I' i'

m

*»«!¦*."¦:*

Yale University Library

39002005744827

YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

ARGUMENTS AND TESTIMONY

IN BEHALF OF

THE TOWN OF BEVERLY

THE DIVISION OF THE TOWN,

THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON TOWNS.

1888.

COUNSEL FOR THB TOWN OP BEVERLY:
HON. GEORGE D. ROBINSON.
HENRY P. MOULTON.

RAND AVERY COMPANY, PRINTERS,
BOSTON.

COJ^TENTS.

PAGE
Opening Argument by Mr. Henry P. Moulton ... 5
Fourth Hearing:
Testimony of Charles H. Odell  33
Fifth Hearing:
Testimony of Charles H. Odell  55
Testimony op John M. Murney  58
Sixth Hearing:
Testimony of Albert Perry  75
Testimony of Charles F. Lee  84
Testimony of Charles H. Henderson .... 88
Testimony of Jeremiah L. Porter  93
Testimony of William H. Lovett ..... 98
Testimony of James A. Wright  105
Testimony of William J. Berry  114
Testimony of John A. Moulton  116
Testimony of Robert R. Endicott  121
Seventh Hearing:
Testimony of Augustus N. Clare  127
Testimony of Hooper A. Appleton  133
Testimony of John Gentlee  136
Testimony of Charles H. Odell  140
Valuation and Taxes in the Proposed Town of Beverly
Farms  149
List of Sales and Valuations agreed to and put in
Evidence  153
Closing Argument by Hon. George D. Robinson (Eighth
Hearing)  155

OPENING AEGUMENT BT MR. HENRY
P. MOULTON.

Mr. Moulton spoke as follows : —
Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen, — The case for the town
of Beverly was fully and carefully opened last year, and
the figui-es offered at that time on behalf of the respon
dents, and which in many respects form the basis of
their case, were given as fully as they could be procured.
It is not my purpose at this hearing to go over all those
figures and facts again in detail ; but I beg leave to refer
the Committee to the opening, on behalf of the remon
strants, that was made last year, and especially to the
figures then presented by Mr. Sohier. So far as I am
concerned at this time, I desire to confine myself to the
points that have been presented, and the allegations on
which the case is being tried this year. If you will allow
me, I will first take my place at the map in order to
point out some of the localities and features of the town,
to which I desire to call the attention of the Committee.
( Mr. Moulton then took his stand at the head of the
Committee's table, under a large map which had been
spread out upon the wall.) This, gentlemen, is a map of

the town of Beverly, from the Manchester line on the
one side to Danvers on the other, — a map that has
served as a target for the wit of our friends on the other
side for the past two years, being sometimes termed a
crazy-quilt, and sometimes patchwork, as these pleasant
ideas suggested themselves to the fertile imaginations
of our friends, — a map which, nevertheless, places in
as striking a form as any in which they could be con
veyed, some of the principal facts that bear upon this
question of division. Now, the fii'st representation of
the petitioners, to which I desire to call your attention,
is the statement that here at one end of the town is a
large village, and that there is no other village in the
limits of Beverly of considerable size, excepting that of
Beverly Farms, and that between the two there is an
unoccupied and desolate country that serves as a natural
line for division. In fact, Beverly Farms is perhaps the
largest of four distinct villages, — villages distinct from
the main part of the town. The first is the Cove
village. I am unable to give you the exact number of
inhabitants in the Cove village, but you passed through
the main street of it yourselves and saw it as it is.
Probably it has from seven hundred to eight hundred
inhabitants. Up in this part of the town (pointing to
the left) is the village of North Beverly, containing
some six hundred inhabitants. It has public buildings,
including a school, and I may say that there is another
school at about this point (pointing higher) that is not
represented on the map of the petitioners. This village

of North Beverly has not changed substantially for the
last thirty or forty years. Instead of five cents a foot
being obtained in some recent sales of land, as stated by
Mr. Loring, there has been no sale of land for over a
cent and a half or two cents, and these sales were of the
most eligible buUding land of the village, and immedi
ately opposite the station of the Boston and Maine or
Eastern raiboad. Instead of forty houses having been
buUt there during the last three or four years, the whole
number built is thirteen, and they have been small
tenement-houses. Then, passing along through the
northern part of the town, we come to the village called
Centreville, another village of some four hundred or five
hundred inhabitants. The farm land on the south
western side of Beverly begins at the water and below
the street that runs to Danvers. There are still one or
two farms left in that part of the town. Going north
this is all farming land as far as Wenham ; on the other
side it is farming and pasture land, and extends in an
easterly du'ection nearly to the line the petitioners have
drawn. The real farmers of Beverly live in the parts
of the town that I have now indicated, and there are, as
I shall show you, sixty-three farmers who own farms of
thirty acres against one who resides in Beverly Farms ;
and this portion of the town — the real farming land of
the town — they propose to leave a prey to the vulture
of the central part in case of division.
Now, I want to call your attention to the seashore
and the situation of the lands there. Beverly, I need

not say, is a seashore town, and the most valuable part
of its land, and the only lands in which there has been
a marked increase of value during recent years, are the
shore lands and hill lands overlooking the water at the
Farms. This part of the town to which I now direct
your attention, west of Beverly Bridge and along the
shore of the rivers, is in no sense seashore land. There
are two rivers here. This is Beverly Eiver, and the
other is known as Danvers River, and the tide runs out
of those rivers down to a mere channel. There are
perhaps between five and six miles of coast from the
wharves in Beverly down to the Manchester line. The
entire shore is occupied continuously, as you see indi
cated upon this map, by summer residences ; and to
what extent the villages of the Farms and the Cove ex
tend towards each other, you can also see indicated by
these houses dotted upon this map. By far the most
valuable part of the shore is Beverly Farms. The
shore residences on this side of the proposed division
line are similar in character to those at the Farms ; but
as a fact, land has sold at the Cove for about one-half
the price, on the average, that it has sold for at the
Farms. I need not perbaps stop to go into the reason
of this to any great extent, but I may mention one or
two matters in connection with it. In the fii-st place,
the Cove is a mile and a half from the railroad-station ;
the Farms have two stations, one at Pride's Crossing,
and the other the Beverly Fa];ms station, on the Glouces
ter Branch of the Eastern Eailroad. Then the land

at the Farms was occupied long before the land at the
Cove was taken up. The Farms has always been the
more fashionable quarter. Another controlling reason
for the higher price of land at the Farms is that the
tide leaves the lands at the Cove, and that substantially
all the bold lands upon the deep water are below the
division line. It is possible, even, at some tides, to walk
around Hospital Point. Mr. Lothrop, the originator of
the division movement, has recently testified that the
flats ceased to be objectionable at Burgess' Point,
marked Woodbury's Point on this map. You readily
see what a comparatively insignificant portion of valu
able shore is left to Beverly in case of division. From
the central village to Woodbury's Point, the flats upon
the petitioners' testimony are objectionable ; a few rods
further on comes the division line, and the proposed
division scheme takes from Beverly seven-eighths at
least of the most valuable shore-lands of the town, and
transfers them in a body to the village of about one
thousand inhabitants at the eastern end.
Now we come to this portion of Beverly (pointing to
the right of the map), the part that is to be set off if
the petition is to prevail. This map is colored in this
way. The part colored green on the map represents
the portion of Beverly Farms that is owned by residents
of old Beverly. The part that is marked blue repre
sents the part that is owned by the petitioners who live
at Beverly Farms all the year round. The part that is
marked pale pink or pale red is the part that is owned

10
by non-residents. The other is owned by shore resi
dents who vote in Beverly. And if we are asked, as
we have been, by what authority we draw any distinc
tions between the owners of this land and the owners
of any other land in Beverly Farms, we say that we
draw the distinction between the owners of land who
live and have their interests in Beverly Farms, and the
owners who really live in Boston and have their busi
ness and aU their interests there. Now, taking the
amount of land that the Beverly Farms petitioners own,
— the native petitioners, all-the-year-round residents,
we find that it amounts to 575 acres, or one-fifth of the
whole territory of the proposed new tovni. The
amount owned by Beverly residents is 725 acres ; 150
more acres in the proposed new town are owned by
people who live in Beverly than by those who live at
the Farms. And if it is a reason why this petition
should be granted, that persons have to go from
Beverly Farms to Beverly to pay their tax-bills, it
is a reason why the petition should not be
granted, that 150 residents of Beverly would have
to come to Beverly Farms to pay their taxes iu
case of division. There are no permanent residents
south of the line of the railroad; with a single ex
ception, there is not one who owns any land upon the
shore. This place colored blue represents West Beach,
owned by a corporation, and is not the property of any
private person ; and, with this exception, one small lot
is the only shore land owned by the people of Beverly

11
Farms. Drawing a line by Mr. Haven's place, you
have on the east of it nine-tenths of all the resident,
petitioners of Beverly Farms. Nevertheless, they have
drawn their line down to the point of division here ;
and they come — the petitioners who base their claim
upon their distance from town come to within a mile
and a half of Beverly town hall, and ask you to
grant them all the intervening territory. In this
section between Plum Cove and the brook that forms
their proposed western line, there are scarcely any
resident petitioners ; I do not know that there are any
property holders, residing betAveen these two points,
who have signed the petition. Looking at the location
of the schoolhouse at the Cove, you will see that they
requii'e children near the line to go two and a half
miles to the school at Beverly Farms, instead of half a
mUe to the school at the Cove, and in the direction where
there is cheap transportation by horse-cars, instead of in
a direction where there is no communication at all. The
valuation, real and personal, of this section I have indi
cated to you as something like two million dollars. In
front of the Haven and adjoining estates is West
Beach, a nule in length, the finest and most valuable
beach on the North Shore.
Now, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, it has always been
thought expedient by the petitioners to insinuate and
assert in some form of language, that the people of Bev
erly were not earnest in opposing this petition for the
division of their town. We heard the first year, before

12
our case was presented, that there was to be no opposi
tion at all. In various forms this suggestion is repeated
at every hearing, and this time it is intimated that the
people of the town at one time determined not to
defend the case last year, that objection to division was
only made by town officers, and that the citizens gen
erally are indifferent as to the result of this contest.
Such assertions are an entire misrepresentation of our
position. Whether we are right or wrong, no one has
the right to say that the people of Beverly have ever
been indifferent to the proposed dismemberment of
their town. The more the facts have been investigated,
the more clearly has it seemed to us that no adequate
cause for division exists, and that the petitioners' de
mands are thoroughly inequitable and unjust.
I can assure you that there is but one opinion among
the people of Beverly in regard to this proposed
division of the town. We do not come here to make
any half-hearted or timid defence. We do not come
here representing only a few town officers, with the
mass of the people acquiescing in any such claim as
that which is made by these petitioners ; and the fact
that we have appeared year after year, now for the
third time, with unequal means, to defend ourselves
and present our case before you and before the Legisla
ture, is sufficient reply to the suggestion that the people
of Beverly are not really in earnest in opposing this
petition. Now, let me go rapidly over the reasons that are

13
urged in favor of granting the petition, as stated by my
brother Williams in his opening argument. I only
allude to most of them at this time, for I do not intend
to encroach upon the province of the learned counsel
with whom I am associated, and present matters to you
in the way of ai-gument at the opening. In the first
place, it is said that Beverly Farms is situated four and
a half miles from the town of Beverly. The distance is
over-stated, but it is true that the village at the Farms is
situated four miles from the town ; the people there are
four mUes away, just as they have been for two hun
dred years in that locality without any complaint on
their part, and, so far as it has appeared in the past,
without any serious annoyance on account of the dis
tance between them and the old town. Now, gentle
men, the argument in reply has been repeated until I
am tired of repeating it ; still it has the same force as
it had when it was first suggested. If the mere fact of
distance is a reason for dividing the town of Beverly,
then every village which happens to be situated at a
distance from the main part of the tovm to which it
belongs can come before you and ask for division from
that town on that ground alone, and you cannot consist
ently refuse to grant its petition. If the position is
sound, there is no need of special legislation, but a gen
eral law, incorporating villages as soon as they cease to
be a burden on the parent town, would fully meet the
wishes of the petitioners. But allow me to call your
attention to the fact that the Farms are situated in such

14
a way as to be conveniently — and now more conven
iently than ever before — connected with the old town.
It is but a few minutes walk or ride from any part of
the Farms to one of the two stations on the Gloucester
Branch Eailroad, the service of which is equal to that on
the main line, where way trains are run each way so as
to accommodate passengers in the morning, in the fore
noon, in the afternoon, in the evening, and late at night,
and it is only a ride of about ten or fifteen minutes
from the Farms to the principal village. So that there
is a minimum of inconvenience at the present time
arising from distance. Communication with Beverly is
much more inconvenient from Centreville and some por
tions of North Beverly, than from the Farms. Beverly
is not a large town. It covers, as has been stated
already, something over eight thousand acres. The
average acreage of towns in the State is something over
thirteen thousand acres. We took the trouble at one
time since division was first proposed, to compile a
list of towns in which there were villages, one or more,
separated from the main part of the town by a distance
as great or greater than that which separates Beverly
from the Farms. But I will not weary you with a mere
repetition of them. I refer again to the fact that locat
ing the division line where they do, these petitioners have
not regarded their own argument of distance, and that
they compel parties, living just east of the line of divis
ion, when they attend town meetings and schools, to go
two miles and one-half to their centre, although they

15
live a mile nearer the public buildings and town officers
of the principal village.
Now under the head of distance. The old argument,
that it is a great inconvenience to come up to town-
meeting from the Farms, is again urged this year, with
all the eloquence with which my brother Williams is in
the habit of putting it. And the curious suggestion is
made, that if town-meetings are held in the evening,
the person coming up from the Farms has got to lose
part of a day. There has been no way devised, so far
as I know, by which a citizen can attend to his public
and his private duties at the same time. Long ago,
Beverly Farms desired Beverly to hold its meetings in
the evening, and persons from the Farms, on the floor of
the town-hall in Beverly, advocated the establishment of
evening town-meetings. Town-meetings have not been
held in the evening for the accommodation of voters in
the old town, but for the benefit of the outlying dis
tricts, and especiaUy the Farms. It is said now that a
man must lose an hour at the end of the day, in order
to attend in the evening, but if these meetings are held
in the daytime, which they tell us now is the only rea
sonable arrangement, then he is going in most cases to
lose the whole day, if he is to bring any effective influence
to bear upon public affairs.
Let me refer for a moment to what has been said
about schools, and I wUl not stop to notice the assertion
that chUdren have been made uncomfortable by their
playmates in school on account of division agitation.

