The San Francisco call., 1898-11-15

.Under the measure passed at that time the matter of taxes was not speclneo. AS able, we went on for two years without | paying any taxes. About that time J. h- Prior organized the Taxpayers ASsocia- earthing of property the owners Of which were not contributing to the revenues oI the city. Among others they found our pay. The court decided the improvements
 were owned by the lessees of the lots ana
 were In consequence taxable we ie naso
 paid taxes upon the. buildings eyer since and in view of the decision of the court
 presumed we owned them at the eXplTTa- ton of our lease on the property. lo strengthen our position in the matter the advertisement which called for the or1gi- nal bids said the buildings would revert
 to their owners. This clause did n nos ap- sI-
 pear In the lease, but we thought 1t being In the advertisement made 1t legal ana
 binding. lease we notified the School Department
 that we would remove our buildings. The
 board commenced suit and Judge Seawell
 decided the buildings heloGSged to us; Go,;at An
 The case was advanced on the caIen4ar and came to trial a year before cases that
 had been set before it. The court re- took from us our property.
 ''The School Board then assumed owner
 ship and notified us that 9ur PosSeSS,u.. nSfoI,a
 to get us out. MT. Grant, MT. McGornlch and myself called on Director T. F. Burns
 suavely and cordially and said there. was no desire to disturb us; we could contlnue
 on in possession from month to month
 "IIe seemed so plausible that we be- lieved all he told us. Before we left him
 he induced us to send a communicatlo2na to the board, to the effect that we Woulo resign all claims on the buildings Ii we were permitted to remain as lessees. lie said this simple communication would way. He assured us there was no prSe5 pTos5 pect of bids for new lease being called for for Some time and that we could con tinue Tn possession undisturbed.
 'We sent this communication, not thinking of the trap into which we were being led. Immediately upon receipt of signed away all our rights in the prem ises. the board assumed an aggressive &t- titude. Notice was served on all tenants, saying the board had assumed ownership of the buildings and all rents would be collected by them. We had been bunkoed out of our property and had no recourse trusting in the integrity of that plausible fellow Burns. We thought his word was good.
 of the present Grand Jury was placed in control of the property. Through some unseen force. the property seems to at
 'Director Waller in his first statement to The Call dwelt on the saving to the city when the Real Estate Investment Company assumed the expenses of insur- ance and repairs formerly paid by the city These expenses were always paid by the lessees and never by the Board of Education, so there was no such saving to the city as he claims. Just before the lease was granted to the syndicate the board ordered all repairs required on the buildings made at once From my knowl- i edge MT. Shook and his friends were plan ming for several years to secure the prop erty. This, too, while MT. Shook was secretary of the Grand Jury.
 ''I was told before the last Grand Jury | was drawn that my name was on the list, | but that would never be drawn to serve | I knew too much for some people,.