remarka-
ble evidence offered by two or three, at least, of these
witnesses, called hy the city. One of them affirmed that
my property was worth only 2 1-2 to 3 1-2 cents a foot,
another that 3 1-2 to 4 1-2 cents a foot was all it was
worth, etc., while the evidence presented b}r the months
of man}7 other witnesses showed that the land just over
the division line, lower, and of much less value, had
been sold in several instances at from 25 to 35 cents a
foot. These were not experts, nor were the}^ cit}T offi-
cials, but were so interwoven in the meshes of the great
machine, whose workings, or modus operandi, are so
mysterious that they are past finding out. It is suffi-
cient to say that the aggregate of all the prices testified
to on both sides, notwithstanding the damaging evi-
dence, as above offered by the city, was 449, which
divided by the whole 30 witnesses, averaged 15 cents a
foot, or $300,000, without reckoning the interest, or say
$350,000 with interest. The first sum is $07,761.15
more than the verdict rendered, which was $232,238.85.

On Tuesday, the 22d, the last witness having been
called in the case, the first argument was made by Hon.
Robert M. Morse, Jr., my senior counsel, closing at
11.30 A. M., when the city solicitor, A. J. Bailey, Esq.,

88 HISTORY OF THE

commenced his argument, which we all admitted was
forcible enough to save any city from imposition.

At 12.30, Chief Justice Brigham made an able and
impartial charge to the jury, which certainly ought to
have enlightened their minds, at least, and directed
aright their convictions ; but the pith of the evidence
was far from them, or in other words, the average testi-
mony, which should have been their chart and compass,
was ignored and entirely disregarded.

Monteglade-Ravenswood claim, $413,486.00
Verdict, 43 1-2 per cent., 179,838.75

Difference, $233,647.25

Newstead claim, $89,317.50

Verdict, 58 5-8 per cent., 52,399.60

Difference, $36,917.90

Total difference (loss), $270,565.15

Monteglade verdict, 12 1-2 cts., $179,838.75

(Instead of 25 and 35 cts.)

Newstead verdict, 11 cts., 52,399.60

(Instead of 18 3-4 cts.)

Total amount, $232,238.35

The amount of three claims was $502,803.50

Some of Judge Brigham's rulings were excepted to by
the City Solicitor, one of them being the rate of interest
to be added to the finding of values, from the dates of
the two takings, to which the judge replied, "I shall
rule that the interest must be made up to to-day (June
22) at the legal rate of 6 per cent, per annum. There
were some other invalid exceptions taken, which I will
not here repeat. The jury then retired, but on the ad-

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 80

journment of the court they hart not returned. On
Wednesday morning, the 23d, the jury brought in their

verdict, which was announced by the foreman, as $232-
238.85, with interest added, making the whole sum $265,-
091.97, which disappointed my expectations, based upon
intelligent evidence.

Still the city persistently blocked the settlement b}r
petitioning for a stay in arrest of judgment and filed a
bill of exceptions, meaning thereby, if possible, to grind
out of me another slice of my just claims. Such a course
was reprehensible and unworthy the name and fame of
old Boston.

Thus harrowed we got a hearing before Judge Brig-
ham on the 30th of October on the exceptions filed bj"
Solicitor Bailey, which were mere technicalities, but
my counsel, Messrs. Morse and Story, finally agreed
under the judge's order, to send them up, in part, to the
Supreme Court, and here the case rests.

Sometime after the trial was over, the verdict rend-
ered, and the exceptions filed to block the ends of
"justice and mercy," I wrote the following pointed letter
to the Park Commissioners :

The Rigid of Eminent Domain and the Wrong of

Jury Trials.

North American Ins. Co. Office, )
Boston, July 26, 1886. j

Messrs. Benjamin Dean,
Patrick Maguire,
John F. Andrew,

Park Commissioners.

Gentlemen: — Tf all the claimants against the city of

90 HISTORY OP THE

Boston have to undergo the same unmerciful treatment
that I have experienced, by being the possessor of lands
wanted by the city for park purposes, they are to be
pitied as fellow victims.

The story of my annoyances, the oppressions en-
dured, I will try briefly and graphically to narrate, show-
ing something of the thorny road I have been obliged
to travel in seeking partial justice from the city govern-
ment. In the first place, my charming estates, of very
great value to me, presently and prospectively, are sum-
marily seized without my consent, under the guise of
eminent domain, a gross wrong in its inception, and in
its unjust finality, sacrificing me, my expectations and
my fortune, for the public indulgence, and personal
gratification.

