The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-03-25
STEWART TAX SETTLEMENT.
Aldermen Claim that No Levy Was Made
for Certain Years.
The Question Arises Whether Many Other Tax
PAYERS Are Not in the Same CASA
Surreptitious Transaction.

Thnss VINO attended the Holt meeting
At Sweeney & Coombs opera house last
SATURDAY. night have still fresh In their
memory the very serious charges made by
Mr.. ]. NJ. Coleman against Mr.. }. $. Stew
art. That speech IS regarded ms one Of
the most scathing criticisms OF public
officials record ever made ia this city
especially such an official as asks prefer
ment again at the hands Of his fellow
citizens.
The most charitable view Of the charges.
n they are true. that could be taken IS
dereliction of duty on the part Of the man
who was guilty Of them Even on this
broad ground tAey we're not eNcusahle and
to substantiate them, or 10 disprovc thenl
q Post attsche was detailed 80 Investigate
the question.
The reporter called at the Office Of the
city assessor and tax collector and lntor.
viewed Mr. Welsh and his chief deputy,
Mr.. Jackson What they had 90 say op
the subject was ia fact standardization
OF the proposition that Mr. stewart. on
the most charitable constitution that can
he put upon his record as city attorney.
the chief tsI collector OF tde city, was
very dsreLct in his duty. In addition TO
fliS IS the TACT llAt lue 'liA 'hNAhIl nus
granted him immun!tieS NOT enjoyed ~
other people Another strange iEln- about
the whole transaction Is the i5ct mat tue
board Of aldermen should suddenly take
such action as would qualify him as can
didate Tor mayor.
10 tel the story as the records show u:
When the ring decided 30 put oni iona
; Stewart Tor mayor--ani this was DC
cidsd early r. the present ye4r-lt was dis
covered that he owed she city >ttt'S1 10
taxes; on. at least 81 he did not owe IT,
the Stewart estate did, gnd be Vas the
legal representative thereof 10 vas FeGos'
pizcd ST once that 81 would not DO 10 pnt
Up sucl q man as that because the "p-
position would tear him 60 pieces at oncr.
How TO settle the matter wla serious
question; but 40 last one Of the aunrhnrn.
more brilliant than tho rest, suEse>tcu th8t
resolution Doe introduced anu passed 'l
the council making II possible 20 pay bath
taNes with pavement coupons. some OF
the owl brigade wanted 10 know W1at
those coupons were ami it IS the mission
Of The Post 10 tell the story.
Several years ago SO was the custom OF
cities 10 declare that certain streets within
their confines should have good sidewalks
and pavements, and the property abuttlng
on them was assessed certain percentage
81 the cost Of construction. Finally lax
payer objected 30 such iaA and an 0p-
peal 90 the supreme court this is matter
Of record u which any lawyer Ctn give
information the matter was decided adj
yersely 10 the cities,
Houston had been one OF the cities that
bad levied this Illegal special tax. and
the city council then In existence very
wisely concluded TO settle tho question
without q lawsuit The result was that
"a ordinance was passed granting 20 those
property owners who had undergone the
expense az making sidewalks and laying
pavement, O complete repay ment, but the
sepaymeuts were 10 be made In twenty
equal luStllimcnts extending over a period
ot twenty years. What might be termed
noumtele>t bearing bond was Issued,
md 80 81 We're attached twenty coupons,
covering the years from 1900 to 1919 In
elusive, each coupon being for one-twen-
tisth of the original amount paid out by
vi1el that one Of the coupons would be
deceived for the taxes ON the property
which 10 described each yeari that they
were good for no other purpose, and thai
they were only good for the year on whicl
tlev matured, and only good. as stated be
foye. for taxes on the property which th'
coupon described. Now that is tho cou
When tho ring" discovered mat thel
oRly available man was humpered with
big tax debt to the city they began Il
figure how they could square II withou
having TO 90 down in their TANKS after IN
STUFF They discussed the matter 10
several days, when at last the hrilhsn
idea suggested itself that they would pas
an ordinance making those coupons aboy
described good for any amount and for an
year that could he classed as back IA
year and they extended that date up
and Including 1898, il having been Disco
cred that Stewart owed all the way frol
1877 to 1901. The ordinance was passc
January 20. 1902, and published January q
1902.
on February II. 1907. O. W. Lockett,
partner Of Mr.. Stewart, ded pettlo
with the city council asking a separate
and readjustment of the city taxes owe
by the Stewart estate. The petition
unsigned. and the only evidence that
was prepared by anybody is an indcrsemel
on the back that Il IS by Lockctt, II VS.
referred to the city tax assessor and ca
lpffOr
their Endorsement liz to the eject tbs