The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-01-10
SMITHS COVE LAND.
Tide Land Board Listens to the
Lake Shore Case.
rug WATERWAY EXCAVATION.
x.T,er Street Eeassessment Case
Another Deserted Husband-De-
liuquent Tax Collections.
TUG WATERWAY EXCAVATION.

shs entire time OF the state land COM
-gxssou was taken up yesterday In hear
s-g arguments In the contest between the
esss.le. Lake Shore e. Eastern railroad
- me y. Fl. Gilman Company as 70 the
sreSerence OF night 70 purchase small
.~.~t Of land situated on Smiths cove.
r. railroad company was represented by
= NJ Carr. VINO said he proposed 70 prove
.sas the tract was above average high tide
- Engineer Stlxrud, who was at present
-. of the city. but was expected back
sssrtIy. Mr. Carr held that the company
-zs the legal owner Of the point or spit
- lsud which projected into the cove from
~ uplands owned by the Haller-Minor
sssrs BIZ virtue OF survey made by the
eomDany and fled by IL In the government
i.ra Office under the act of congress OF
,g-x giving to railroads running through
.sv4rrmsnt land for each ten miles OF road
,asnty acres for station purposes. and
srrfher by virtue Of a contract OF purchase
sron the Haller-Minor heirs OF the title 10
.se upIands stu resting in said estates
rbis il the point on which the railroad
company is making its fight, hoping 10
-roye By the elevation that the land Is up
zni
George Donworth, representing the
smiths Cove Land Company. was willing
a. ALLOW She case TO go over until The ele-
va,.on was decided.
Attorney W. r. Hays appeared before the
commission, at the conclusion OF the argu-
nents and asked TO say few words in
hls own behalf and that OF his associate,
Frank Shay, they having Eeie application
"a the state for a contract to excavate the
waterway al Smiths cove, anu to fill in
the adjacent tide lands. Mr.. nays claimed
that bis contract has been signed by the
commissioner OF public lands and only
awaits the approval Of the governor. Mr..
HAYS eontended that the state, by its board
of tide land appraisers. had plated the said
lands as tide lands. had laid out It's water
way through the spit or neck of land ac-
cord!ng 20 law, had given due and legal
notice thereof, that the time for a review
Of its said acts had long since expired, and
that the board had no power now TO change.
alter or in any manner review the acts Of
If predecessor. He claims that the action
Of the local board was an adjudication Of
these questions. He further held that the
company is estopped from attempting to
assert an adverse title 10 these lands
against the state by reason Of the com
pany standing by and allowing the state to
4y cut Its waterway and appraise the
lands as its tide lands according to Ian.
Mr. Hays attention was called at this
point 10 the fact that the commission was
not hearing contracts. but was sitting to
hnd or lowland.
Mr. Hays then took up the position that
Under this ruling the matter could not come
70 before the commission unless I'm the ma
tire OF an appeal He further stated that
no claim OF ownership had bean set up or
urged In the contest OF the proposed con-
trsr, before the commissioner OF public
lsn.s and that the present claim is adverse
ard hostile 10 the rights OF the state and
sha SaA her ntfo
TIE matter by the board went over until
fof&y.
The docket for today is as follows:
b l35. l.. /. Pike. i.7ss. LIE. S.. l.. s. e.
Ry. Co.. Halter ct al. 1.e5i. VS.. Leary
ct al.
B. fa5. I. .. 3. Pike. i.79. 1.7ss. s.. L. 8 &
z Ry. Co. LIZ. Halter ct al. Ls5i. VS..
Leary et al. 1881.
B. 81 1. 5. 6. pike. IT'S. 1.7sa.s.. l. s. &
= Ry. Co. I.727. Halter ct al. Ls5i. Us.
3. iss. L. 7. 8. Pike. l.7Ss. 8. L. S. &
= Ry. Co. LII. Halter ct al. ISL. VS..
Leary ct al.
b iss. L. .. 10, and h. "a. I.s,s.s.. LIS.
& Z. Ry. Co. LIT VS.. Haller ct al. 1861.
B. iss. l.. 4. s. 6. Pike. 17ss. i.7ss. 8. l.. s. &
z. Ry. Co, 1.7Z7. Halter at al, l,eol. vs..
Leary ct al. 1,l30.
B. 1sc. l.. Z. Pike. 1.7ss. s., L. S. &
z. Ry. Co. LII. Halter ct al. 1861. VS..
Leary eft al. 1,I30.
B. i3d l.. s. Q. Pike. l,7s7. 1.7ss. s.. L. s. e.
I. Ry. Co.. 1.727. Halter ct al. 1851. VS..
Leary ct al. l.Ia0.
D. 1877 l.. !. .. Pike. 1856. 1.7s7. s., L. s. "a
e Ry. Co. LIS. Halter CT al. 1855, VS.
Leary ct al. l,13O.
B. 1y7. L. 3, 4. Pike. I.Tss. s., L. g. & cry.
Co. LIS. Haler ct al. 1850. VS. Leary ct al.
lISa
x. l3., 7. g. 6, 8. Pike, L,7S5. !, 7Ss. s, 7.
E. Ry. Co. LIS. Halter ct al. 1,sJo. VS..
leary ct al. 1.I30.
3. 1877. I. 9. 10, II. Pike. 1.Ts5. g. l.. 5. &
Z. Ry. Co. LIS. Halter ct al. l.6So. Mann,
iEs VS.. Leary eft al, 1.l3o
B. lbs. /, l. 2. s.. +. 5. Il r. Ry. Co. LIS.
Halter ct al. i.eJe. Mann. 1.is2. VS.. Lea<y
ct al. l.lsa
b. lss. l.. 8. 4. S. s.. L. s. q e Ry. Co.
In Halter ct al. 1850. vs.. Leary. l.lsO.
b l2s. L. /. Pike. I.7S5, s.. l. s. & r. Ry.
Co. las. Halter et al. 1,e5o. VS.. Leary.
Lla
b ia. L. ?. :. S. 9. s. l.. s. & F.. Ry. Co.
La Halter ct al. l.6So. Mann. i,4S2, W.
leary. 1851.
B. iSe. l. I. Z. s. Z. S. L 5. & f. Ry. Co.
les haller et al. fs50. vs.. Leary. l.isl
b iS9. l. 10. II. Pike. l.7S5 &. l.. s. 4 L.
Ky. Co. l.72s. Halter e. al, 1850. vs. Leary
ei al, l,l3l
R i29. L. le. Pike. LIS. LIS s. l.. S. & r.
ny. Co. LIS, Haller Ct al. I,6S0. VS.. Leary
ct al, l,l3t.