The act of seizing my property for this purpose was
an unscrupulous one, not rising even to the pretension
of a public necessity. Nor do I believe that the framers
of this odious, unjust and arbitrary law, giving the right
to take private property for public, and especially for
luxurious uses, ever contemplated that lands so taken
unwillingly from the owner, should subject him to the
grinding process now imposed by the city of Boston.

You must bear in mind that these lovely estates were
not wrenched from me as a public necessity, for the site
of a public building, or the location of a railroad for the
greater convenience of the citizens and the public, but
absolutely torn from me for luxury, and then stinting to
the last strain the compensation.

Finding that there was no alternative but to part
with my estates, the very thought of which became such
a sore trial, I endeavored by every means in my power

WEST ROXBTTRY PARK. 01

to effect «i settlement with the commissioners, and to
save being dragged into the courts for redress. Willi
this hope I delayed entering my ease upon the docket,
unwisely believing that justice would ultimately he done
by the city government. Doomed by disappointment, I
was at last forced to commence a suit against the city,
presenting nry several claims at one time.

After many months of labor, tedious and perplexing,
I at length brought together more than thirty highly
respectable and thoroughly competent experts and oth-
er witnesses, who had either lived in that neighborhood
or had owned, bought or sold lands there, and knew
well their value.

The testimony of twenty- three of these excellent wit-
nesses gave valuations of the several estates, averaging
for Newstead, 17 1-4 cents a foot, and for Monteglade
and Ravenswood Park 18 1-2 cents, together averaging
about 18 cents a foot or $360,000, without the interest.
More reliable witnesses I am sure were never offered in
court.

After closing our evidence, the city solicitor opened
and continued the case by the introduction of seven or
eight witnesses, most of whom knew nothing of the
value of lands in that vicinity, never having lived,
bought or sold real estate there, confessing on the stand
their ignorance of values; }^et three of them testiiied
that my estates were only worth 3 1-2 to 4 1-2 cents,
and one of them dropped as low as 2 1-2 cents a foot;
shameful statements which should have been dishonored
on the spot. The testimony of worthy men informed
them that less desirable property had been sold just on
the other side of the stone wall, dividing my property

92 HISTORY OF THE

from George Wm. Bond's, at 25 to 35 cents. Such
witnesses as those who gave the low figures must have
been under strange influences, and if the land had be-
longed to them instead of me, 25 or 30 cents a foot
would have been too cheap for it, the difference being
in valuing other people's property.

Thus my cause was severely handicapped, while I
was powerless in my efforts to obtain simple justice
tempered with mercy. Still the average of all the tes-
timony presented was 15 cents a foot, 3 cents more than
the values given in the verdict, or $60,000.

In combating the law department of the city govern-
ment, I had to contend against the board of park com-
missioners also, with whom I had so often tried to set-
tle my claims, out of court, certainly an uneven and
unfair struggle for my private rights. I have now had
convincing evidence that in going to the courts, with
such powerful odds against me, became a iarce, present-
ing my equitable claims under the greatest disad-
vantages.

You know how earnestly I tried to have my claims
presented to and adjusted by the honest judgment of
three intelligent and competent referees, capable of
measuring the true value of estates of such magnitude,
or to submit my claims to the good judgment of even
one of our justices, an offer that was fair and safe
for either party, but my reasonable proposition would
not do; the motive of such unwillingness I can not
comprehend; to me it was a n^sterious problem.

I am neither a bankrupt nor an anxious seller of real
estate, but simply an innocent owner of valuable lands,
that I do not wish to part with at present, consequently

WEST ROXBURY FARE. 93

I hereby offer to you $50,000, or even more, to release
to me and give up these charming (stales to my own use
and benefit, for they will surely bring twice the amount
of the verdict, as soon as the tide of population which
is near at hand, reaches them. The location of these
lands, being so near the steam and horse car facilities,
renders them most desirable for elegant homes, but my
hopes are sacrificed before I can get the benefit of the
advancing demand.

Ignorant of the principles governing a court of law,
and the administration of justice by jury trials, I had
the temerity to believe that the guards placed around our
tribunals were ample for the security of avavy private
citizen in his equitable rights, but when a jury is em-
panelled, knowing but little or nothing of the value of
real estate in a neighborhood, and perhaps incompetent
to estimate the true value of large estates, and who go
upon the premises for one single view, it would seem to
be impossible for them to render a reliable judgment of
the real value of the properties they are chosen to ad-
judicate; and yet we are subject to the uncertainties of
such jury trials. Our remedy is by adopting the prac-
tice of appointing referees.