16

except to assert that the charge is entirely without
foundation. The evidence in this case wiU fail to
show that a single scholar from the Farms has ever
been persecuted or annoyed by his schoolmates in Bev
erly. I only allude to the matter, to deny altogether
and in toto what has been alleged. But they say
they cannot conveniently, or rather, that they wUl
not, send children to the high school in Beverly.
Have they informed you what is going to be done
in the way of establishing a high school at Beverly
Farms in case this division is granted ? You have in
evidence the fact that there are thirteen scholars aU
old in thfe proposed new town who are capable of
entering a high school. I ask you what town is there
in the State that supports a high school for the benefit
of thirteen scholars? The law requires that a town
having five hundred families shall support a high
school. Not, however, a high school of the grade of
that in Beverly. Here will be a town of less than
two hundred voters. The Boston residents have no
object in establishing a high school there, because,
as Mr. Loring has testified, they educate their chUdren
elsewhere, and they have no more to do with the vUlage
school at Beverly Farms than they have to do with the
schools at Beverly. So that if division is granted on
account of the alleged high school grievance, then
these same chUdren who are now suffering because their
parents wUl not permit them to attend the high school
in Beverly, wiU either have to come to that high school

17
after division, or they will have to go to some place
beyond for the higher education which they cannot, or
rather, as the petitioners themselves have it, they will
not, come to Beverly to acquire.
Notice now what has been said about the relations
existing between these two sections of Beverly. The
attack that has been made upon us is more violent and
bitter this year than it has ever been before. To any
one who knows facts, the statements made by my broth
er in opening are rather a subject of mirth than of
serious consideration. But if the. people of Beverly for
a moment supposed that these statements were going to
be taken as facts ; if they had any idea that anybody
was going to believe that there was any such state of
things as that so eloquently described by my brother
WUliams in the opening, they would repel the charges
as indignantly as any man in this room would repel such
charges if made against himself personaUy. If we
have any thing against the people of Beverly Farms, it
is that they allow these charges to be made without a
protest. Now the people of Beverly have no feeling,
and never have had any feeling, against the people of
Beverly Farms, and that is to a large extent admitted
by their own evidence, that until two years ago, there
never was any difficulty, or want of harmony, between
these two sections of the town. The old days of half-
savage feuds between adjoining villages have gone by,
have they not 1 The people of Beverly are not aU chil
dren ; they have got something else to do besides insult-

18
ing others, calling hard names, and nourishing a spirit
of hatred against a community of their neighbors and
feUow townsmen. So far as this division movement is
concerned, they have not had any ill feeling. Undoubt
edly, in times of excitement, there may have been
something said on one side or the other, unpleasant for
the moment, but that amounted to nothing, and that
has not been the cause of any lasting feud or deep feel
ing. Beverly people have not had a feeling of hatred
against the people of Beverly Farms, in the first place,
because they are their own kith and kin, and have no
quarrel with them, and, so far as the question of division
is concerned, because the people of Beverly have aU
along known that the people of Beverly Farms are
not the real petitioners, and not those who were
urging this fight upon them year after year. Some
thing else, which I hardly care to notice, is said in the
same connection. It is said that the press of Beverly is
bitterly hostile to the people of Beverly Farms. The
press of Beverly has been hostUe to the division move
ment, and not to the people. But my brother Williams
did not tell you more than half of that story. He did
not teU you that there was a paper established in the
interest of division, caUed the Beverly Farms Advo
cate (a few copies may have come to the State House at
some time), and that this paper has been prodding and
goading us from the time of its birth to the present.
WhUe that process is gomg on, my brother WUliams is
entu-ely happy : but when we wake up, and give them

19
a shot back, he wrings his hands in despair, and says
there is such a deplorable state of feeling between the
two communities, that no earthly remedy can be found
for it save division.
Now, coming to the more serious charge, let me call
your attention to the matter of taxation of Beverly
Farms. And I am going to say in reply to the charges
of unjust and disproportionate taxation, that the people
of Beverly Farms are taxed less than the people in any
other section of Beverly, and that if there is any dis
crimination in taxes, it is in favor of Beverly Farms.
We have had some talk about personal estate. It is
agreed that the assessors went down to Beverly Farms
in 1S86, and found a miUion and a half of personal
property there which had not paid any tax up to that
time. My brother Williams says in his opening that they
discovered $3,000,000 of new property. Mr. Loring
testified to a rise of real estate in 1886, of $1,600,000,
leaving $1,500,000 of personal property out of the
$3,000,000. It was about time for the assessors to put
then- spectacles on, when there was $1,500,000 not pay
ing any tax, and which they agree is not and cannot be
over-taxed at the present time. With regard to per
sonal property on the other side of the line, we have to
say this, that it has not been proved, and cannot be
proved, for it is not the fact, that there has been any
omission, — certainly not any intentional omission on the
part of the assessors, of any personal property on the
Beverly side of the line, and we hope satisfactorily to

20
answer all guesses and opinions made by Mr. Loring
upon this point before the evidence in this case closes.
Let us come to the rise in the valuation of real estate in
1886. Forty years ago, or a little more, the land at
Beverly Farms was worth the same price as any other
pasture and woodland. The shore was first taken up
for summer residences, and the present occupants of it
began to come to the Farms about 1844 to 1848, and
since that time the rise in value of land at Beverly
Farms has been constant and continued up to the pres
ent time. Even in the panic of 1873, and the years of
depression that followed, the price of Beverly Farms
land went steadily upward, instead of taking a down
ward course in common with almost every other de
scription of property throughout the country.
Now, Mr. Loring states that in 1870 the valuation of
Beverly Farms was something over $800,000. In 1885,
according to his figures, the valuation was between
$4,000,000 and $5,000,000, and the latter we are told was
a fair and normal valuation. That is, upon their own
figures up to 1885, in 15 years the increase in the value
of real estate had been five-fold. A petition for division
was presented in 1885. It is asserted that this rise in
valuation occurred in consequence, and that it was made
by way of revenge and to compel the Farms to assume
a large portion of the town debt in the event of division.
True, a petition was presented to the Legislature of that
year, and it is also true that certain other things occurred
during the same year which bear directly upon this case.

21
In the first place, the town of Beverly by vote in town-
meeting which had no reference to division, and which
was passed before the division movement commenced,
required the publication of the assessors' valuation of aU
the property in town, and the valuation book of 1885
was pubUshed. That had not been done before for
several years, certainly not since the great rise in value
of land at Beverly Farms. The exact facts as to the
valuation of all the property in town were thus brought
to the attention of the people of the town. Then it
would appear that the people of the Commonwealth and
the Legislature were thoroughly convinced at that time
that there were persons on whose property no fair
valuation was placed, and that the evils resulting from
this fact were such as to require the application of a
stringent remedy. Accordingly the Legislature passed
an Act that year to which I shall call your attention. I
refer to Chap. 355, Acts 1885. This Statute is entitled,
" An Act to secure fair and equal valuation through
out the Commonwealth of property subject to taxa
tion." That Act in its first section prescribes the
oath that assessors shall take, and the oath, in the
form given in this statute, has been required as the
oath of office of assessors since that date. 'The third
section of the Act declares that every assessor of
every city or town, or other person chosen to declare
the value of property for the purpose of taxation, who
shaU knowingly fix the valuation of any property at a
less sum than its fuU and fair cash value, — and I call

22
yom- attention to the language of this statute, the full
as weU as the fair cash value, for the statutes before
required that property should be assessed atits/mV cash
value, — the Legislature now said to the assessors aU
over the Commonwealth, 'Some of you have been
violating the provisions of the statutes in your official
acts. We caU your attention to the provisions of the
law, and if you violate the law and your oath of office
in the future it will be at your perU ; " and the Act
goes on to provide that for any breach of Section 3,
there shall be imposed a fine not exceeding one
thousand dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding
six months, or both such fine and imprisonment. So
that if property at Beverly Farms was assessed at one-
third of its value before 1885, then it was at some per
sonal risk that the assessors continued to assess at the
same rate after the passage of this Act.
Now, gentlemen, I have a list of all the sales that
have been made at Beverly Farms since 1 880 that I can
find, and as this matter of taxation has never been fuUy
presented, as I believe, in accordance with the facts, I
ask your indulgence whUe I read in detail this list with
the valuations of 1885 and the valuations of this year,
and compare both those valuations with the prices that
the same property brought at actual sales.

23

BEVERLY FARMS

William Powell Mason
Alexander Cochrane
Emily D. Tyson
Stephen G. Wheatland
Dr. R. H. Fitz
Eugene V. R. Thayer
Henry P. Kidder
Andrew C. Wheelwright
Mrs. Whitman and Miss Perkins
Thomas Gaffield and Martin Brimmer
Thornton K. Lothrop
Franklin Haven (Miller Hill) .
Franklin Haven (Haskell Street)

SHORE LANDS.

Assessed Valuations.

Prices

1885.

18S7.

Paid.

. $41,000

$62,400

$80,000

15,000

19,600

30,000

. 14,000

84,850

55,000

. 13,250
20,700
25,000
22,600
40,000
45,000
. 17,000
38,650
70,000
30,000
66,100
112,000
19,100
30,500
45,000
32,850
39,000
75,000
4,300
7,975
24,041
15,800
25,375
35,000
Admitted value.
1,700
6.000
6,000
600
1,000
1,000
$227,^00 $392,150 $603,041
The total of the prices paid for the above property
shows that in the year 1887, when for purposes of
revenge there has been an outrageous over-valuation, it
is only assessed at about two-thirds of the actual price
that it brought, and there is not one of these lots of shore
lands that has been sold at a price nearly as low as the
assessors have valued it in 1887. I wish to say that if
there are any sales known to my friends on the other
side, that are not in this, and that will change the effect
of these figures, I ask them to produce them, for we do
not want to make any mistake in this part of the case.
But the first matter I should have called your attention
to, is the fact that the valuation of these lands in 1885
24
was $227,200. That is to say, the assessors assessed these
shore estates in 1885, at one-third the actual price paid.
Now, I am not going to comment at length on the
conduct of the assessors for the year 1885. It has
already been said on the floor of the Legislature, that
the assessors of that year were either knaves or fools.
This in my judgment does not foUow. We had in
Beverly a somewhat peculiar state of things, — we had
a portion of the town where land was rising rapidly in
value. The amount for which these sales were made
was not at that time known. With a shrewd eye to
business the prices were concealed. All the information
that could be got from the deeds of conveyance was,
the grantors conveyed the property in consideration
of one dollar and other valuable considerations. And
you have heard Mr. Loring testify that he incurred the
ill-will or at least the criticism of his friends in disclos
ing as he did for the first time in his evidence here, on
the first division hearing, the rates at which the lands
were selling at Beverly Farms. The testimony given at
this first hearing disclosed the prices at which property on
Beverly shore was sold, the publication of the valuation
book disclosed the valuation upon it, and from both
sources the people of Beverly learned the exact facts.
Now I am going on beyond this list, because gentle
men from Boston came here last year and said they did
not complain about being enormously over-taxed them
selves, — they could endure it, — but that their hearts
were overflowing with sympathy for the poor people in

25
the village, the permanent residents, who were taxed
beyond all endurance. Now, I give you some figures
regarding sale and valuation of the vUlage lots at
Beverly Farms.
I give the names and prices, and all the sales of
which I can obtain any information, and, I have no
doubt, substantiaUy all that have taken place : —

VILLAGE LOTS AT BEVERLY FARMS.

James J. O'Brien
Charles E. Hubbard
Abigail Young .
tl It
Town of Beverly
Ellen Vaughan .
Caroline E. Lovering
Sarah L. Ober .
W. C. Loring
S.A.Fogg. Total .

Assessed.

Assessed.

Prices

1885.

1887.

paid.

$1,150

$1,450

$2,200

6,000

15,950

20,000

150

300

425

100

150

325

1,500

4,350

4,691

800

800

1,850

800

925

1,850

1,500

2,972

8,000

550

2,600

5,000

150

350

812

$12,700 $29,847 $45,153

The total valuation of these lands was in 1885, $12,-
700, and in 1887, $29,847. The actual sale prices
being $45,153. So that the disparity is even greater
between the valuation in 1885 and the actual price
paid for the village lots, than between the valuation of
1885 and the price paid for the shore lots.
Then there are the hill lots at Beverly Farms. Mr.
E. W. Gurney was assessed in 1885 at $10,500, and in
1887 at $17,900, the price paid being $22,500. Mrs.

