The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-10-04
Records of the Circuit Court Do Not
Had Really Been Dropped.
EXPLANATIONS BY THE ORGANS
ARE GIVEN THE LIE BY THE COLD
PUBLIC RECORDS.
Spencer's Certificates Not Made to
Correct Previous Errors-The Bog
Bobs Up Right Along.

The two Taggart organs are trying to out
lie one another in explaining away the Cir
cult Court record which shows that the
Board of Park Commissioners adopted res
olution April 16 TO include in the park
system" Mayor Taggart's bog lands. Both
of them assert that there was an irregu-
larity in the proceedings under which the
assessors were first appointed by Judge
Brown, maze by Col w. r. Holloway, who
was at that time clerk of the board Col.
Holloway is not here to defend himself. He
is out of the country. But as a matter of
fact the excuse the two organs make is
without foundation. The records speak for
themselves.
There was more than one petition filed.
as the Sentinel and News could have discov-
cred if they had cared to publish the truth.
Both papers say that Colonel Holloway
made an error in not describing the property
that was to be condemned in the application
for the appointment of the assessors. In
no part of the park law is this required.
Section IS says: whenever said Board of
Park Commissioners shall have determined
to have condemned any grounds selected
purposes), or shall have selected any
grounds for such purposes and secured
a contract or agreement for the same by
purchase or otherwise, they may apply to
the Judge of the Circuit Court for the county
in which the real estate, or the real es-
tate to be offered thereby. may be situated
for the appointment of three disnterested
freeholders of said county as assessors. and
thereupon such court shall appoint three as
SCISSORS, qualified as aforesaid, for the pur-
poses provided in this act The section
then goes on to set out the duties of the
assessors No place is it said that the real
estate to be taken shall be described in the
application for the appointment of the asses
sors. Indeed, the board proceeded on the
theory that it was not necessary to begin
condemnation proceedings when agree
ment could be rachel with the property
owners, and in the case of the Kirkland
property, ON West Washington street, which
the board bought from the Marion Trust
Company, no reference is made to it in the
various petitions for assessors filed in the
Circuit Court, excerpts of which are given
below. If it were necessary to set out
description of the land N one case it would
be in all, and the deal on the Kirkland prop
erty was irregular. Other cases are men
toned farther on. AS matter OF fact the
original application was probably sufficient
The records of the Circuit Court show that
an application for the appointment of as
SCISSORS was made Sept. 8, 1886; that Joseph
L. Flack, G.. T.. Cruise and Daniel Burton
were appointed; that Cruise subsequently
resigned; that John S. Spann was appointed
his successor, served a day or two, resigned,
and that G. 4. Coffin was appointed to take
his place. They were appointed under the
provisions of the park act, as shown by
~ DO do nnf h
perform their duties faithfully according to
law.
After the work of the board grew so vol
luminous City Attorney Curtis concluded
that to save any questions that might there
after arise it would be better to have each
tract of land condemned in subsequent pro-
ceedings and described in detail, and that
course was followed. There is nothing in
either Of the various petitions on file in
the Circuit Court that show they were hled
to amend or cure the record in any respect.
THAT FEB. DATE.
Until the Journals expose was published
both Taggart organs stood upon Feb 8 as
the last date any action was taken with
regard to Taggart's bog lands on the Bluff
road, below the Belt Railroad, and east of
White river. On that date, according to
the epitome of the park records compiled
under the direction of the shrewd clerk of
the Park Board and then published in the
Sentinel, Sept. Is, President Claypool, of the
board, wrote +. E. Wolcott, chairman of
the finance committee of the Council, stat
ing that various tracts named, among them
| the mayors, had been dispensed with. The
Sentinel said, in concluding It's CARRIED rec
| ord of the park transaction:
1.-THE land between the Belt road and
| White river has never been considered for
| purchase except prior to the time of the
boards communication to Mr.. Wolcott,
| Feb 8, 1897.
| the Journals expose. The Sentinel yes
| terday failed to acknowledge that it made
| a mistake when it made the above declara-
| ton and simply asserts that there was
nothing in the filing Of the petition for the
| condemnation of the mayors land and the
| appointment of assessors other than to
| cure any defect in proceedings the board
| had taken. If this were necessary why did
| not one of the petitions cover the old base
| ball park on Seventh street? This, accord
| ing to Mr.. Claypoops letter to Mr.. Wolcott,
| had been appraised at $4,000 and was
| among the tracts dropped. The Mansur
| property was appraised at SIT 900. 1t was
| also dropped with other tracts that We're
| dispensed with, according to Mr. Claypool $
| letter published in the Sentinel Sept. is,
| In order to reduce the land that was to be
| taken for park purposes to the apprOpria-
| ton Of $350,000 that had been recommended.
| 900. according to Mr. ClaypooI. was also
dropped. Neither the Kirkland property nor
the baseball park property appear in the
| Circuit Court record. If the Mansur prop
| erty is in the records it has been included
again in the Fail creek system and is so
described meets anu BOUNDS IldI 1t COQGu
| not be located by reading of the long de-
scriptions of the seven sections of that sys-
| tenn. If it was necessary to make past pro-
ceedingS regular TO have formal entry
made in court, why were not the baseball
| park, the Washington street and Miley-
avenue property, otherwise known as the
Kirkland property, and the Mansur prop
erty brought into the court records as well
as that of the mayor? City Attorney Curtis
| simply intended to have all lands that
were actually TO be taken carried into the
| Circuit Court records. Inasmuch as the
| ball park had been definitely dropped ac-
cording to statements of the Park Board,
| IL was not considered necessary to put it
| in the court records. although it had been
assessed by the assessors. If Mayor Tag
| CARTS land was finally to be left out en-
tirely as is claimed why was it included
| in the court record when the others We're
not? The explanation given by the two or
| the suggestion of the mayor or clerk. The
latter superintendent the garbled record
that was prepared for and published by
the Sentinel Sept. Is.
OTHER DISCLOSURES.
Other things are disclosed by the court
records. On May 4. 1897 two weeks after
Mr.. Spencer filed the application for as
SCISSORS to assess the mayor land, City At
| torney Curtis filed in the Circuit Court a
| long entry covering Sections l. . g. f. s. 6
and in the ''Riverfront and Fall creek
park system informing the court that the
board had determined to have condemned
lands for park purposes to be known and
| designated as sections in the river and
| creek system. Accompanying the entry were
various certificates made by Mr. Spencer
Il "a hl f4af4a saFtd