Moreover, as an illustration in my case, the jury did
not render their verdict according to the old rule of
"law and evidence," but entirely ignoring the testi-
mony of excellent witnesses, they rendered their verdict
on the basis of 11 cents a foot for JNewstead, against

17 1-1 cents, and for Monteglade 12 1-2 cents against

18 3-4 cents. The average of all the testimony on both
sides was about 15 cents, or 3 cents more than the ver-
dict, taking $60,000 out of me.

94 HISTORY OF THE

If the jurymen are governed by the rule of equity,
their decisions are easily made, because the average of
all the evidence offered settles for them the amount of
.the verdict, in most cases; but the chances of obtaining
justice, when law and evidence is not the rule, becomes
doubtful.

13y the strict definition or interpretation of the law
governing jury trials, I read the law thus: "A jury
is required to try any matter of fact and declare the
truth on the evidence given them in the case, according
to the average testimony offered." This being the rule
and the law, it becomes a plain and simple duty so to
act, and nothing more can be required of them.

It does, however, seem to me that different causes re-
quiring the experiences of different business trans-
actions ought to be considered in empanelling a jury,
to secure practical judgment.

After the labors, anxieties and annoyances running
through several months in the preparation of my case
for trial, the tedious court experiences and large ex-
penses, a very unsatisfactory verdict is finally arrived
at, it being $150,000 less than I had a right to expect,
which in a word was at least $400,000; still the dis-
agreeable recollection of the suit comes up, and weari-
ness not willingness leads me to accept the unrighteous
verdict, rather than suffer another such ordeal; not
doubting that the city government would rejoice over
their victory, and render to me speedy judgment, but
instead of that they petition for a stay in arrest of judg-
ment and file a bill of exceptions, simply to delay and
block the wheels of justice, and thus to annoy and per-
plex, intending to wear out my patience ; but they will

WEST ROXBUKY PARK. 95

be mistaken, for I shall never consent to the reduction
of one dollar from the face of the verdict, nor abate one-
cent from the interest.

Now, if your commission, representing the city gov-
ernment, did not intend to abide by the verdict rendered
in my case, why did they have the hardihood to force
me to all the discomforts of the suit In court? They
have acquired no such privilege over me. Surely I
have done nothing in the progress of the trial to gain
undue advantage, which I might have been justified in
doing if I had been keenly alive to such methods, but
all my witnesses were of the highest respectability,
capable, conscientious and judicious, besides being tax-
payers. Is it therefore honorable, on the part of either
department of the city government, first to force me
under the harrows and then to do their utmost to keep
me there?

Your plea for trying to set aside the verdict and pe-
tition for a new trial seems to be based upon the fact
that Ncwstead was entered with other claims against
the city, it having been seized the year before, and no
action filed. What could be more natural when other
and larger claims were pending? No claim of mine is
stronger or more legitimate.

Do the park commissioners owe me for Newstead or
not? Does the city government, or any of its officials,
desire to rob me of this property, or take advantage of
a weak and dishonest technicality of law and thus de-
prive me of 47(3,360 feet of land at 18 3-4 cents, or
$89,317.50 when they also owe me for other large
claims?

The jury has now rendered their valuation for this

96 HISTORY OF THE

property in their verdict at 11 cents a foot, which is an
extremely low one, you may rest assured that I shall
never take any less.

If the citizens of Boston crave my charming estates
for their aesthetic indulgence, without paying for them,
you will pardon me if I should respectfully decline, pre-
ferring greatly to be my own almoner, and to bestow
my charities where they are deserved, and where they
would be better appreciated.

You can not expect me to part with this property at
one-fifth of the real value, when contiguous lands or
others similarly situated could not be bought to replace
mine at five times the value placed upon them by some
of your witnesses, even if such could be found, nor have
I the power to seize desirable lands under that odious
right of eminent domain, a pretext for doing very great
injustice to the owners of real property.

The long strip of land with a short frontage on Blue
Hill avenue, which you settled for at 9 or 10 cents a
foot, will not compare in value to the charming ridge
of land called ISTewstead, nor is it worth one-half as
much for building purposes.

Many other lots that were seized and paid for at
forced bankrupt prices, are low boggy sloughs, only fit
for the raising of cabbages and other farm produce;
besides being a long distance from railroad facilities,
while my estates are all conveniently situated and ad-
mirably adapted for the building of elegant mansions.