26
Joseph Cabot's lot was assessed at $9,388 in 1885, and
at $20,626 in 1887, the price paid being $32,000. The
totals are : $19,888 of assessment in 1885, $38,526 val
uation in 1887, and prices paid $54,500.
The aggregate shows as follows : The whole of
THE shore land, VILLAGE LOTS AND HILL LOTS WERE
ASSESSED AT $260,788 IN 1885, AND AT $461,523, IN
1887 ; THE TOTAL PRICES PAID BEING $702,696.
Not one lot of land at Beverly Farms, either shore,
hill, or village property, has sold at less than the high
est valuation that the assessors ever put upon it. That
is something that cannot be said of any other portion of
this town of Beverly. I shall come in a moment to the
question of discrimination. It is said that from motives
of revenge, and for the purpose of making the town of
Beverly Farms, in case it should be incorporated, as
sume a burden that did not belong to it, this assess
ment was raised. If that is charged, we deny the
statement entirely. But, if they merely mean to say
that the assessors and the people of Beverly, so far as I
have any authority to speak for them, that when they
knew the facts, they determined that whether Beverly
Farms should go or stay they should assume something
Uke the legitimate burden that they ought to bear, that
they themselves were bearing [under the law ; if this is
what they mean, and that the valuation was raised with
an idea of having a full and fair valuation all over the
town, in compliance with the law of the Commonwealth,
then it is true ; p,nd we stand here before you and justify

27
the acts of the assessors fuUy and without apology.
Now it is said that there has been discrimination
in the valuation, and my friend Mr. Williams says just
as soon as you come on the other side of the division-
Une, you see a difference. In his language, — more
expressive than any I can use, — " the assessors of
Beverly have ratified the division-line that the people of
the Farms selected." That means that the Cove shore
estates are assessed at less in proportion than the Farms
estates. I have particulars of all the sales that I can
get information of, regarding the shore land at Beverly
and the Cove, the point at which the fire of my friends
on the other side is principally directed. Let me read
a list of sales at the Cove of shore lands and the valua
tion placed on the property this year by the assessors : —
SAI.es of SHORE LAND IN OLD BEVERLY. (From testimony.)
AsBesBed Prices
1887. Paid.
Henry W. Peabody  $15,700 $10,750
Amory A. Lawrence ...... 15,600 8, 100
WUliam Hobbs  9,000 6,000
W. O. Grover  14,000 11,000
C. Almy  4,400 4,500
Charles Torrey  7,500 6,000
J. W. Lefavour  18,300 20,000
W. D. Pickman  , 24,475 40,000
W. Sohier  7,500 8,000
$116,475 $114,350
The prices paid in the aggregate for shore lands
at the Cove were between $2,000 and $3,000 less than
the figures which the assessors put upon that property

28
in 1887. We shall show you by actual sales in aU
other parts of the town where sales have occurred, that
property is assessed at its " fuU and fair cash " value ;
the fact being that in all sections of the town, except at
the Farms, sales have been made at about the valuation
of the property, sometimes more and sometimes some
what less. This is our answer to the charge that we
have unjustly discriminated and over-taxed Beverly
Farms. Then they say that Beverly will be one of the
wealthiest towns in the whole Commonwealth if the
division is granted. We are told it wiU rank eighth
in wealth. This is not the fact ; Beverly Farms, with
a population claimed for itself of 1,300, is eighth in
wealth at the commencement, and it wiU be a good
deal nearer the top than that as time goes on. They say
that Beverly wiU have over $6,000,000 left, and that wUl
make it one of the wealthiest towns in the Common
wealth. But in making this statement they -take the
aggregate property of Beverly, and make no account
of the number of people among whom it is to be
divided. Now, there wiU be left in the town of Bev
erly, according to their figures, a valuation of $6,952,-
775. The poils of Beverly number 2,453. This
leaves per poU $2,834. The average amount of
property per poll in all the towns of Massachusetts
is $3,462. Their position then is this : They come
here saying that Beverly is one of the largest, wealth
iest and most prosperous towns in the Commonwealth,

29
and that the division is not going to injure them one cent,
and yet upon their figures it is going to reduce a town
they call wealthy to six hundred dollars per poll less
than the average amount in the towns of Massachusetts.
Now, take the figures as to the deficit in Beverly and
the division of funds. The result of division would be
to add about sixty per cent to every tax bill in the town,
and the income of the town divided by the number of
polls (taking only the same amount of property to each
side), — the inevitable result is that the Farms receive
nine dollars where the people in the town receive one
doUar. This applies to both the income and valuation,
and is equaUy true whether it is taken before subtracting
the debt or afterward. There are certain other things
that bring out the features of this case in a strong light.
Some of them have been mentioned before. I desire
to caU your attention again to the fact, that Beverly
Farms wUl have thirteen mUes of road to take care of,
and that the town of Beverly will have forty-seven with
the same income. Beverly Farms has one hundred
and fifty scholars (it was said to be one hundred and
five, two years ago), to educate with the same amount of
revenue as that with which Beverly has to educate one
thousand six hundred scholars.
Now, I wUl only mention without attempting to argue
what seems to me the most important part of our case,
and that is the question of the public policy, whether
this division should take place, and a town should be
created for which there is no earthly necessity, where

30
the wants of the inhabitants are well supplied at pres
ent. Whether a town should be created from a vUlage
that has not increased in population or in business for
forty years, where there is no probabUity of an increase
in the future, except in wealth, where one half of
the houses are vacant for six months in the year,
and where the inevitable result of division, wiU
be the creation of a club town, to which rich
men may resort to enjoy the blessings afforded by
the smallest municipal expenses, and the lowest rate
of taxation. Indeed, when you come to examine the
evidence that has already been introduced into this case,
we believe that you will be sati|^ed that the object and
motive of this petition, and the reason that this contest
is again forced upon us, is to secure the establishment
of a town affording every advantage of seclusion
and low taxes. I do not wish to pass entirely
unnoticed the statement that only three per cent of
the town debt and $150,000 in addition, was created
for the benefit of Beverly Farms. The amount
Beverly Farms received has been much more than
the percentage named of the amount expended by
the town of Beverly, and much more than $150,000
in addition. The town at one time spent $200,000 in
laying water pipes, and widening and straightening the
main avenue to the Farms, and it was in consequence
of the demand of the Farms for these improvements
that the town of Beverly entered upon the course of
expenditure that lasted for some years, and that created

31
the debt which at present exists. Then we say further
that in recent times the town in response to demands
from the Farms (you will find it in last year's evidence)
severed its connection with the city of Salem, and estab
hshed an independent supply of water sufficient to reach
the highlands at the Farms and for which there was no
demand from any other portion of the town.
Beverly is only in the front fighting the battles of other
places, as well as its own. It is notorious that in Essex
County, wherever an opportunity is offered for the divi
sion of a town that will secure similar advantages to those
which the Beverly petitioners seek, petitions for division
have either been presented or are kept back only to
await the final action of the Legislature upon the peti
tion which is before you. It has never been the policy
of Massachusetts to create a town like the proposed
town of Beverly Farms. The towns of Nahant and
Swampscott were separated from Lynn, but before
there had been a considerable accumulation of wealth in
either place, and when their valuations bore no com
parison with that of Beverly Farms to-day. It is con
tended by the remonstrants that the petitioners have no
valid reason for separation from the old town ; that in
their relations with the town of Beverly, they have
always been fairly and justly treated ; and believing that
this proposed division is an unjust one, and that the shore
lands, the only part of the town of Beverly that
increases in value, belong to the whole town, and not
to a small portion of it ; and believing also that it is not

32
in accord with sound poHcy that such a town as Beverly
Farms must be, if incorporated, should be created, we
come here and present our case, and ask that the
prayer of this petition be refused.
Let me add a single word about Wenham, which is
one of the smallest towns in the State ; they take about
four hundred and seven acres from the total of four
thousand acres. They go into Wenham without saying.
By your leave. There is no grievance or complaint
against the old town of Wenham, by the inhabit
ants of the eastern section. It is said to be an ad
vantage to the inhabitants of Beverly Farms to have
control of the school in East Wenham. They say it
will be an advantage to some ; but if you wiU look at
the road in the north-westerly part of Beverly Farms,
you will see that division would be a decided disadvan
tage to people who reside on that road, who are largely
opposed to division, and who must send their children a
mile and a half to the East Wenham school, instead of
half a mile to the Centreville school in Beverly. Now,
of four hundred and seventeen acres of land, there are
sixty-four landholders, but only thirteen of them reside
in that part of the town, and these thirteen resident
property-holders own less than sixty acres out of the
whole area of four hundred and seventeen acres. The
rest of this eastern section is owned in the old town of
Beverly and Wenham. I add that the people of Wen
ham, for reasons that wiU be given in evidence, are
almost unanimously opposed to the proposed division of
their town.

TESTIMON^Y.

FOUETH HEAEING.

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES H. ODELL.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Mr. Odell, you are a member
of the Board of Assessors of Beverly?
A. I am, sir.
Q. You were chairman of the Board last year?
A. I was chairman of the Board last year.
Q. And you testified last year ?
A. I did, sir.
Q. As to the action taken by the Assessors in the valua
tion of 1886 ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I will not ask you to repeat that testimony. Did you
hear the statements made by Mr. Dow and Mr. Ober in rela
tion to a conversation with you, at this hearing ?
A. I did, sir.
Q. Will you be kind enough to state to the Committee
what the conversation was ?
A. During the investigation of last winter, when we had
late night sessions, between 5iine and ten o'clock or ten and
eleven o'clock, I think the train used to arrive in Salem
at eleven o'clock, I was going down one night in the smoking-
car ; Mr. Ober was sitting opposite me, where the card-table
is, and he was conversing about the matter in general. This
gentleman came over, and Mr. Ober introduced him to me as

34
Mr. Dow. He said he complained of the valuation of his
land. I asked him about the location of it, as he was an
entire stranger to me. He said it was down to Larcom's. I
replied to him that I thought his land was fairly assessed ;
that was, the assessments, all of them, were governed by the
sales in the localities where the land was ; we had no other
basis to go on, except the actual sales. And I went on and
told him that one matter for consideration was that Miss
Burnham, of Boston, had refused considerable more than what
he was assessed for ; on the other side of him there was a lot
bought by Mrs. Burnham that was assessed for 1900 and
brought 11,100.
Q. How did you begin the conversation about the way
the assessment was made in the spring of 1886 ?
A. Then he spoke about Miss Ober's land, the Miss Ober
who was on the stand here, and said she was over-taxed. I
think he boards with her. I told him that Miss Ober's land
in 1885, which you will see by your books is assessed at
eighty cents a foot, was assessed at the same price as the
surrounding land. Every street has a different valuation,
and we have a price per foot on the right and left hand side
of the street. We went over all the streets of the town
thoroughly. Q. This was your talk with him ?
A. This was my talk with him. Said I: "If you will
look over the land you will find " — this was in 1886, —
" you will find that she has more land than she had in
1887." The survey was made by her own uncle.
Q. 1885, do you mean?
A. More than she had in 1885, — " and if you will figure
that, you will find it comes to the same price." That is, she
had more acreage than she had ever been assessed for. Then
he went for Mr. Alvin Haskell's land, which has been
pointed out to the Committee a number of times, a piece
of land bordering on low land ; I think it was formerly a
gravel-pit. A good deal of gravel has been taken out of it.
It was assessed, I think, at over $3,000. Well, I told him

35
that we were governed in regard to that land by the land
adjoining, Mr. Haven's. This land adjoins Mr. Haven's.
Mr. Haskell came before the Board of Assessors, and was, I
think, the only man.
Q. I just want to keep your testimony to this conversa
tion. A. This is the conversation about the land ; this is the
first going off. I told him that Mr. Haskell would only tell
us what he got for one piece from Mr. Haven, and the second
piece he refused to tell the Board about ; therefore from the
evidence we had, we assessed his land at the price which
one of the assessors, who lived at the Farms, said he had been
offered. He said he had been offered so much for it, and we
assessed not so much as he said.
Q. Now come right to the conversation.
A. I am telling the conversation as far as I remember
it. Then he conversed about the general assessment and the
general trouble at the old town. Well, I told him that as
far as I was concerned, personally, I was sick and tired of it ;
that I very reluctantly went on to the Board of Assessors ;
that after the hearing in 1885, the old town being up in arms
about it, and the raking which they got in Boston here, that
they did come to me, the prominent citizens of both parties.
Republican and Democrat, and asked me if I would stand as
one of the Board, as they proposed to put in a majority of
new members on that Board. I told him I reluctantly con
sented ; that I had got about all I wanted, that I had got
about sick of it, and I didn't want any more of it. That was
about the substance of the talk th§n.
Q. Did you tell him, did you tell any of them, that you
were put on with the understanding that the town of Bever
ly should not contest division ?
A. That statement, sir, is not true.
Q. Did you say any thing of that kind to Mr. Ober ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Or to the other man ?
A. No, sir. And it is very improbable —

36
Q. I do not ask you whether it is improbable, I only ask
you for the fact.
A. No, sir, I did not.
Q. Did you say you were put on for the purpose of rais
ing the valuation of the Farms so that they would have to
pay an undue proportion of the valuation and of the debt in
case they were successful ?
A. I do not think, sir, the debt was mentioned ; I have no
recollection of it. I said I was put on to equalize the val
uation, which you will find in my testimony of last year.
That was all I said.
Q. Did you say any thing more than that ?
A. No, sir, I did not. Not only that, but some people of
the Farms came to me also, to ask me to go onto the Board
of Assessors.
Q. Did you say that Mr. John I. Baker came to you ?
A. I have no recollection of Mr. Baker's coming to me.
Q. That is not my question.
A. No, sir, I did not. Mr. Norwood did come to me, and
lots of these gentlemen.
Q. Did you say any thing about Mr. Roads or Mr. Jones
giving any advice in the matter ?
A. No, sir ; I never heard the names of Senator Roads or
Senator Jones mentioned; they were not senators at that
time, either ; at any rate, Mr. Roads was not.
Q. Well, that was the year before ?
A. Their names were not mentioned.
Mr. Stearns. Mr. Roads was a senator at the time of
the conversation, and so w^s Mr. Jones, too.
Q. Mr. Odell, will you tell me how the Lowell estate is
assessed this year, or how was it assessed last year, either ?
I don't care which.
A. The Lowell estate this year was assessed from what
came out in the testimony of last year. I went to the Suffolk
Records to see what could be found, and I found there was
no return there. I went to Mr. Hills, chairman of the
Board of Assessors of Boston, and I asked him how he assessed

37
the estate. He told me he assessed the whole estate ; the
estate had never been settled, and the estate was in Boston.
I claimed that we were entitled to one-ninth of the estate,
that is, of the personal property, as Mr. William D. Sohier
and his sister were living in Beverly. "Well," said he, "if
that is so, we shall have to abate it, if it belongs to you." I
claimed that it did, and I found in the tax commissioner's
office that the trust property had already been returned to us
for a number of years by the sworn return of the trustees,
that is, part of it. That is the way I got at the portion that
belonged to us ; that they had already received the corpora
tion tax on the trust property as belonging to them, but not
the direct tax. I asked him what his assessment was, and he
said $160,000 personal on the whole estate. I asked him how
he arrived at it, if by dooming ; and he telephoned down
below, and asked how they got it, and they said it was
doomed, that they had never made any return. I asked him
if there had been any more, and he said he gradually raised
it a little every year until they brought returns in. I asked
him how he did in such cases, and he said he gradually raised
them, and when they got the doom high enough people gen
erally came in and made a return.
Q. What did you do ?
A. I took one-ninth of it ; that is, one-eighteenth of it
for Mr. William D. Sohier, and one-eighteenth for his sister,
and we assessed them for $18,000.
Q. What about the assessment of the Pickman estate
this year ?
A. The Pickman estate for this year, I went over that
very carefully with the rest of the Board. Mr. Murney and
I went to the Boston office, and we overhauled every thing
we could find. Mr. Pickman is alive. I found he was
assessed, — I could not get far in Salem, but he has got some
property in Salem, — I found Mr. Pickman was assessed on
real estate in Beverly for $117,425 ; I found he was assessed
on real estate in Boston for $337,000 ; he is assessed for
personal in Beverly on $274,550 ; making a total of $728,-

38
975 ; then on his corporation stocks, which he pays to the
State, he is assessed for fifty shares of the Boston Cooperage
Company, eighty-five shares of the Boston Cordage Company,
seventy-five shares of " The Boston Daily Advertiser," two
hundred shares of the Boston Storage Company, a hundred
shares of the Continental Sugar Refining Company, fourteen
shares of the Washington Fire and Marine Insurance Com
pany, eighty shares of the Salem Lead Company, sixty-seven
shares of the National Dock and Warehouse Company, sixty
shares of the Middlesex Company, and fifty shares of the
Massachusetts Hospital Life Insurance Company. And, as
I say, judging from what was said last year, and from what
was said by the chairman of the Board of Assessors in Boston,
that if Mr. Pickman paid on real and personal estate to the
amount of $500,000, he thought that would be as much as
he ought to pay on, and we having found three-quarters of a
million, I didn't feel justified as one of the Board, and the
Board decided they didn't feel justified, in raising him any
more than he was, on his personal estate.
Q. And that was all the property you had information
about, from all the means of information you had ?
A. That was all, sir ; we could not get at any other
information. Q. What have you done in relation to looking at estates
in relation to personal property ?
A. We have taken that book of 1887, which is in evi
dence here, that tax-book, the assessors' valuation book, and
we have looked at every estate in the town of Beverly that
appears on that book at the Probate Courts ; we have the
inventories, and they are all here, the schedules of all the
property which you will find in here, of every estate in
the town of Beverly, that there is any account made of.
The parties are assessed according to the schedules filed, and
the inventory of stocks, name by name, and the assessments
are made up into this book, and carried into the valuation
book. Q. Has any one been doomed in the town of Beverly any
more than the returns in the Probate Court?

