The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1888-08-07
THE YESLtR TAXES.
SUITS BEoCGnT TO PEEvExr TEE SALE
oY TIE rsopxsrr.


Z SUITS were brought yesterday in the nat
/ Ter Of the IesJer assessment 20 restrain
sheriff cocbrsae from selling property for
aelfnques taxes. The sAsSx verr afxr-
{ Used for to-day, bat temporary restraining
orders were Issued IN all OF the eases. one
sait vas brstskht b. J. D. LowTnan. sauin-
{. lstrs.gr Of tie estate Of sarah Z. Y,sssr
F. The complaint alleges thar last year the
east half Of the Yssier donation claim. the
property Of Mrs. Yesier'x estate vsas A
ssEs8 At st-fsaus tAa; tue board Of =; raj
baton frssatnieutiy and wronxfuIIy IN
erased the valuation 10 sEs.eoo
a srEr BY Nh YEsIER
A similar suit Was brought by Nr. II. L
fckser. The property Involved IN this co<e
u the NJ of the swJ. Of the SCI 81 sec
=, Up. = y. Z Y 10; 4 ssd the SEls If
TIE sEi4 Of See %. Tp. a y, g5E 2. the ~
81 See. IL Tp- Is y, r r; an undivided =
Interest 10 the sw,4 of the swis OF SCI
y; al undivided iafercs: IA the SEi.
Of the swl. Of Sec. 4, TIP. 2sN,RsE and
tie SEA % the SEs4 II s.,e Is, Tp. AN.
Y. The eosapiainf alleges that the
property Was assessed for $780, its full
valuation. aud that the assessment was
that the plaintiff rendered the county
treasurer sI74, the Emoani legally
collecsable. aud that the treasurer
ec;uaied solely with the intention OF ipjur-
ing Mr.. iesies. refused 70 accept IT. Au-
other list OF property IL inelBded in the
complaint, which the plaintiff asserts he
listed with the assessor at its fail cash
value. The complaint alleges that the
assessor frandulent5y and sFrongfniiy
burned and totally destroyed the list
aad without reason or cause made
pretended assessment fixing the
valuations st greatly increased and
grossly unreasonable and extFavaesut fig
CURES: the complaint asserts that this was
done solely for the purpose Of i8jnrinz.
expressing and defrauding the plaintiff,
discrimination has been made. thar the
plaintiff appeared before the board Of
equalization with many repu able witness
c. and conclusively showed that the assess
ment was unjust aud greatly in excess Of
the real cash value Of the property; that
the board ignored the evidence aud re (,
fused 10 make any reduction, although /
every member of The board knew that the 1
cash value of the property was not above the /
price the owner listed II at. The complaint 4
Is accompanied By the aiiidayits Of Messrs. I
Hill0ry l. Butler and X. Russell. subsfau- I
tiating Mr.. Yeslcr's statement regarding 4
values.
THE MOST IMPORTANT cAsEs.
Another suit is brought by ]. u. Low
man, trustee OF Mr.. fesler's estate and this 4
i the most important Of the three as IL in I
wolves nearly all Of Mr.. Yesier's last years I
ihAes- INC hllceAtiohs are pfaCtitS3is the
same a. In the last mentioned suii-that /
the assessor with the intention OF iniursng
Nr. lesaer, burned the lists returned by
him OF his property and greatly increased
the assessment, ana that although the
plaintiff conelasiyeiy showed the board of
equalization that the assessment was man.
ifestly unjust, the board refused to make
any reduction, that the plaintiff rendered
the county treasurer S.5076.f6 the amount
legally due for taxes and he refused 20 ae-
cept IT, Further, that the wharf and mill
al the foot Of MIL street was assessed at
$500 and that the board OF equalization.
without notice to the plaintiff aud actuated
the valuation TO So, 600. This complaint is
accompanied by the affidavit OF Judge
Lewis that while more than s., 000, coo worth +.
Of land belonging 10 Others is assessed at
of its value, that OF Mr.. Yesler's
is placed higher than its actual cost value