Auction sales or bankrupt prices are no criterion for
the values of my estates, knowing as I do that, if the
city would let my private property alone, I feel sure of
realizing the full amounts of my several claims, as ren-

WEST HOXRURY PARK. !»7

dered against the city being more than $500,000, for
nothing can be more certain than that these picturesque
and lovely estates will soon be wanted for the country
homes of our citizens.

If I had made an effort to improve these lands and
offered the lots for sale, many of them on Glenroad, Ra-
venswood Park and "Walnut avenue would have been
sold long ago at 50 cents a foot, for there are no lands
so attractive for fine dwellings within four miles of the
city, nor so available. You well know how to appreci-
ate the beauties of Monteglade and Ravenswood, for
nothing can be more charming; and besides, the pecu-
liar location, relative to the other park lands renders
this property, especially, indispensable to the form and
perfection, and in fact it is to be the grand entrance to
the great Franklin Park.

Did it ever occur to the commissioners, past and
present, that that grand old man, Dr. Franklin, would
not, if here, have considered it any compliment to have
his name adopted for the park?

Shall I enumerate the names of those owners who
have suffered by the exercise of this unrighteous power?
No; but I will speak of the treatment dealt out to one
of Boston's old and worthy merchants, who for over
forty years did a large business, and paid his taxes in
this city. He was interested in a valuable and promi-
nent lot of land, condemned by the park commissioners
and, after many earnest and repeated efforts to make a
fair settlement, he, also, was dragged into court and
finally obtained a verdict of more than double the
amount offered b}T them, even after the very damaging
testimony presented by the citjr against him ; and sup-

98 HISTORY OF THE

posing that his arduous labors would thus be ended, he
accepted the result of the trial in great disappointment,
and expected immediate payment. But the same cruel
action was continued, until the old gentleman's spirits
were broken, and his patience as well as his pockets
were exhausted. He was finally forced by threats of
another trial, (which his health would not permit) to
deduct many thousands of dollars from the verdict,
(which was seventy-five thousand dollars too small,)
before he could collect his money from the city. He
had always looked upon this real property as his onry,
or chief safeguard against poverty in his old age. But
the over-bearing, grinding process of the city govern-
ment has thrown him upon the charity of his friends.

The above statement represents only one of the ex-
amples of the unmerciful treatment exercised over the
owners of lauds doomed, within the park area, which
ought to be condemned by every good citizen who loves
the name of Boston.

To save complications, and the time and labor of
calling together another class of expert witnesses, I
made no claim extra in my suits for the valuable ledges
on the premises, which your superintendent of streets
knows how much to value ; he having negotiated not
long ago for such property at prices aggregating
many thousands of dollars .

In considering the cost and value of my several
estates, we should not lose sight of one very important
fact, not presented in court, to wit: That the accumu-
lated interest and the taxes on my properties, (these two
items of outla}7) amount to more than $200,000 since
1876, ten years ago, when all this property was virtually

WEST ROXBURY PARK. 09

doomed by the commissioners. And after the fiat had
gone forth that all these lands would be seized by them,
nothing could be done to improve these lands advan-
tageously by preparing them for salej as no sane man
would be fool enough to buy and erect a home on land
sure to be condemned by the city. Yet I paid my taxes
annually during all these years.

I ask no favor of the park commissioners, the city
government, nor the board of assessors, except one, and
that is simply to let my lands alone.

Respectfully and cordially yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

P. S. Aug. 2, 1886. The property of the late Geo.
C. Richardson on Forest Hill, Robes- on and Sigourney
streets, 14 lots, has been sold at auction (out of season)
at prices averaging 18 cents a foot, and the Williams
estate was also sold at auction by L. Foster Morse at
prices ranging from 18 to 10 cents.

The remaining land on Sigourney street, which be-
longed to Geo. Win. and W. S. Bond was sold to the
city at 28 cents a foot. This is the next lot to mine
divided only by a stone wall, but lower land. This
sIioavs that real estate is in fair demand.

Copy of a letter written to the park commissioners,
which speaks for itself, and shows how I regard the
value of the property taken from me.

100 HISTORY OF THE

Tremont House, 1
Boston, Dec. 29, 1886. f

'7

Messrs. Benjamin Dean

i

Patrick Maguike,
John F. Andreav,

Park Commissioners.
Gentlemen: — ~Now that you (representing the city
of Boston) have obtained legal possession and control
of my estates, which I regard as of great picturesque
beauty and value, the loss of which having become such
a trial to me, I thought it best to make, through your
commission, to the city of Boston, a bona fide offer for
these estates. To wit: For Newstead, 12 1-2 cents a
foot; Monteglade, 16 1-2 cents, or nearly $65,000 more
than the verdict, in order to regain legal possession and
control of them.