39
A. No, sir, not one.
Q. On either side of the line ?
A. No, sir; we have gone strictly according to the re
turns. We have given exactly what we have found. If we
found a hundred shares of stock, we have taken the valuation
report, and made the tax according to the price, and made a
return. Q. And the inventories that you have taken from the
Probate Court are of probate estates all over town ?
A. All over the town ; and also copies of wills and the
probate estates are in this book.
Q. What in relation to the Sears estate, Capt. Odell ?
A. I went over the Sears estate last spring with Mr.
Murney at the Suffolk Court, and also took the daughter ;
we had the daughter's inventory — that is, in this book,
Miriam, who died in Essex County — and I could not see
under the returns they made there, where we could find as
much personal property as we have assessed. If you will
remember, the law was changed in 1881 in regard to mort
gaged property. This property has been carried along in
Beverly at the same price for a number of years, about $200,-
000; $90,000 to Mrs. Sears, and $60,000 to one of the girls;
but Mr. David Sears has never been assessed in Beverly, and
we claim he does not reside there. We have Henry F. Sears,
and he is assessed ; the estate is assessed at about $200,000.
Then, as I was saying, under the law of 1881 or 1882, it
has been decided that mortgages are exempt from taxation.
We looked into that matter very thoroughly, and found that
most of this Sears property, in fact, it was noted before he
died, that Mr. Sears, most all of his property was in real
estate in Boston. There are three of the family living. You
will find most of his estate is in mortgages on real estate ; for
instance, you will find an item of Nathan Matthews, $100,-
000 of mortgages on real estate. We could not find so much
as we had assessed.
Q. Take the estate of Mr. John Pickett?
A. Mr. John Pickett has died within a month, I think

40
within two months. He was the largest coal dealer in
Beverly. We assessed him on real and personal, I could not
tell you exactly how much, but in the vicinity of $98,000, I
think. He was the president of the bank there.
Q. What was his inventory ?
A. I have not seen it, but there will be a gentleman here
who will testify to it. Mr. Endicott, who is one of the asses
sors, told me that we had assessed him within ten per cent
of his whole valuation. Mr. Endicott will be here to testify
to that fact.
Q. Do you know whether any gentlemen from Boston
have moved in or attempted to move into Beverly Farms,
this year. Captain ?
A. A gentleman bought the Foster property, Mr. Hub
bard, and notified us last spring that he was taxed in Beverly,
and there was some trouble why he could not get off from
Boston with the Boston assessors, I don't know what it was,
but he notified us he should be there in Beverly.
Q. How about the estate of Mr. W. Powell Mason ?
A. Mr. Powell Mason, as I understand it, don't pay his
taxes in Boston or Beverly either. He pays them in New
Hampshire. He is in Boston half of the year, and in Beverly
the other half. I think Mr. Hills was thinking about look
ing him up once.
Q. Dr. Haddock is named as another wealthy citizen ?
A. The old Dr. Haddock I don't believe has got any
thing. He told me a year ago he had got $1,000, the first
thousand dollars he ever had clear of his bills, and he said
the strike came on and he had not got more than a five-
dollar bill left. He said he proposed to keep his insurance
policies good, and he should leave his family all he had in
that direction. But his son, young Charles, married a lady
from Connecticut, who has some income. The trust is in
Connecticut. Q. The statement was made in relation to that Dr
Haddock. A. I see it was qualified by "the family" this morning.

41
Q. Yes, it was.
A. Dr. Charles, young Charles, married a Connecticut
lady. The trust is in Connecticut. The mother is in
Europe ; one of the boys is in the navy, and a daughter is in
Connecticut. We don't know any thing about that trust. I
understand she only has the income from it. It has never
been settled, but the trustees live in Connecticut, and all the
property is there.
Q. Take the property of Mr. Whitney, Mr. Odell ?
A. Capt. Elisha Whitney is a ship-master (?) ; he is
around here on the street now as a broker. 1 think he was
in the government employ as an inspector of steamers, or
something of that kind for a year; when he left off going
to sea some fifteen or twenty years ago, I know he did not
have much of any thing. He has had a large family, and
I think if he has squared the yards with his family he has
done very well. He is an insurance broker on State Street,
he is sixty-seven years old, and he comes to Boston every
day. That is the way I should put him. I am only giving
my guesses.
Q. There were some other instances mentioned this
morning, you may state in regard to them ?
A. I don't remember, except Mr. Clark. Mr. Clark has
got real estate here in Boston, something like $100,000 here
in Boston, — A. N. Clark.
Q. Mr. Giddings?
A. He is of the firm of Tower, Giddings & Co., on State
Street, well-known brokers. Mr. Giddings tells me his money
is all in his business, that is all I can say. He is assessed in
the city of Boston.
Q. You have said nothing about Mr. Choate ?
A. Mr. F. W. Choate is a lawyer who lost a great deal by
the Boston fire. He was largely interested in the Washing
ton Insurance Company, which was wound up the other day.
We assessed him for $5,000 or $10,000, but never considered
him as a man who had a great amount of money since he
met his losses in that fire.

42
Q. Do you know any thing about Rev. Mr. Smith and
wife? A. I do not ; no, sir.
Q. Where does Mr. Smith live? What is his business?
A. Mr. Smith is the rector of the Episcopal Church. He
married a lady in Swampscott, I think, about a year ago. He
has now come to Beverly. I don't know any thing about
him ; I don't know whom he married, and I don't think any
of the Board have any information about him.
Q. Had you any information that he was a man of means ?
A. Not at all.
Q. Then there is Mr. Joseph W. Lefavour ?
A. Mr. Joseph W. Lefavour carries on one of the largest
shoe manufactories in the town of Beverly. I don't know
any thing about what he has got, any more than what we
have assessed him. I could not tell you any thing about it.
Q. George Z. Silsbee and family ?
A. George Z. Silsbee is a large owner in manufacturing
companies. I think he is treasurer of some of the mills, the
Amoskeag, I think.
Q. Does he pay on personal property in Beverly?
A. Yes, sir, he pays on personal in Beverly. I do not
know any thing about him. I only took the estates of those
who are living, and have never raised them on either side of
the proposed line.
Q. Have you raised anybody at Beverly Farms this year
except where you found a return?
A. No, sir ; the returns are all here.
Q. What do you say as to the taxes upon property in
Beverly, in Beverly village, the valuation of property there as
compared with its cash value, as compared with its value in
other parts of the town ?
A. We took off a list of sales —
Q. Whether it is high or low in comparison with other
portions of the town ?
A. I consider that the valuation is high in the old town,
according to sales.

43
Q. Do you know what the sales show in the old town, as
it is called, for the last year?
A. No, it was taken off, but I forget what it was. It wa8
very near the valuation. Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Stearns.) Mr. Odell, in your talk with Mr.
Dow, did you say to him that anybody had been to you to
ask you to take the chairmanship of the Board of Assessors?
A. No. The Board of Assessors elect their own chairman.
Q. Did you say any thing to him that anybody had been
to you to ask you to go on the board ?
A. I did.
Q. Did you name any person ?
A. I did. No doubt I did ; I could not remember about
that, but I did name some.
Q. Whom did you name?
A. I named Mr. Norwood and Mr. Israel Lefavour.
There are twenty or thirty of them here, perhaps.
Q. I know. Did you name twenty or thirty ?
A. No, I told him that they had come to me from both
sides —
Q. I asked you whom you named to him ?
A. I cannot tell you whom I did name.
Q. Can you tell whom you did name ?
A. I have no doubt I named Mr. Norwood.
Q. Didn't you name Mr. Baker ?
A. I don't think I did, because I do not think Mr. Baker
came to me.
Q. That is the reason his name was left out ?
A. Why, of course I would not —
Q. Mr. Baker was very efficient and very active, was he
not, last year in the matter of opposition ?
A. He always has been, and always will be.
Q. And if there was any general hunger for you there, he
is quite a prominent man, isn't he ?
A. He is quite a prominent man.

44
Q. Quite open and frank in the expression of his opinions
and his desires, isn't he ?
A. I don't know as I know.
Q. Well, not particularly backward, is he ?
A. In what direction ?
Q. In reticence, in silence, in keeping his views to him
self? A. No, I do not think he is.
Q. There is no man that would be more likely to come
to you than Mr. Baker, that you know of?
A. Well, yes, I do, a great many. I do not think Mr.
Baker has much to do with politics ; he runs a party of his
own, outside of both the great political parties.
Q. Oh, nobody ever supposed Mr. Baker had any thing
to do with politics. Then, as I understand, you do not think
Mr. Baker was up to the average of the fourth foot of
Beverly (?). You think he would not be as apt to come to
you to express an opinion as other people ?
A. I don't think there was any reason. The people were
all roused. I don't think there was any need of his
coming. Q. They were roused ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. By what were they roused ?
A. By the sentiment there was up here, and the facts that
came out at the State House, at our first hearing.
Q. I don't quite understand what excited this rouse-
ment? A. Because the people down there had not been paying
on one-fourth part of their property, while they had been
assessed up at the old town nearly to their actual sales.
Q. Now, that came out in 1885 ?
A. That came out iu 1885 ; after the hearing in 1885, yes,
sir. Q. You mean to say that it came out in the hearing of 1885,
that the people of Beverly Farms had been under-taxed?
A. Yes, sir, I do.

45
Q. And that was the grand source of wrath and fury at
Beverly, this rousement?
A. That was the fact ; yes, sir.
Q. Then it was not the question of division that made
Beverly fume, it was the great injustice that Beverly Farms
had been heaping on Beverly, was it ?
A. It was both.
Q. Yes, there was great feeling in Beverly that they were
oppressed by Beverly Farms in the matter of taxes, was
there ?
A. I didn't say that.
Q. What were they excited about, if they had no
grievance ?
A. They were excited over the fact that they had been
paying these Boston people's taxes long enough.
Q. Long enough ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And so far as you can say, that is what they got
excited about down in Beverly ?
A. Yes, I think that was it. I should think they would
be. Q. Now, these Boston people that didn't pay their taxes
to old Beverly ran all along the line, didn't they?
A. They did.
Q. Clear down to Beverly Cove?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And this thing had been going on, and old Beverly
had taxed and assessed all of them, didn't they ?
A. Old Beverly? No. When I was elected, I supposed
Mr. Lothrop was going to —
Q. Never mind about your brilliant hopes.
A. They were not my hopes at all.
Q. I want to know if it had not been the fact that this
great injustice that roused Beverly was perpetrated by a
Board of Assessors chosen wholly by old Beverly, was it not ?
A. No, sir.
Q. How many did Beverly Farms have on it?

46
A. Had one, and always have had.
Q. How many in all ?
A. When we have had five, they have had one out of five,
and when we had three, they have had one out of three.
Q. How long has it been five ?
A. I could not tell you ; four or five years, possibly.
Q. A little more ?
A. I could not tell.
Q. Well, the assessment of 1885, that roused old Beverly
to this point of indignation, was made by four old Beverly
assessors, was it not, out of five ?
A. Yes, sir, made by the five assessors.
Q. And four of them were old Beverly men ?
A. Four of them were old Beverly men.
Q. Who were those five, I would like to know ?
A. Mr. Murney.
Q. He is one of them now ?
A. Yes.
Q. Who was it that made this assessment in 1885 ?
A. There was a man by the name of Williams from the
Farms. Q. He was a sinner, we will agree. Now, go on and give
us the rest.
A. I think a man by the name of Hdl.
Q. Who is Hill ?
A. Hill is a jeweller.
Q. A good man ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. An intelligent man ?
A. I should say he was.
Q. Neither a fool nor a knave ?
A. No, sir, neither.
Q. Who was the next Beverly assessor ?
A. Mr. Lunt.
Q. Who is he ?
A. He is a shoe manufacturer, 4n a small way.
Q. A good man ?

47
A. He is a good man, yes, sir ; as far as I know.
Q. Who was another ?
A. Capt. Daniel Foster ; he is on the Board now.
Q. He is on the Board now ? He is a good man, of course ?
A. No better than the others.
Q. Not a mite ? Now, who is the fourth ?
A. Mr. Moulton.
Q. A good man ?
A- Yes, sir; chairman of the Board this year.
Q. Then you had four intelligent, good, honest, true
Beverly men who made that assessment of 1885, didn't you ?
A. 1 should call them good, honest men.
Q. Do you want to discount their intelligence ?
A. Not a bit.
Q. You don't want tn leave that out ?
A. I would not say any thing about their ignorance in
regard to property, though.
Q. It is their intelligence we are inquiring about ?
A. I would call them intelligent men.
Q. I suppose all of us have great abundance of ignorance ?
A. No doubt about that.
Q. Now, these Beverly men, this Board, until they got to
that brook, they assessed property with first-class judgment,
did they not ?
A. I don't think they assessed it high enough.
Q. Where, on the other side of the brook ?
A. Not according to sales. I say we assessed it accord
ing to sales in the locality.
Q. You got it right ?
A. Well, then, the Board.
Q. Your Board got it right, did it ? because you did it
under oath, and there had been a tremendous law passed in
1885, that did not affect you as much as the rousement at
Beverly ; but nevertheless, you got it right. Now, that old
Beverly board of 1885 got it within five per cent of what
you did that side of the brook, didn't they ?
A. No, I don't think they did.

