Daily capital journal. (Salem, Or.) 1896-1899, 1896-06-11
An Open Letter From J. II. Albert to
Street Commissioners Culver.

An open Aettci fiOih j. 49, N-f
Street Commissioner Culver.
SALEM, Or, June 10, 1896.
To w. I. Culver, Street Commissioner;
DsAR SrR;-- Referring to the following re.
POI, Of the action Of the city council at us last
meeting to.wit:
AT This point Mayor Catch called atten.
ton Of the courcl To the state Of abeyance
into which the Mission street eneroachmenis
had fallen and sugges ed that the question De
revived and that George G.. Bingham, one OF
the parties interested in the immediate adJu,t-
meut Of the matter who was present in the
council chamber, be invited 20 address the
council on the subject. This, upon motion.
Mr.. Bingham did, urging the necessity Of
promptly replacing the offending fences upon
! ibe correct lines OF the street. The discussion
became general and eveniuated in an offer by
Mr.. Bingham to give his services as a lawyer
| in behalf Of the city in any event OF legal
prosecution arising from settlement OF the
issue. The council thereupon ordered City
Engineer Culver to remove the distractions
complained Of, at once, placing them upon
the original municipal lines and to report his
action IN the premises"
/ beg TO call your attention to your
notice TO me dated March ~, 1896, and
my answer addressed TO the common
council OF March 18th respectively, Of
which the following are true copies,
to-wit:
SALEM. Or, March ~, 1896.
Mr.. ]. II. Albert, Salem, Oregon;
DEAR SIR;-At the regular meeting Of the
common council Of this city held on February
IS, 1906, report was made by the COM
mittee on streets and public property showing
that the fences along the north side Of
Mission street which encloses your lands, ex-
tends into the street, the report further states
that the fence should be built with reference
to the north line of the Leslie donation land
claim and not the Wilson line.
am instructed by The council to tahe the
necessary steps to remove this obstruction.
You are respectfully notified TO remove the
fences belonging to you along Mission street
TO a point at le 'st 80 feet from the Leslie
line within ten days.
W. !. CULNES,
Street Commissioner.
SALEM, March ~, 1896.
To the Hon. Common Co.ncil OF the City OF
Salem.
GEN N:-Referring to a certain notice
served upon me. this day by W. J. Culver,
as street commissioner, beg to say, that the
surveyors report with its accompanying plat,
on Gle with the city recorder, shows that the
road or street referred to, was located "along
the south line OF the Wilson claim" The
records Of the United States land Office show
the Wilson claim mo. ~ 10 have been
established prior to the Leslie claim (No. 4S)
and that the south boundary Of the Wilson
claim is a right line projected from its south
west to its southeast corner.
The charter OF the city Of Salem recitcs
that the "limits oflhe city shall be as follows,
commencing in the middle Of the main chan
mel OF the Willamette river as the corner
Of the late w. II. Wilson's claim, thence east,
following the southern boundary to the south
east corner Of said claim, ETC., etc.
My southern boundary fences were located
by City Surveyor Culver about one year
since, as being just thirty feet north Of the
southern boundary Of the city. the Wilson
line, in regard to the location Of which there
can be no dispute. This line is now con.
hmed by the city surveyor and has not been
disturbed by any subsequent survey; indeed,
is established by him in the plat prepared by
him for the "eom" on streets and public
property.
have no respect for the report Of a com.
mittee which directly eontradiets the facts
clearly established by the data upon which Il
prelends to base It's findings. deny its
right to relocate road already legally
established or to carve slice (however
small) from the municipal domain for the
benefit Of an adjacent roprietor.
Relying upon these facts, | will ioroibly
resist any attempt on your part, or your SER
wants, 10 invade or trespass upon my prem.
ises.
Respectfully,
[ [Signed. J. II. ALBERT.
wish TO supplement this with the
statement that the iron stake set by
you near the west end OF my property
on the Wilson line Is In position now,
the oak stake at the east end having
been covered up In the flll since made
by me, but both 30 foot stakes, as set
by you for line upon which To place
my permanent fences are intact and
exactly In line with the fences placed
over two years tlnstead OF about one
year ago. the intervening fences con-
forming exactly TO that line. The
contention of the committee that the
fences should he 30 feet from the
Leslie" no, 45) instead OF the viii
son No. 4i) line, which 10 claims IL
oyerlaps, suggests the undisputed
fact that the Wilson claim has prior
ity In date, It's south line was run
through virgin territory, and as two
bodies cannot occupy the same space
at the same time, the northern bound
AIRY OF the Leslie claim must neces-
sarlly be limited 10 territory lying
south OF the south line OF the Wilson
claim, and IL Is not possible for the
former TO encroach upon, or overlap
the latter In case they conflict, but
the south line OF the one aud the
north line Of the other must be, and
are identical, the question of priority
In time OF the Wilson claim now being
RES ADJUplCArE.
You admit that the United States
patent projects the south line of the
Wilson claim from certain point In
the Willamette river its southwest
corner, south 20 degrees, 2l minutes
east, SO chains TO the southeast corner
OF said claim. You admit also that