The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-07-19
OPPOSE THE NEW PLAT
Protests Against Vacating Old
Tide Land Streets.
HEARING BY THE COMMITTEE.
Property Owners and Railroad Men
Object TO Appraisers PIat-An-
other Session Tomorrow.

The Joint tide land committee Of the
city council held a meeting yesterday az
ternoon 70 consider protests against the
vacation OF the old plat. and win meet
again tomorrow. There was considerable
talk as 20 whether the legal points in the
matter should be considered first, and IL
was finally decided that a special meet
ing should be held for that purpose at :
O'Clock tomorrow afternoon. With this
understanding a number OF those in the
meeting withdrew and the protestants
came forward.
Il. r.. Rawson. fIf behalf Of several hold
ers OF water front property in North Sc
attic. claimed that the tide land act or
March -. lsso. delegated 20 the city the
power 20 regulate the streets, and that.
having once delegated this power TO the
city. the legislature could not give IL to
a COMMISSIONS mere creature of statute
for even a legislature cannot give away
what st doesn't possess. The new plat, II
carried out, said Mr.. Rawson, would de-
stroy all chance for North Seattle TO de-
rive any benefit from its water front by
making the land available for warehouses,
elevators. etc. Inaccessible. re asked
that some way be found OF rearranging
the plat SO that the part of the water front
that he represented would not be lost to
the city.
X. S. Jones spoke for property owners
at the foot of Pine and Stewart streets.
saying that under the proposed scheme
no possible grading would avail TO make
that part of the water front of any value
TO the owners.
A. Fl. Manning made a strong protest
on the grounds that the wharf which he
had built at the foot of Water street six
teen years ago. and which had been in
constant use since then. would become
worthless II tire plat OF the tide land APP
pra!sers was accepted. Railroad avenue
would take up nearly all the front. and
what was left citizens were refused the
right to file on, so II seemed that citizens
who had bought property at the foot OF
Water street IN good faith had no rights
whatever.
G. H. Hagan, representing Senator
Squire's property, adjoining Mr.. Man.
ning's said that the new plat gave the
railroads everything and shut the citizens
out.
Judge Osborn drew a map and graphical
" described the damage done to him by
running a 120-foot cross street directly
through the improvements on his property.
and only twenty-five feet to the south OF
an existing sixty-foot street that was
amply sufficient for all traffic. and an be-
cause OF the desire on the part of the
platters for exact uniformity in the size
OF the blocks. The Judge declared that the
argument OF the appraisers was that they
had the city In a hole, and didn't see what
the city could do to help itself. He had
been TO the appraisers and had been prom
ised a hearing by them. but they had filed
their plat the night before the date set to
hear his complaint, and fooled him shame
fully.
r. s. Jones then spoke again about the
change in South Second street. and showed
that the new plat worked to the benefit OF
the railroads. He didn't for an instant
suspect. he said. that the appraisers were
in any way Influenced by the railroads.
but IL the railroads had done the work
themselves he did not see how they could
have taken better care OF their interests.
South Second street, under the new ar
rangement. will be useless to teams. South
Third. Fourth and Fifth are not available.
and all traffic will be diverted to Railroad
avenue. thereby destroying the value of
the investments made in good faith along
South Second street.
". b. Huntley spoke in place OF Hon.
Thomas Burke. who could not attend, say
ing that the Great Northern. in order to
conform 20 the new requirements. would
have 10 cross and then recross the Seattle.
Lake Shore g. Eastern along the North Sc
attic front In a way that was simply i'm
practicable. IL had bought the right TO
be where II is from the property owners.
and had done so I'm good faith.
Hon. ]. A. Stratton said that OF all those
who had made improvements. certainly
not more than two did not have their i'm
provements run through by the new
streets II looked as though the spprais-
ers had deliberately planned 10 run into
everything. II the city vacates the old
streets it cannot occupy the new ones I'M
I'll these improvements have been con-
demned. which means, IN almos, every
case "a lawsuit, and where is the money
10 come from for the paying OF the value
OF the improvements and for the costs OF
the suits7
As there were no further protestants
present. the committee adjourned TO meet
again tnnOrrow