WEST EOXBURY PARK. 3? 



why should any official or officials of the City Govern- 

 ment presume to ignore my rights? 



We all know that unimproved lands are not intended 

 to be taxed for more than half their real value, yet I 

 have paid ray taxes annually on my l^ewstead estate, 

 lot 'No. 17, these ten years past, at valuations ranging 

 from 11:2,900 in 1871, to |28,G00 in 1881, which is sud- 

 denly reduced to 18,(300, in order to make the small ap- 

 propriation of |(]00,000 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 f 1,13G,- 

 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, Newstead, 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 wnllingly accept the use of 

 these pleasure grounds, if they knew the methods by 