48
Q. Five and a fraction, sir, is all you have raised on the
left of the brook.
A. I don't think so. Some other parties have been over
the figures. I think it is more.
Q. Well, it is not, so the figures say.
A. It depends on who makes the figures.
Q. That is what we think.
A. I think, if your side made them they might prove that.
Q. But taking that brook, and taking it down on one side
of the line and the other, it is very easily done, isn't it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. There is no difficulty in going and taking your estates,
and seeing how much you have raised them. Will you
swear that this Board have raised it six per cent ?
A. I haven't looked the matter over.
Q. You don't want to ?
A. Yes. I think some parties will testify.
Mr. Moulton. I will give you the assessment for 1885
in five minutes.
Mr. Stearns. I have got it over here in the books, now.
Q. Assuming that it is five per cent, five and a fraction,
five and one-tenth, is it ? I know it is a very small fraction.
The old Board of Assessors, if that is true, had first-class
judgment, hadn't they, until they got up to that line ?
A. I think the assessors knew nothing about the sales at
Beverly Farms.
Q. Did not ?
A. When you put into a deed " one dollar and other con
sideration," they knew nothing what property sold for.
Q. Now, don't jump over that line for a minute. I am
asking about old Beverly, and I want to see how those good
men, how their wits and their brains and their judgment and
their honesty held out until they got to the brook ?
A. I don't believe they ever considered any brook at all,
either side, either Board.
Q. You don't ?
A. No, I don't. I cannot see it.

49
Q. Now, if they got within five per cent on the left-hand
side, and when you come to pass over onto the right they were
eighty-two and one-half per cent out of the way, — do you
know of any thing about that brook that causes lunacy when
they step over it ?
A. No, I do not. I know there is an estate this side of
the brook that is taxed four hundred per cent more than it
was before.
Q. You know there is one ?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Of course, there is always one. I don't doubt that you
saved specimens on this left-hand side, but I am asking now
if it is a fact that these good men and true assessed it upon
precisely the same basis that you did ?
A. Not with the same knowledge.
Q. Of course, they could not. Nobody knows as much
as you do ; I only ask you, knowing all they could know.
A. No, the knowledge came from this State House, and
not from what I know. I want to put that just where it
belongs. Q. Did the knowledge come from the State House as to
how much Beverly Farms land was worth ?
A. Yes.
Q. Who got it?
A. It came out here in the hearing, testified to by Mr.
Loring. Q. Then there had not been sufficient done for Beverly
Farms in old Beverly ?
A. They had no more idea that land was selling for
$20,000 an acre, in my opinion, than nothing at all.
Q. So that your ground for excusing the old assessors is
that it came out in the hearing that there had been some of
these estates sold at this price ?
A. All of the estates, practically.
Q. Now, do you mean to tell this committee, sir, that with
aU these estates, all these large and beautiful estates in
Beverly Farms to which the attention of the assessors was

50
directed, that the question of the value of shore land had
never been presented to them, nor to the people of Beverly?
A. I can only tell j^ou what the feeling was in Beverly in
regard to it.
Q. Oh, I don't like Beverly feeling ! I want to get at the
facts. Now, sir, is it not true that this Beverly Farms and
the building of the houses there was almost a phenomenon?
A. No, I don't think so.
Q. That the putting on these rocks of magnificent places
along there, building up on that shore, was not considered a
remarkable thing in Beverly, an attractive thing ?
A. Yes, sir, it was considered attractive and remarkable.
Q. Well, enough to attract comment so that the assessors
would know who was piling big money up there ?
A. I only know what the assessors say, what the Board
say ; they say they did not know until they found it was only
" a dollar and other considerations " in the deeds, that they
had any idea that land was bringing the price it did.
Q. Now, that is your only explanation of it ?
A. That is my only explanation of it.
Q. Now, as I understand you, you deny Dow's statement?
A. I do.
Q. Did you tell him that you did it for the purpose of
ulterior results, that is the substance of it ?
A. I deny that in toto.
Q. And you tell this committee that the reason you did
it was because a feeling had been aroused in old Beverly
that Beverly Farms was not paying its share of the tax? That
is it?
A. That the valuation should be equalized, the taxes
should be apportioned upon the rich man as upon the poor
man. Q. You told us a minute ago that the rousement at
Beverly was occasioned by the feeling that Beverly Farms
had been undertaxed ?
A. I say so now.
Q. That, then, was their feeling ?

51
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You were asked to go on that Board ?
A. As a member of the Board, yes, sir.
Q. You went there, feeling, \ suppose, the burden of this
great duty upon you ?
A. Everybody knows it is not a very pleasant place to be
on the Board of Assessors.
Q. You went into it, then, rather in the performance of a
sacrifice as a citizen, didn't you?
A. I went in because I considered, — there were so many
pressed me that I went in.
Q. Did you go in from pressure or duty ?
A. I do not think I looked at it from duty, either ; there
was so. much pressure, I went in.
Q. In other words, you were taken off of your feet and
hoisted there ?
A. No, I didn't say any such thing. I was only one of
the Board.
Q. You went in by pressure, and the pressure was that
Beverly Farms was undertaxed ?
A. As I said before, and you will find it in my testimony
of last year, what I understand by that —
Q. You said last year, didn't you, distinctly, that you
made that assessment over in Beverly Farms with a view
to the question of division ?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Didn't you say that last year ?
A. No, sir. With a view to the question of division ?
Q. Yes.
A. No, sir ; I never made any such statement.
Q. Didn't you say it was because of the question of divis
ion ? I don't know as I can give the exact words, but it was
because of this question of division.
A. The testimony will speak for itself.
Q. Didn't you ?
A. No, sir, I did not, because the question of division
was what caused the statement to come out in the hearing.

52
Q. Ah, I am asking you what you said?
A. That is what I mean to say. I think if the question
of division had never come up, you would probably never
have known what the land sold for.
Q. And when you get over this line, then do you have
any other reason than that you have given, why the assessors
who were correct on one side of the line had erred eighty-
two per cent on the other ? I want to know if there is any
other explanation ?
A. Only what I have stated. I know that they did not
know any thing about the valuation of property there, and
they did know it in old Beverly.
Q. Do you own any property at Beverly Farms ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you ever own any there ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did any of your Board of Assessors ever own any
there ?
A. I think not. I would not say about that.
Q. These men, then, knew just as much as you knew, or
are you brighter ? I don't know but what that is so.
A. Well, you can judge.
Q. I cannot judge, I ask you.
A. I think Mr. Haskell, who was on the Board from the
Farms, — a Farms man, — was very conversant with all the
property at the Farms.
Q. By the way, where is this man Haskell ?
A. He was here yesterday ; I thought he was here to-day.
Q. Aren't you going to show us the Farms assessor to-day ?
A. Yes, if you say so ; if you want him, you can have
him ; no doubt about that.
Q. Who is he ?
A. He is the graveyard man, you called him.
Q. Yes, very appropriate. I didn't know whether he was
buried now, or not ?
A. No.
Q. He is still alive ?

53
A. Yes, I think he is alive.
Q. Better than he was last year?
A. Yes, I think he is ready to testify.
Q. He don't own any property there himself? He only
pays a poll-tax ?
A. He built his son's house, and made it over to him.
Q. He built somebody else one, he don't own one himself?
A. Not in his own name.
Q. Now, this question. None of your assessors knew
any thing about the value of Beverly Farms property from
any ownership or experience in it, did you ?
A. Well, I have relatives at the Farms, and I visit there
very often, and I have an idea something about that land.
Q. Yes, you have aunts and cousins ?
A. I have aunts and cousins ; that is, my wife has.
Q. But you have no property there ?
A. No, sir.
Q. No land you expect to inherit ?
A. Only through my wife, I don't have any of my own.
My wife has aunts and cousins there.
Q. None that you expect to inherit ?
A. No, not at all.
Q. So that you had no vital interest there in the real
estate at the Farms ?
A. Not at all.
Q. Your acquaintance with Beverly Farms was in no
sense a pecuniary one ?
A. Not at all, no, sir.
Q. You say you were mighty tired of this matter last
year? A. I was.
Q. You got terribly tired ?
A. I did.
Q. You were not on the stand a great while ?
A. I was on the executive committee all through.
Q. What committee ?
A. The town committee for fighting this matter. This
year I am not.

54
Q. It didn't affect your judgment as assessor at all?
A. I was elected after the assessment was made.
Q. You have done it again this year ?
A. Not but very little.
Q. Aren't you one of the fighting committee ?
A. I am not on the executive committee, I am on the
general committee ; I am not in the front ; I am not taking
a front seat so much as I was.
Q. You got too tired last year ?
A. I did.
Q. So you are going to rest this year ?
A. Because the rest of the town of Beverly are here now
to take charge of it themselves.
Q. If you are not the man, won't you tell us who is the
front fighter ? We want to know ?
A. I think they are all united.
Q. You are all in the front ?
A. No, I suppose the executive committee are in the
front. Q. Where does the executive committee come from ?
A. Chosen in Beverly.
Q. Who chooses it ?
A. Why, the citizens get together, a committee is chosen
by the town, and the general committee choose an executive
committee, and a finance committee, and all that sort of
thing. Q. You have got a financial committee ?
A. Certainly.
Q. Considerable — Well, I won't ask about that.
Mr. Robinson. You had better go on, and open up both
sides. Mr. Stearns. We have no finance committee.
Mr. Robinson. No, you have no finance committee, nor
finances either.
Mr. Stearns. I don't know, I hope so. I am vitally
interested. Adjourned until 3 p.m.

FIFTH HEAEING.

Tuesday Afternoon, Jan. 31, 1888.
The Committee met in the Green Room, at 3 p. m.. Senator
Ladd of Worcester, the Chairman, presiding.
The Chairman. The hour having arrived to which this
meeting was adjourned, we will now proceed with the
hearing.

EXAMINATION OF CHARLES H. ODELL, resumed.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) Mr. Odell, I simply want to
ask you — I do not know but it has been stated either by the
counsel in opening, or by you in testimony — whether the
property on the Beverly side was proposed to be divided and
valued at as high sales as the sales show the value of the
property to be ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I want to call your attention to two places, — the
Rial side, as it is called, over on the other side of the creek
there ; we know there have been sales there considerably in
advance of the valuation.
A. The property on Rialside is opposite of the depot, in
the old town, crossing the river, that property has been
opened up from a large farm, and has been cut into streets
within the last two years. The only sale, — one sale of
property that I know of, was at five cents a foot, for a corner
lot there. That property has since been sold for considerably

56
less, sold by a woman, who sold it for considerably less. We
have assessed the lots, where they have sold lots for $200,
for $175.
Q. Is it not a fact that much of the land is held at from
three to five cents a foot, and held at considerably less, — a
schoolhouse lot, for instance ?
A. Yes, sir. Last year the people in that section wanted
a schoolhouse established over in that section, and a school
committee located on the lot there, for which they had to
pay, I think, three or four times what the assessment was,
when they found that the parties wished to purchase this lot
for the town, — they made them pay for it. But outside of
that there have been no sales made at but very little above
the assessors' valuation. That is an exceptional case. As
we all know, in cases of that kind, when a town wants a lot
of land, or when the people want a lot of land, they make
them pay what they can for it.
Q. Wasn't that a sale of John Porter's heirs ?
A. Yes, sir. One of them is here, and will testify to that.
Q. They sold it for about three cents a foot ?
A. They have a record here of all the sales that were
made. Q. Just one other question, and that is, in regard to the
wharf property, and take that property of John Pickett's, and
that is assessed at ten cents a foot, is it not ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that as high as you put it ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you think it would bring any more ?
A. No, sir.
Mr. Moulton. I understand, Mr. Chairman, that it was
agreed —
The Witness. Mr. Baker informs me that he paid only
a cent and a half for the school lot.
Mr. Moulton. It is agreed, as I understand, that the
sales that, were read to the Committee this morning are in
evidence, with such modifications and changes as may be

57
proposed and introduced by our friends upon the other side,
if any. Mr. Robinson. I should like to ask Mr. Odell about that
schoolhouse lot.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) How did the town get the
lot? that is, you said something about the town taking it
for a schoolhouse.
A. The matter was referred to the school committee, and
the school committee decided on that lot. There is a large
tract of woods, and this was at the end of the woods, and the
school committee made all their arrangements about that
themselves ; they made the trade, and the town had nothing
to do with it. The town referred it to the school committee,
and they selected the lot and settled the price.
Q. They located the lot for the schoolhouse ?
A. They located the lot for the schoolhouse ; yes, sir.
Q. And^ afterwards they bought it?
A. They made the price, a cent and a half a foot, so Mr.
Baker, who was the chairman of the committee, says. I
know that it was above what we put on it, because we
assessed it as farming land at so much a foot.
Q. And that was a cent and a half a foot ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr. Loring, who was here, was one of the school
committee ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Well, take all the sales that have been made there on
the Rial side : how do they compare with the total valuation ?
A. Mr. Porter came in last spring, and gave us all the
sales that he has made since the last assessment, and that
were sold in small lots for houses for workmen in the
factories, and, as I say, if they sold a lot for $200, we
assessed it for $175. That was, however, out of the Por
ter farm, through which they have cut roads at their own
expense. Q. How much building has there been there ?
A. There have been considerably many small buildings

58

going up there for the last two years ; for two years, I think,
buildings have been going up there.
Q. These were houses for the workmen in the factories ?
A. Yes, for the workmen in the factories.

JOHN M. MURNEY, sworn.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) John M. Murney?
A. Yes, sir ; that is my name.
Q. You reside in Beverly, Mr. Murney ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You are one of the assessors ?
A. I am.
Q. And have been for how long ?
A. For two years now.
Q. Have you prepared some statistics in relation to the
present case ?
A. I have.
Q. Will you teU me how many polls there are at Beverly
Farms ?
A. 272.
Q. How are those ascertained ?
A. They are ascertained by taking them off the assessors'
books, the number of polls as returned to the assessors on
the first day of May.
Q. How many remonstrating voters are there in Beverly ?
A. I do not know, sir ; I have not made figures on
that. Q. You will do it, perhaps ?
A. Yes ; if you desire it I will.
Q. How many polls are there in Beverly ?
A. 2,743.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) Polls in Beverly without the
272? A. No ; with the 272.

