The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-04-03

Permit me 70 say that I think the
reference 20 the so-cailed tide land steal
il an attempt TO build a mountain out %
a mole hill"
Tssat Is one expression In letter sent
70 the Post-InfelligeHcer by Richard
WInsor. a P0Duiist paper IN attempting
10 cast discFedit upon the last Republi-
car Administration By lead cries OF ROB
berry" credited Judge wlnsor with say
ing several things that the Judge I'D
not sas. Judge WInsor says ne WAS mis-
quesed, He did not charge the local
board o. tide land appraisers with fraud
iB the 8pprsiSement o. the land in ques-
tor: he did not say. az quoted. that Gov.
AcfSTaw appointed ID. 4. Mckenzie 8
member Of the board. nor did he ssg
that Coy. McGraw appointed any other
person member OF the board.
Mr.. winzov says rome sharp things
about Mr. Mckenzie. but that was to be
expected Ar. Mckenzie made some
rather pointed remarks about the judge.
Following IL Mr. Nlnsors letter.
Ny attention has been called 20 what
pr ports 10 be an interview with ID. A.
Mckenzie IN your issue Of ire End inst.
fear that NJ Mckenzie made his state
nenfs 81 about the same temper that I
was in when read the purported inter-
view with me IN the Times. and that Mr..
Mckenzie in his temper. exercises tho
s. ne disregard for exactBcss Ia MS state
uents IL not for truta that he attributes
To myself Permit me &c say that ! think
the reference - the so-calied tide land
steal is an attempt 20 build mountain
out Of a mole hill. : never stated or III
tended 10 state that there was any frauI
IN connection wis those contracts. In re-
pig 20 q question from the reporter OF .hs
Times Z stated distinctly that under ne
circumstance. II there was any fraud u
could net have been upon the part OK the
land commissioner or the board Of state
land commissioners; that IL must have
been upon the part Of the local board II
any existed I did not charge the local
pOsrd with fraud In the appraisemens OF
this land, and distinctly stated that the
state Lad TO interest IN the improvements
Upon the property. and that there would
have to be a great discrepancy between
the appraised value OF the land. plus the
improvements and the price Il was sold
for, to establish even a presumption or
fraud 1 expressly stated 10 the reporter
that I knew nothing OF the value of the
Improvements. and was not in position 10
form an opinion OF their value. / did not
state that Gov. McGraw appointed u. A.
Mckenzie a member Of the board. Meth
or did state he appointed any other per-
son "A member of the board. 1t was not
a matter upon my mind / do not sup
pose that applying epithets TO Mr.. Me
kenzie win add anything to the weight
OF my statements and were | TO call aim
'Greaser Don,' | have heard him called
about election time II might or might not
be welghty argument as 10 the truth OF
my position.
Permit me further 20 say. however. that
Mr.. McKenzge's statement that Judge
WinsOr was interested in some tide lands
at Ballard and that the only time he did
protest was when he tried 10 bulldoze the
board into closing up street at Ballard
that was laid out AT the reqnes; OF the city
council of that city. he desired this street
closed 50 that he might acquire Il for his
own uses. Is absolutely untrue and with
out foundation In fact. | never had one
cents interest direcuy or Indirectly in tide
lands at Ballard. ! never went before the
board Of appraisers 20 bulldoze IL into clos
Ing a street or for any other purpose.
never had any transaction with the board
as such. I visited the Office of the board
on three occasions. twice to examine plats.
once 10 nle paper in the interest OF
client The only conversation l ever had
with Mr. Mckenzie In regard 10 the plat
ting Of streets al Ballard on the tide lands
was a casual one with him personally upon
the ears on trip from Seattle 10 olympia
while the legislature was la session two
years ago this winter. ! had no Interest IN
the use OF any street In Ballard 10 lead me
10 bulldoze or attempt TO buildoze anybody
! aid say 20 the Times reporter that the
worst thing. 10 my mind. IN the whole Sc
attic tide land transaction was what APP
pcarod 20 nie 20 be virtually a steal OF the
great body OF tide fats In Elliott bay: that
ia no other country would public opinion
permit a man TO occupy position repre-
rentiug the public upon tide and board
ms n A Mckenzie did. laying out and
plating tide lands and changing streets
and az TIE same time DE interested ia a
private corpor -tlun that was 20 be bene-
flted by contracts In connection with his
acts rs a public officer and which would
eventually result In anpTopriating that
great body Of tide lands 70 this private
corporation or its assigns. that no public
officer having trust duty 60 perform
should as "A matter Of public policy be per-
rllttcd go exercise that trust 20 his own
ntVantaRp that | djd not think Mr.. Nc
kenzie SHOULD have been q member OF the
board and M she same time acquire inter
esjs ln a corporation which might be at
fecred hv his official acts.
II do not now desire 90 charge MI Nc
feaEie With wiilfui untruth In making the
charge th.e 7 was Interested lu tide lands
a. Ballard. RE Is SIMPLY mixed in his facts
md was talking reckiessiy. supposing that
had charged him win fraud IN councc-
tlon with the contracts referred TO- I
charged None. J snow o. none. have made
no INVESTIGATION thar would warrant me Ia
making such charge The Times re-
porter returned 20 my office % see II was
rot mistaken IN my position In regard 20
the tmpTc1 efuente and Il they were not
made uD9er leases from tho state. re-
affirmed ms position aH4 stated explicitly
chat ~ rlgbt of purchase By the improve
meut owner wgs one given ~ the law
ASA that tie hoard had no right 20 take
tuto consideration the improvements IN ap-
pratsinE the value 81 che thfe land: thaj
8
sgth day 0f March. isse was the BASIS 8.
she FIRST right of purchase ~ the tffs land
upon which the tmpvos vnlcnts were sittl-
aged. that they might take into considera-
slon che situation u the land lts proximity
90 the center ~ the city ana tts desira
bliry for business purposes In Determining
SIS value hUt the value 81 the Improve
raentS thereon was not q matter fer theli
consideration