WEST ROXBURY PARK. 45 



On the 31st of October I received iin answer to the 

 above conimnnication, and on the 9th of November I 

 wrote the following reply: 



My Dear Sir: — I have the pleasnre 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 1871 on 

 112,900, and in 1881 on |28,G00, to 1883 on $18,600, thus 

 cutting down the valuation $21,300, from the first date, 

 and then to summarily seize the property, l)y the right 

 of eminent domain, at these small llgures, it seems to 

 rae, 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 foi" the public good. It is 

 enough to make the holder of real property howl at such 

 gross injustice. 



Arc we living in a christian community, l)reathing the 

 atmosphere of civilization, or are we living in a land of 

 bondage? Not even at 18 3-1: cents a foot do I wish 

 the city to buy this estate ; to me it is worth more, and 

 will produce a ])rofit over this price. Ten years ago 

 this property was valned by competent experts at 15 2-3 

 cents a foot, four times the assessors' pi'csent underval- 

 uation, but it was not for sale. 



"Why do you tax me at all onproj^erty already doomed 

 foi' 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 