69
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) That would leave how many in
Beverly ?
A. 2,453, deducting the 272.
Q. What is the valuation of Beverly for the year 1887 ?
A. $14,287,100.
Q. Of that what proportion is the Beverly Farms, or take
it in the precinct that was established at the Farms ?
A. In the proposed town valuation Precinct One I find
that there is $5,292,750 ; that is, in real estate and personal
and all.
Q. That is. Precinct One is the Farms precinct, is it ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With the lines substantially as pointed out by Mr.
Loring on the first day of the hearing ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Perhaps you had better trace it off on the map now,
Mr. Murney, how far the precinct comes, because we shall
have occasion to refer to the distance between that and the
proposed dividing line.
A. (Pointing on the plan.) Mr. Chairman, the precinct
line commences here at what is known as Plum Cove, going
by this dark line, I should say, to about that point, then it
crosses to Thistle Street, going from Thistle Street to the
Gloucester Railroad, up the Gloucester Railroad to this point,
which is just back of Mr. ^A. P. Loring's dwelling, and
thence —
Q. Then going north ?
A. Then going north to this point here.
Q. Yes; north-east.
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Moulton. That is all. I just wanted to show what
that was.
Q. (By Mr. Qua, of the Committee.) It includes every
thing to the right of that line ?
A. Yes, sir ; every thing to the right of that line. The
valuation, as I understand it, of the real and personal property
is $5,292,750.

60
Q. (By Mr. MoULTON.) And from there to the pro
posed division line ?
A. From there to the proposed division line it is $2,041,-
575, making a total of $7,334,325.
Q. And deducting that from the total valuation of Bever
ly leaves how much ?
A. Deducting that from the total valuation of Beverly it
leaves $6,952,775, that is remaining in old Beverly.
Q. What is the corporation tax of Beverly ?
A. The corporation tax of Beverly this year was $20,-
462.20 ; the bank tax was $6,756.93 ; making a total of the
bank and corporation tax of $27,219.13.
Q. Perhaps if you give us a word of explanation there,
Mr. Murney, it may be well. Of course everybody under
stands how the corporation and bank tax is collected, but
you may state in regard to that of what corporations and
banks the State collects, etc.
A. As I understand that, Mr. Chairman, a corporation
tax is a tax that is levied by the State upon all the incor
porated companies doing business within the State. Then
the corporations are required by law to return to the tax
commissioners some time during the month of May, I believe,
a list of the persons that own stock in those corporations.
We have a list of those corporations in Massachusetts, and
of the towns where the stockholders reside, and those towns
are credited with a certain part of that corporation tax, and
the State retains the balance. I took the returns from the
tax commissioner's office and examined them, checked off the
names of the persons who were living in Beverly, and of
those that were living in Beverly Farms, and in that way I
have determined the amount of corporation tax that would
come to our part of the town, and that which comes to the
whole town at present.
Q. Have you got it of the Farms ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Very well. I will go on with the valuation first, and
we will take that in its order.

61
A. Very well, sir.
Mr. Moulton. Have you any figures of the taxes paid
by the different people there ; that is, by the Beverly village
residents, the Farms permanent residents, the summer resi
dents, and the non-residents ?
A. I have.
Q. Give us those figures. Precinct One is ?
A. Precinct One, Beverly village residents, 206 acres. By
this I mean those that reside in what is termed the old town.
The value is $75,600.
Q. And what is the tax ?
A. The tax is $967.68. The Farms permanent residents,
— that is, the permanent residents of the Farms, those that
reside there all the year, — own 459 acres. The valuation is
$375,650, and the tax $4,808.
Q. Yes, sir.
A. And the summer residents, — that is, those that reside
in Beverly a part of the year, 412 acres. The valuation is
$3,488,300, and a tax of $44,650. Non-residents, 526 acres ;
valuation of $1,353,200 ; tax of $17,320. The total acreage
in Precinct One is 1,604. By the way, you will find that the
acres will foot up only 1,603, but I have not put in the num
ber of feet that was attached to each one.
Q. That is to say, you have not put in the odd feet ?
A. No. The odd feet would make it 1,604 acres, in
round numbers. The valuation, the total valuation, is
$5,292,750, and the tax is $67,747.
Q. Now take the tax between Precinct One and the pro
posed line.
A. The Beverly village residents in that district own
545 acres ; the valuation is $46,325, and the tax $592. The
Farms permanent residents, 116 acres ; valuation, $32,175 ;
$411 tax. Summer residents, 66 acres; $1,201,350 valua
tion ; tax $15,377. Non-residents, 310 acres ; valuation,
$761,725 ; and a tax of $9,750. Giving a total acreage of
1,038. (By Mr. Williams.) How much is that, please ?

62
A. 1,038 acres. Valuation, $2,041,575; and a tax of
$26,132. (By Mr. Moulton.) Now give us the total valuation of
the proposed town.
A. And the acreage also that I have here, sir ?
Q. Yes.
A. The total acreage is 2,640; valuation, $7,334,325;
the tax, $93,879. I should have said in regard to that
acreage that it is 2,642 acres ; I did not compute the feet
there ; the total acreage is 2,642 acres, instead of 2,640, as
stated. Q. Now, you are speaking of the proposed town. How
did you get at that ?
Mr. Williams. Don't you want to distinguish here ?
Mr. Moulton. The total, and the total of the proposed
town. I thought that he had given it all.
Mr. Williams. AU that I have here is, acres, 2,642;
valuation, $7,334,325 ; tax, $93,879 ; that is all. I thought
that you were going to distinguish between the non-residents
and the permanent residents.
The Witness. This is taking the whole total.
Mr. Williams. In order to cross-examine him I have to
compute these two ; and I do not know but, if he had the
total of the Beverly Farms as we laid it out, giving the per-
manents, non-residents, summer residents, etc., it would
help us.
Mr. Robinson. It is given separately for the two parts,
and then the total is given. That is the way in which it is
presented. We can give it to you the other way if you
want it.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Are you ready to go on with
the corporation tax?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, how did you get the corporation tax of Beverly
Farms ?
A. I took, as I stated before, the list of corporations, and
where I found the name of a person that I knew was a resi-

63
dent of the Farms, I checked that oft', and took it out of the
share that was credited, took the rate that was named by the
State, and in that manner found the amount of corporation
tax that would be due to Beverly Farms, and the amount
that would be due to the old town.
Q. Give me the corporation and bank-taxes of Beverly
Farms, first in the precinct, and then from the E'arms pre
cinct to the line.
A. I find that the corporation-tax of Precinct One is
$10,176 ; the bank tax in the same precinct, $1,494, making
a total of $11,670. The corporation tax from Precinct One
to the division line, is $4,756 ; and the bank-tax for the same
place is $530; making a total of $5,287 ; and making, in the
Beverly Farms, a total of corporation and bank tax of
$16,958. Q. Now, how much is left in Beverly ?
A. $10,261.
Q. And the total bank and corporation taxes are how
much? A. The total bank and corporation tax this year was
$27,219. Q. Now can you give me the income received from the
Farms, including the corporation and bank tax, taking it as
you did before. Precinct One first?
A. The property tax of Precinct One, that is, on real and
personal, is $67,747 ; the corporation and bank tax is $11,670 ;
making for Precinct One $79,418.
Q. That is the total income, is it?
A. That is the total income from Precinct One.
Q. Yes, sir.
A. Then from Precinct One to the line, the same as before,
property tax $26,132. That is from Precinct One to the line,
$26,132. And the corporation and bank tax, within the
same limits, is $5,287 ; making $31,419. Thus the total in
come from the Farms would be $110,837.
Q. That is the total revenue derived from the Farms ?
A. That is the total revenue derived from the Farms.

64
Q. Including the bank and corporation tax ?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Moulton. Now, the lists that I have given to the
reporters are the figures just as Mr. Murney has given them.
Q. Mr. Murney, did you make up these papers ?
A. Yes, sir ; I did.
Q. And they are the figures that you have just been tes
tifying to ?
A. Yes, sir ; they are the figures I have just testified to.
Q. Whether or not they are correct ?
A. They are correct so far as I know, and so far as I can
make them correct.
Mr. Moulton. I would like to leave these with the
Committee, brother Williams.
Mr. Williams. What are those ?
Mr. Moulton. Just what have been testified to.
Q. How many polls at the Farms pay a tax on the prop
erty ? How many tax-payers pay a tax on the property ?
A. I find a hundred and eighteen polls at the Farms that
pay a tax on property.
Q. What?
A. A hundred and eighteen polls at the Farms —
Q. No ; we will designate it as the precinct.
A. There are a hundred and eighteen polls at the Farms
that pay a tax on property.
q. Yes?
A. There are eighty-two persons that pay a tax on prop
erty who do not pay a poll-tax. That includes non-residents
and ladies, of course.
Q. And it makes a total of how many tax -payers ?
A. It makes a total of two hundred.
Q. How many residents, summer-residents, and non-resi
dents at the Cove pay a tax on property ?
A. Thirty-one.
Q. Yes, sir. And what does that amount to ?
A. That amounts to about —
Q. What is the total valuation ?

65
A. $1,331,500, I believe.
Q. Well, what do you mean by non-residents there ? I
asked you the question about non-residents.
A. Do you mean all the non-residents in town, or only
the shore non-residents in connection with this —
Q. In connection with this estimate with regard to the
Cove. A. I was taking the non-residents in the Cove in that
vicinity, and also I went as far back as Mr. Ezra K. Baker,
who has purchased, — well, half ways between Centreville
and the Cove ; but we understand it to be in the Cove
district. Q. You have taken all the non-residents in the Cove ?
A. All the non-residents in the Cove, not in the town
proper. There are a few there.
Q. And also the summer residents ?
A. And also the summer residents.
Q. How many persons in Beverly pay a tax on property?
A. Why, that would leave about 1,600. There might be
one or two more, but say 1,600.
Q. I mean the whole town.
A. Except the thirty-one in the Cove.
Q. Oh, you were speaking of those that were left in Bev
erly. My question was as to the whole number in Beverly.
A. 1,833 persons in Beverly who pay a tax on property.
Q. And 1,600 would be left in Beverly ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, what would be the valuation of the old town
of Beverly without these shore residents ?
A. $5,724,800.
Q. And what would be the average '
A. $3,578.
Q. So that if the tax rate is raised in Beverly, it would
have to be divided among these 1,600 tax-payers ?
A . Certainly.
Q. Now, what is the valuation of the permanent residents
— that gives us the total — the valuation of the permanent
residents ?

66
A. You wish for the valuation of the permanent resi
dents in the proposed town ?
Q. Yes, sir.
A. $407,825.
Q. And the summer residents ?
A. And the summer residents $4,689,650.
Q. And of non-residents ?
A. $2,114,925.
Q. Making a total of summer and non-residents ?
A. Summer and non-residents together, $6,804,575.
Q. What is the average valuation per poll at the Farms ?
We have had the polls and the valuation.
A. The number of polls at the Farms would be two
hundred and seventy-two, I find that the valuation of the
polls at the Farms is $26,964, gross.
Q. Yes, sir. Now take the Beverly polls.
A. The Beverly polls would be $2,834.
Q. That is how many polls ?
A. That is for two thousand four hundred and fifty-three
polls, the number that would be left after the division.
Q. And the valuation has already been given. Have you
deducted the debt and got what the net valuation per poll is
on each side ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Give us that, please.
A. The net debt of Beverly is $857,188, and that valuation
at the Farms per poll, subtracting the poll, $25,388 per poll,
and the net valuation in Beverly per poll would be $2,660.
Q. Yes, sir.
A. That is, the net valuation of the polls after the division
is about nine and a half times that left in Beverl3^
Q. About nine and a half times ?
A. About that ; a little over that ; about nine and a half
times that left in Beverly.
Q. Now, there are some other figures. Have you looked
to see about the average size of the towns in Massachusetts,
and how many towns there are that are larger or smaller
than Beverly? •

67
A. Beverly has got eight thousand six hundred and thirt} -
five acres. The average size of towns in Massachusetts ac
cording to the returns made here at the State House, Public
Document No. 19, is thirteen thousand and sixty-six acres.
Thus, the number of towns larger than Beverly is two hun
dred and sixty-four, and the number of towns smaller than
Beverly is seventy-three.
Q. Are those lists in accordance with your figures ?
A. Yes, sir, they are, on the Cove.
Q. And you have given the totals of which this is the
detail ?
A. Yes, sir ; that is the detail. The totals I have just
testified to.
Polls in proposed town ...... 272
Polls left in Beverly  2,453
Beverly polls  2,743
Beverly valuation  $14,287,100
Proposed town valuation. Precinct 1 . $5,292,750
Between Precinct 1 and the line . . . 2,041,575
 7,334,325
Valuation left in Beverly  $6,952,775
VALUATION AND TAXES IN PROPOSED TOWN.
FARMS PRECINCT.
Acres. Valuation. Tax.
Beverly village residents . . .206 $75,600 $967 68
Farms permanent residents . . 459 375,650 4,808 32
Summer residents .... 412 3,488,300 44,650 24
Non-residents  526 1,353,200 17,320 96
Totals (including feet) . . 1,604 $5,292,750 $67,747 20
VALUATION BETWEEN FARMS PRECINCT AND PROPOSED LINES.
Acres. Valuation. Tax.
Beverly village residents own . . 545 $46,325 $592 96
Farms permanent residents . . 116 32,175 411 84
Summer residents .... 66 1,201,350 15,37728
Non-residents  310 761,725 9,750 08
Totals (including feet) . .1,038 $2,041,575 $26,132 16
Total proposed town . . 2,642 $7,334,325 $93,879 36

68

CORPORATION AND BANK TAXES.
Farms Precinct.
Corporation tax ..... $10,176 14
Bank tax  1,494 70

Between Linea.
$4,756 41
530 77

Total in proposed town

$11,670 84 $5,287 18

Total bank and corporation tax in proposed town
Total bank and corporation tax left Beverly
Total bank and corporation taxes of Beverly

$16,958 02
10,261 11
$27,219 13

INCOME OF PROPOSED TOWN, INCLUDING CORPORATION
TAX.
Farms precinct tax  $67,747 20
Farms precinct corporation and bank tax . 11,670 84

Between lines tax ....
Between lines corporation and bank tax
Total income of proposed town .

$26,132 16
5,287 18

$79,418 04
$31,419 34
$110,837 38

SUMMER RESIDENTS ON BEVERLY SIDE (COVE).

Silsbee, George L.
Dresel, Otto ....
Sears, Mrs. Emily E. and family
Pickman, William D. and family
Peele, Mrs. Willard .
Porter, Alexander S. .
Sohier, William ....
Sohier, William, trustee
Lowell, John and Augustus, trustees
Bardwell, heirs of Mary P. .
Lefavour, Joseph W. .

Personal,

Real.