This downright offer will convince you how much I
regret to have rny property wrenched from me against
my will for luxurious purposes, and how severely I con-
demn the exercise of that arbitrary power, the right of
eminent domain, that authorized the seizure when the
property had been undervalued.

Resistance being useless, I therefore try this method
to recover the legal title to my estates; and as the city
treasury is now laboring under a heavy weight of debt,
in the face of a restricted right of borrowing, limited to
only 2 per cent, on the tax valuation, and as the city
can not afford the luxury of expensive parks for its citi-
zens, I presume you will be glad to accept at once this
generous proposition, and thus reduce your obligations.
Respectfully yours,

Samuel E. Sawyer.

WEST JROXBURY PARK. 101

As it will be of interest to know how the court re-
gards certain points in evidence, I will here copy, ver-
batim, Judge Brigham's charge to the jury, on testi-
mony of values, as follows: "The prices which the city
of Boston may have paid for any land in the park does
not furnish appropriate or pertinent evidence of the
value of the land of the petitioner taken. The law does
not regard sales made to avoid the very proceeding
which has been going on before you, as current market
sales. A sale by the owner of land, for which there can
be one purchaser only, when he has no option to refuse
to sell, and can only elect between an acceptance of the
price offered and the uncertainty, delay and trouble of
legal proceedings, is not a reasonable or fair test of
market value. It is in no sense a sale in the market.''
To which instruction the city solicitor excepted.

On the 17th of March the two important points were
argued before the Supreme Court. On the bench were
Judges Morton, Allen, Devens, and Holmes. Mr.
Storey's argument was on the stay and arrest of judg-
ment. By the city solicitor, on the j:>lea that Newstead
was barred b}T limitation, consequently out of the juris-
diction of the court. Mr. Morse's argument was on the
exceptions. When they had finished, Mr. Bailey made
his plea on both and all points, in which, by his usual
effective and methodical way, he drove his arguments
lustily into the ears of the court, which Was apparently
unmoved by his eloquence.

And here the case rested for some months, awaiting
the uncertainties of the law and for the decision of the
court and final rescript. Meantime no mercy can be

102 HISTORY OF THE

expected from the city of Boston, as I have endeavored
to show by the foregoing pages of this narrative; but
on the other hand, the city government has done all
that it possibly could, to block the way of settlement.
After seizing my estates, I have been dragged into
court; unaccountable and unjust testimony was given
against intelligent and judicious experts, and finally the
verdict was rendered; the result being about 16 1-4
per cent, of my claims, or about $250,000 less than I
would have accepted for this property, at private sale.

After the testimony had been admitted on both sides,
as to the value per foot of the New stead land, without
any objections being raised at the outset, and as the jury
was about to retire, the question was raised by the
city solicitor about the rate of interest, on the declara-
tion of the verdict. He then for the first time raised the
point of jurisdiction, and requested that the Newstead
estate be thrown out of the verdict; but as the record
did not show any reason for such a proceeding, the
Supreme Court sustained the verdict as will be seen by
the rescript, sent down May 9th, 1887. To wit:

Samuel E. Sawyer vs. City oe Boston.

Petition for the assessment by a jury of the damages
to the petitioner, by the taking of land by the board of
park commissioners. The case was tried in the Superi-
or Court, and the jury returned a verdict for the peti-
tioner in the sum of $265,091.97 and the respondent
alleged exceptions to the rulings of the court. The ex-
ceptions have now been overruled, the rescript being as
follows : The court is not shown to have misused its
discretion in admitting or rejecting evidence. The

WEST HOXRURY PARK. 103

record does not disclose that the petition was not filed
"within the statutory time." Roherl M. Morse, Jr. and
Moorfield Storey for the petitioner and A. J.Bailey and
R. W. Nason for respondent.

Tims ends this important ease in litigation, — one of
the most important in regard to the magnitude of the
several claims, that has recently been tried in our
courts, the amount involved being over iive hundred
thousand dollars.

The legal expenses were fully commensurate, being
nearly twenty thousand dollars, besides the extraordi-
nary labors of the plaintiff.

'•'•Let there be gall enough in thy ink, though
thou write with a goosc--pcn, no matter."

— Shaksjyeare, Twelfth Night.

FINIS.

DATE DUE

UNIVERSIT

Y PRODIM

DTS, INC.

#859-5503