$10,900

$12,000

25,600

18,450

199,700

35,400

289,550

117,425

18,600

1,950

5,000

5,600

34,600

23,400

94,000

-

18,000

-

-

21,800

-

36,300

95,950 $272,325

69
NON-RESIDENTS.
Personal. Real.
Richardson, Gedney K  _ ^n ggo
Eliott, Charles E.  _ 22 200
Benson, Emery K., heirs  _ 10 000
Rodgers, Mrs. Eliza  _ 7 400
Almy, Charles, jun  _ 9^200
Grover, William O  _ 27 500
Turner, Albion B  _ 17 850
Grier, Mrs. William P  _ g 900
Loring, Augustus P., trustee .... - 63,500
Torry, Charles  _ 19,300
Lawrence, Amory A. ..... . _ 45 100
Peabody, Henry W  $425 52,750
Endicott, WUliam, jun  _ 57,900
Baker, Ezra K  - 9,400

$425 $362,800

Total non-residents and other summer residents . $696,375 $635,125
Total real and personal  $1,331,500 00
Total tax  17,043 20
Cr OSS-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) That painted green represents
the land owned by people residing in old Beverly ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the tax paid on that green land on that side
of the line ?
A. I will see if I haven't got some way that I can give it to
you more quickly than by figuring it over. Well, I could
give it to you altogether, or 1 could give it to you in pre
cincts, Mr. Williams, as you prefer.
Q. What is the precinct ?
A. The precinct is, Beverly residents, owning 206 acres,
value $76,600, and the tax $967.68. And between the pre
cinct and the line there are 545 acres, value $46,325, and a
tax of $592.96.
Q. According to this the Beverly residents pay a tax of
$1,560.64 ?

70
A. Is it not $60 more, Mr. Williams ?
Q. $1,560.64. And that is out of the total of what ?
A. $93,879.36.
Q. And the Beverly remonstrants out of that are how
many? A. I do not know.
Q. Now, only one or two more questions ; that is, as I
have it here, in the Farms district as represented there you
have made the distinction here that the permanent residents
have a valuation of $407,825 and the summer residents
$4,689,650 ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I want to raise that same old question, a question which
is old to you but new to the committee. What is the dis
tinction there ?
A. The distinction between the permanent and summer
residents ?
Q. Yes.
A. The permanent residents are those that reside there
all the year round, and the summer residents are those that
reside there only part of the year, during the summer.
Q. Do they vote there and pay their tax ?
A. They have a right to vote there if they wish to ; no
doubt many of them do.
Q. They are assessed there ?
A. Yes; they are assessed just the same as the perma
nent residents, but their habits of going and coming give
rise to that designation.
Q. They vote there ?
A. They have a right to vote, and no doubt a good many
of them do.
Q. As Mr. Stearns put it last year, they have every
attribute of citizenship that every other resident of Beverly
has? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, take Mr. Sohier, for instance, how do you class
him ?

71
A. As a summer resident.
Q. Now, as to the summer residents who have all the
attributes of citizenship, what is the proportion of valuation
that they represent in Beverly Farms ?
A. The permanent residents and tlie summer residents
together ?
Q. Just put it the residents.
A. They would represent $5,097,475 in valuation.
Q. And among all-the.year round residents you put it
$407,825? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you include in those the Lorings ?
A. I include in those, I believe, Mr. A. P. Loring.
Q. Well, has his father, Mr. C. W. Loring, any other
residence, that you know of?
A. Well, I supposed he had a residence in Boston.
Q. If you were apprised of the fact that he has not, and
that he has resided for the past sixteen years, winter and
summer, at Beverly Farms, and that he has no other abode,
nothing but a trunk anywhere else, would that make any
difference as to where you should appraise him ?
A. Yes, it would make a difference ; but I did not know
that he was reduced to a trunk. I supposed that he resided
in Boston.Q. He is not leduced to a trunk, so far as his residence
in Boston —
Mr. Robinson. That is hardly testimony here.
Mr. Williams. The witness says that he is a resident of
Beverly Farms, and I want to know how he found that out.
Q. Do you know how much the Lorings are valued at ?
A. I haven't got it in my mind now ; no, sir. It is in
this that I have submitted, but it is not in my mind now.
Q. Suppose we get that' cleared up now. I hate to take
the time of the Committee, but we claim that he is just as
much an all-the-year-rnund resident as anybody. We find
that the Lorings have a valuation of $198,375.
A. Yes, sir ; that is their valuation.

72
Q. And if that were added to the other figures that you
have given, it would make about $606,000, instead of $408,-
000, would it not ?
A. $606,100.
Q. Do you know of his having any residence whatever,
except in Beverly, or of his having any home ?
A. I know that we have always supposed that he did.
Q. Well, did you know of his having any house here in
Boston, even?
A. No ; I did not. I never investigated the matter any
farther than what my associates in office concluded to ; I
never investigated the matter ; but I will, however.
Q. Or doing any thing more than living at a hotel?
A. Oh, I never supposed he was living at a hotel ; I sup
posed he owned a residence in Boston ; that is what I sup
posed, that was my supposition.
Q. Now, take it on another point. You stated that the
permanent residents own only 575 acres. Now, of the resi
dents who vote there, how many acres are owned by those
people ?
A. 478 added to the 575. That would be 1,053 acres
owned by the permanent and summer residents.
Q. Aren't they just as much permanent residents as any
others there ?
A. Well, no, I do not think that they are, Mr. Williams.
Q. What is necessary to constitute permanency ?
A. Well, I should suppose to constitute permanency they
would have to be residing there all the time ; but when a
man is lucky enough to have two residences, or two homes,
and live in one a part of the year, and then live in the other
another part of the year, I certainly should not term him a
permanent resident, the same as our old permanent residents
in Beverly Farms, that were born there, and never have Hved
outside those limits.
Q. But those who make an investment in a home there,
and who make it their home, they have just as much interets
in the town as those who live there altogether?

73
A. Well, it might be said that they had, or that they had
not. That would be a matter of argument that I should not
wish to enter into. I would, however, give this as my idea,
and my thought, Mr. Williams, if you care to hear it, that a
man who is born in the town and brought up there has more
at stake, and has greater love for the town, than I should, for
instance, if I went there, moved into it, and moved away,
etc. So that I think that those who were born there and
grew up with the people, lived as boys together there, and
were brought up at school together there, — I think that
their interest and love for the place would be greater than
others would feel. Certainly I think that I should take more
interest in it then than those that are here to-day and gone
to-morrow. That is where I should make the distinction.
Q. Did you ever hear of that distinction in the world
until last winter, when it was brought out in the hearing ?
A. I heard it twenty years ago. I went there twenty
years ago, when they were beginning to settle there pretty
thickly, and they were coming to the pottery, where I was
working, and I had occasion to make some pottery for them
from copies or designs brought by them, and we classed them
then, or rather knew them then, as summer residents.
Q. You do not understand me. I mean in designating
them as citizens, and as owning property there, and as voters.
A. Well, yes, as early as the time I make mention of.
Q. How long have you resided there ?
A. About twenty years.
Q. Are you a property-owner there ?
A. No, sir; I am not.
Mr. Williams. I do not know as there is any thing
more. I of course claim that these figures are not accurate,
inasmuch as they do not show the facts.
He-Direct Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) Do you know whether David
Sears, whose name was mentioned this morning, — or have
you made any inquiries to ascertain whether he lives in

74
Boston or not, or whether he is taxed in Boston? His name
is brought out here as one who resided in Beverly, and as
one who should be taxed there.
A. WeU, I hope he does, for the benefit of the next
Board of Assessors. I find that Boston has chalked him
down for $80,000 of personal property this year ; and if he
is a resident of Beverly the town of Beverly is so much in.
Q. You find that he is taxed in Boston for that ?
A. Yes, sir. He is taxed in Boston for $80,000 of per
sonal property, according to the records.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) In reference to the corporation
tax, which you testified to as $16,958.02, will you kindly tell
me where you put the tax which Mr. C. W. Loring as trus
tee pays on the Dresel trust ?
A. Yes, sir. When I made these figures out first, I put
them to Precinct One. I have since understood that that was
a mistake, and that it comes into the Cove. They appear in
the Cove now.
Adjourned until 10 a.m., Wednesday, Feb. 1, 1888.

SIXTH HEARING.

Boston, Feb. 1, 1888.
The Committee met at 10.15 in the Green Room, Senator
Ladd of Worcester, the Chairman, presiding.
TESTIMONY OF ALBERT PERRY.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You reside in Beverly ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And were born in Beverly, I believe. North Beverly ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And have you lived in Beverly nearly all your life ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your business?
A. I am a shoe manufacturer.
Q. And your place of business is where ?
A. Lower Beverly, what is called the town proper.
Q. Near the station ?
A. Near the station.
Q. And you are acquainted with the amount of manu
facturing business in Beverly, and the manufacturing prop
erty? A. Somewhat, yes, sir.
Q. And also with the people ?
A. I think so.
Q. Let me ask you first as to the feeling of the people of
Beverly with regard to the division, the people of the old
town? A. Well, I think they are decidedly opposed to it, most
decidedly.

76
Q. And unanimously, so far as you know ?
A. I should say so.
Q. What do you say with regard to there being any feel
ing or feud between the people of Beverly, and the people of
Beverly Farms ?
A. Those that I have talked with, I think there is no per
sonal feeling on their part in the matter at all.
Q. Has there ever been to your knowledge any manifesta
tion of any kind of the existence of a hostile feeling on the
part of the people of Beverly towards those of the Farms?
A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. Have you employed in your business men from Beverly
Farms; and if so, to what extent, men and women both?
A. I have employed both, I can hardly tell you to what
extent, but more or less.
Q. Can you tell how many? are there any who work in
your factory now from Beverly Farms ?
A. There are.
Q. How many ?
A. I don't know how many, because I haven't looked
over the list ; but I know there are some, and I know that
there are quite a good many working in other factories.
Q. Who take the train in the morning, and come up ?
A. Come up, and are there in season to go to work at
seven o'clock, and there are accommodations for returning.
Q. Is there any feeling apparently between them and
other people of the town who work in the factories ?
A. I didn't know there was ; I have no knowledge about
it. Q. Have you any figures relating to the manufacturing
interests of Beverly during the last three or four years ?
A. I have ; I took occasion to look into that since I heard
Mf . Williams's opening argument. If you wish for the re
sult, I will give it to you.
Q. Yes.
A. Do you wish for the actual figures ?
Q. Yes, I wish you would give us the figures you have in
relation to that point.

77
A. My method of getting at this, was through the express
parties who take the goods out of Beverly, take the products
out of Beverly. I went back to the year 1885 for the basis
to take my figures from. I went to all the expressmen who
take goods out of Beverly. In 1885 the gross amount of
goods taken out of Beverly, of cases, was 63,732 ; the prod
uct of the shoe industry of Beverly, taken from all the ex
pressmen who carried the goods ; the gross amount in 1886
was 54,800, and the gross in 1887 was 51,966.
Those goods I have approximated the value of, and I got at
that from inquiries of other manufacturers and from my own
product. On my own product in 1885, the average per case
was between $49 and $50, $49 and a fraction ; in 1886, the
average was between $49 and $50 ; and in 1887, it was
$53.53 ; and I have made the average approximate cost,
$50 per case. The amount in the aggregate, the total value
on that basis, which I think is a fair one, was $3,186,600 in
1885 ; the aggregate in 1886 was $2,740,000 ; the aggregate
in 1887 was $2,598,300.
I estimated the amount of cost of pay-roll, that is, the
amount that goes to labor. In my own case, I estimated it
is about thirty per cent, and I have inquired of four or five
other manufacturers, and their estimate is about the same, so
I made that a round figure, thirty per cent which goes to
labor. In 1885, on that basis, there was paid to labor $955,-
980, to approximate it ; in 1886, $822,000 ; in 1887, $779,490.
Q. Being a loss of how much?
A. Making a loss from 1885 to 1886, $133,980 ; and a loss
in 1887, on the basis of 1885, of $176,490 ; or a loss to the
pay-roll in Beverly since 1885, taking that for a basis, of
$310,470. The difference in amount of shipments between
1885 and 1886 was 8,932 cases ; the difference between the
shipments of 1885 and 1887 was 11,766 cases ; the total differ
ence in the two years would amount to 20,798 cases. Taking
that as the basis, the amount of the loss of value since 1885
is $1,039,900. Q. Have you any other facts which show a decrease, if it

78
exists, of the business in Beverly since 1885, aside from the
figures you have given ?
A. I have been to other manufacturers and gathered their
ideas, or the facts, in regard to the loss on their pay-rolls.
Q. It has been said there has been a new shoe-factory
built in Beverly. What is the fact about the number of
shoe-factories there now compared with the number two
years ago ?
A. I don't think there is any more. There was one
factory, what was called a meal-store, that has been finished
off into a shoe-factory.
Q. On the other hand, are there any losses in the number
of factories?
A. I should say one party moved out of town, and the
place they moved from has been vacant since they moved,
about two years ago.
Q. How much difference did that make in the pay-roll in
Beverly ?
A. Well, the man told me he took a pay-roll out of
Beverly of perhaps $25,000. Another one moved to Fox-
boro, and I estimate his at $25,000 or $30,000 : I have not
seen him. The firm of Woodbury Brothers took business
down to Dover last year out of Beverly, and they thought
the loss of pay-roll in Beverly was about $50,000 and odd
last year. That I took from the party who had charge of the
pay-roll. Q. So that at least three manufacturers have moved
away? A. One of the firm told me that the pay-roll would be a
loss to Beverly this year, on the estimate of the rate that
went out last year, of about $75,000 ; of course that was an
estimate of his. One firm has wound up business, and they
said their pay-roll two years ago was $20,000. Mr. Baker
has already taken a part of his business to Springfield, started
a factory there, which he says will be a loss to the Beverly
pay-roll of from $35,000 to $40,000 this year.
Q. Mr. Joseph H. Baker?

79
A. Yes. Those are their own figures. Other figures are
the estimates from actual products.
Q. You have estimated the loss at about 30 per cent ?
A. The aggregate loss in the two years, as I have esti
mated it here, and I think it is properly calculated, would be
$310,410. Q. About 30 per cent?
A. Just about 30 per cent.
Q. What do you say as to the valuation of manufacturing
property in Beverly, Mr. Perry, as to whether it could stand
an increase or not, in your judgment ?
A. My judgment is that with the falling-off of business
in Beverly, any increased burden would be injurious to busi
ness, and perhaps disastrous to the trade. Of course that is
a matter of opinion, but it is fairly founded, and it would
seem to me, with a general falling-off of business as it has
fallen off the last two years, it would not take but about ten
years more to put it in about the condition the fishing busi
ness is in Beverly to-daj''.
Q. It has been said that there have been eighty new houses
bunt in Beverly, — I think those were the figures given by
some one. Do you know any thing about that fact?
A. I have no especial knowledge. The question was
asked me how much the growth had been in North Beverly,
after Mr. Loring's testimony in regard to the rapid growth
there, the rapid development of the property; and I being,
born there, and having some acquaintance with the condition
of things, was interested, and so I sat down and tried to
count up what houses had been built in North Beverly dur
ing the last thirty years prior to the horse-railroad track
being put up there ; and I think, outside the line of the
horse-railroad, I could not think of but thirteen houses built
there for thirty years. It is pretty much a farming section.
Since the horse-cars have gone there, I think there may have
been ten or a dozen houses built on the line of the horse-rail
road, and most of them are built around the North Beverly
depot.

80
Q. Do you own some farming land in North Beverly ?
A. Yes, sir ; not a great amount.
Q. What do you say as to the valuation of land there in
comparison with its actual cash value ?
A. Well, for the last few days I have made some inqui
ries as to land which has been sold and bought by connec
tions of my own family, three or four cases in particular.
One man who works for me bought a farm of sixteen acres
last fall; he gave $2,200 for it, and I ascertained what it was
taxed for, and I think it was $1,900 or $1,950. Another tract
of land of ten acres, very level land, good farming land, was
purchased for $1,000, and it is taxed for $1,000. Another
party who is connected with my family I sent to, to ascertain
what he gave for some twelve acres ; I think, I don't know
the exact amount, but he paid $600, and he sent me word it
was taxed for $600. The party who has another estate there
for sale, I think it is taxed at $4,300, told me the other night
he had charge of settling it, and he would sell it for $600
less than it was taxed.
Q. That was a farm, was it ?
A. That was the farm of Mr. Dodge ; I don't know how
many acres there are in it. There have been some other sales
there that I haven't any definite knowledge of. I know the
sales, but I should not wish to testify concerning them, be
cause I have not inquired into them.
Q. Have you taken these sales indiscriminately ?
A. Not at all, no, sir.
Q. Whether you have taken the instances that came to
your knowledge ?
A. I have taken those that came to my knowledge and
those I learned about.
Q., In other words, do you know, or have you opportunity
to know, of any sales or valuations that are against these
figures ?
A. I don't know of any. The reason 1 took these was
because some of my family were connected in the purchases
and sales ; it was the easiest way for me to get at them', and

81
I have much to do, and don't have a great deal of time to
give to such a matter as this. I took them because the facts
were easier for me to get at than in regard to any others.
Q. Can you say whether the population of Beverly has
gained or lost within the last two years ?
A. I am not able to say with regard to that ; I have made
no inquiries. Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) Where did you count these
houses at North Beverly, in your own house ?
A. 1 counted them from riding over the line of the road
which I drive over some.
Q. I understood you to say you sat down and counted
them up.
A. I took a memorandum of them from my own knowl
edge of them, being familiar with the street, and I have
counted them from time to time as I had ridden over the
road. Q. Then as you had gone along from time to time you
kept counting as they went np ?
A. I hadn't kept counting. I think the number isn't so
large but that almost any schoolboy could count them.
Q. You didn't quite do that, did you? What you did
was, you thought it over; you were at home, and you
thought of such a house, and such a house ?
A. Not always at home. After Mr. Loring put in his
testimony here, I said, " Now, I will look this matter up, and
see what growth there is in North Beverly." The town
proper I have not gone into at all.
Q. I see, but what did you do ? Did you go up to North
Beverly, and go and count them, one, two, three, four ?
A. I didn't count them that way, my friend.
Q. You didn't count them backwards ?
A. No, sir.
Q. In other words, you didn't go to North Beverly ?
A. I had been to North Beverly.

82
Q. You had been there, but you didn't go up and count
these houses, did you ?
A. I counted them from my own knowledge of their
being there.
Q. You sat down by your fireside, and ran them over in
your head ?
A. Well, if there is any question in regard to it, I think
it can be verified.
Q. Now this boot business has fallen off a good deal in
Beverly, you say. You had quite a strike down there, didn't
you? A. That is true, sir.
Q. How long did that strike last ?
A. We have had two strikes, I think.
Q. When were those strikes ?
A. I think one of them was two years ago, — two years
ago this coming month.
Q. When was the other ?
A. I should think it was last July.
Q. So that each of these two years you have tumbled off,
so you have had a strike. How long did the first one last ?
A. The first one lasted, I think, about seven weeks.
Q. And the second one lasted how long ?
A. I think about a week, a nominal vacation, as many of
them said.
Q. There was such good feeling there in old Beverly that
they thought the workmen wanted a vacation, and they let
them have it?
A. Well, I can't tell you about that. Sometimes we are
obliged to take a vacation for want of something to do.
Q, It was a strike, wasn't it, to come right down and
tell the facts?
A. Yes, there were two actual strikes.
Q. Now, there is no ill feeling in old Beverly, you say,
towards the Farms ?
A. I say I don't know of any ill feeling towards the peo
ple of Beverly Farms, — individual feeling.

Q. Were you in Beverly the night after the Plouse failed
to pass the bill over the veto last year ?
A. I should think I was, I am not quite sure. I think
I was. Q. Won't you see if this is a fair description of what hap
pened there : " At half-past seven the bells were rung from
many of the church steeples. The Salem Cadet Band played
stirring melodies on the grounds in front of the town-hall.
Somebody shouted, ' Give the Farmers a roasting,' and there
was a rush ¦ for the station. When the seven-oclock train
from,Boston for Gloucester arrived, the station was full. On
board was a large delegation of the Beverly-Farms people.
Two cannon which had been taken into the station were
fired while the train remained, their deafening reports being
prolonged by the echo. Bunches of cannon-crackers, and
crackers of all kinds, were thrown under the cars, and ex
ploded on the platform ; and there was a chorus of fish-horns,
groans, and jeers, as the train rolled out." Do you recognize
that? A. I wasn't at the depot, sir ; I don't know what hap
pened there. I do know something that happened in the
old town, — their rejoicing that the bill hadn't passed both
Houses. Q. Do you think that is a fair expression of the kindly
feelings of the people of old Beverly towards the Farms
people ?
A. I think the rejoicing in the old town was similar to
the rejoicing at the Farms at the time they supposed the bill
would pass. I think one would offset the other.
Q. If I understand you, that is what you call in old
Beverly " rejoicing," is it, — " roast the Farmers " ?
A. I don't know any thing about that, sir ; I never heard
that expression used.
Q. Fish-horns, jeers and groans, — you simply call that
rejoicing ?
A. I haven't heard of that before, sir.

84

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES F. LEE.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You reside in Beverly ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your business ?
A. My principal business is insurance ; I do some real-
estate business, and am also an auctioneer.
Q. Have you made sales of property in Beverly the last
year? A. Yes, sir, I have.
Q. What time does it cover ?
A. I commenced business in August, 1885, and the first
sale I made of real estate was, I think, in January, 1886.
Q. How many sales of real estate have you made in
Beverly ?
A. I can't say ; I presume twenty-five or thirty, all told.
Q. Have you got the figures of your sales here ?
A. 1 have some figures of some sales of improved property.
I have not the figures of the sales of land that have been
made where it has been cut up from farming land into build
ing lots ; but I know of most* of them, I have them in my
mind. Q. Those sales are of land in the part of Beverly called
Rialside ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, take the sales of improved property. How
many have you made ?
A. Of improved property I have made ten.
Q. Are those all the sales of improved property that you
have made ?
A. Yes, sir ; that is, where I have sold houses and lots,
where there has been no alteration of the old places.
Q. Where in Beverly are those places situated ?
A. I can read the list, if you like, — which I have here,
— and tell where they are.

86
Q. Tell generally where they are.
A. They are in Beverly Centre, most all of them.
Q. On what streets ?
A. I made one sale at the Farms, at auction ; and that is
the only one outside. Most . of them are on Cabot Street,
and Chapman Street, and Stone Street.
Q. Cabot Street is the main street?
A. Cabot Street is the main street.
Q. And Chapman and Stone Streets are streets at right
angles with Cabot ?
A. Yes ; and Railroad Avenue and Dane Street. They
are all what we call in the central part of the town, handy
to churches and stores and post-oiSfice.
Q. Have you compared the amounts of those sales with
the assessments on the property you sold ?
A. I have. Yes, sir.
Q. Give me the result, if you will ?
A. The first sale was the Enoch [Brown estate on Cabot
Street ; it sold for $3,800, and was assessed for $4,200. The
next was a new house belonging to Mr. Lovett on Davis
Street, down toward the bridge, which sold for $5,000,
assessed for $4,500. The next sale was on Cabot Street, the
Morgan estate, just above the Catholic Church, sold for
$4,500, assessed for $4,700. The next one was the Chester
Merritt estate near the south schoolhouse on Stone Street,
which sold for $2,220, and was assessed for $2,000. The
next was the E. Foster Stone estate, on the corner of Stone
Street and Davis Street, very near the south schoolhouse,
the same locality, and the sale and the assessed value were
just about alike, there wasn't $50 difference. I said I
wouldn't mention the amount of the sale, so I haven't given
it, but there wasn't $50 difference between the sale and the
assessed value. The Wilson estate, the brick house just at
the bridge, sold for $1,500, and was taxed for $2,250. The
next was the EUingwood estate on Chapman Street, next to
Capt. Giddings's house on Federal Street, sold for $1,230 at
auction, and was taxed for $1,700. The William E. Norwood

86
estate sold for $3,000, and was assessed for $2,575. The Barr
estate on Cabot Street, very nearly opposite the Catholic
Church, was sold for $1,360, and was assessed for $1,000.
The next was Andrew J. Iverson's house on Dane Street,
near the Dane-street Church ; it was sold for $3,000, and was
assessed for $2,150. I have added in the Stone estate, and
the aggregate of these sales is, selling price, $29,060 ; the
assessed valuation, $28,525. Then I have made two auction
sales of town property that was not assessed.
Within the last six months} three auction sales brought
$4,810, and the property was assessed for $4,700. It sold
for $110 more than it was taxed for.
Q. Those sales are all in Beverly ?
A. All in Beverly ; right near the centre of the town.
Q. What is''the result of your Rialside sales?
A. I sold three lots of land over there at two cents a foot,
one near the schoolhouse lot, which you were speaking of, in
the woods, and I think they were taxed for about a cent and
a half. I think the aggregate of the sales was about $600,
and they were taxed for about $450. Then I made the sale
of Mr. Lovett's land, which has been given here, on Win
throp Avenue, and that was four cents a foot. There is one
consideration to be mentioned, and that is, that he has spent
about $2,000 in building roads, besides the amount of land
that has been taken out to make them, and in addition to that
he paid something toward the construction of Winthrop
Avenue which was already there.
Q. Have you had occasion to know about the relations of
the pupils in the high school the last year ?
A. I think I have had some, yes, sir.
Q. You had a brother in the high school ?
A. My brother was a member of the senior class that
graduated last year.
Q. Were any members of that class from the Farms ?
A. Master Ford was there.
Q. Do you know of any ill feeling between him and the
rest of the class ?

87
A. I don't think there was any ill-feeling. I came up to
Boston at the time of the debate in the Senate last year, and
my brother came up with me, and Capt. Odell's son came up
with me. They met Master Ford here in Boston, and they
went around with him all the forenoon, and he was with them
at the debate in the Senate, and they seemed to be having a
first-rate time ; they went to dinner together, and there
wasn't any ill-feeling.' He has always been very pleasant
toward me, I didn't know him before then, but he always has
been since. My brother informed me that they have a class
association, and he has been president of the class association
for three years.
Q. Master Ford has been ?
A. Yes ; I don't think there is any very great ill-feeling
there. Q. Have you ever heard of the pupils from the Farms
being subjected to any ill-feeling in any of the schools in
Beverly? A. No, sir. My brother told me at one time, speaking of
a piece that had something in it which recalled the matter of
division, that some of them sort of made a little demonstra
tion, and Mr. Hard stopped it right off, and told them to stay
after school, and gave them a sort of dressing down, said he
wouldn't allow any thing of the kind there. He said they
were very pleasant ; that once in a while Master Ford would
come up and would say, " Well, boys, how is division this
morning ? " And they would talk it over, but they never
got mad, and never evinced any ill-feeling at all. I have seen
him around with the boys in the street, I am there all the
time, aiid I shouldn't say there was any thing very serious.
Q. Master Ford was president of the class association
during the last three years ?
A. Yes, sir.

88

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES H. HENDERSON.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You live in North Beverly ?
A. I do, sir.
Q. Have you any facts as to the actual sales of land in
North Beverly, and the assessments on lots that have been
sold? A. I have, sir.
Q. Will you please give them to the committee ? In the
first place, how near do you live to the railroad-station ?
A. I live within an eighth of a mile, I should say, about
five minutes' walk. I walk there to take the train quite
often, and I allow myself about five minutes.
Q. Now please give the facts I inquired for.
A. There have been some sales of real estate quite near
the depot, in fact, directly opposite the depot and post-office,
— the post-office is located at the depot, — and the sales I
shall first mention, are sales of building lots directly opposite
the depot ; I bought one lot there myself, I think that was
the first one sold.
Q. When?
A. That was two years ago, sir, this fall. I bought my
lot for $250; it is assessed for $200. My neighbor, Mr.
Trask, bought one for $250, and his is assessed for $200.
Mr. Terrio bought a lot there for $250, and it is assessed for
$200. Mr. Broughton bought a lot there for $150, and that
is assessed for $200. Those four lots in the aggregate amount
to 62,112 feet, the lots directly opposite the station and post-
office ; the cash price paid was $900, and they are assessed
for $800. I have figured out the average of this per foot,
and I find that it is a fraction less than a cent and a half per
foot ; a cent and a half per foot would amount to $931.68.
Mr. Wallis bought a tract of land just above that, and
just above the depot, within 300 yards of the depot and post-

89
office, with a frontage on the street where the horse-cars pass
of 243 feet, and running back to the shores of Wenham
Lake, and containing five acres, for $775, or $155 an acre. I
would state that before I bought my lot of Mr. Lord, Mr.
Wallis came to me, and urged me to take a lot of him, he
wanted to start the sales there, and he offered me a lot 66
feet front and 100 feet deep for $150. I didn't buy there,
but bought, as I stated before, down this way further.
Q. Did you look at the assessed value of this last sale ?
A. The assessed value of this last sale I couldn't obtain,
sir, for the reason the valuation books have not been dis
tributed yet, and I couldn't get that. I can't tell you what
that was assessed for ; but I will say that $155 per acre was
paid. I have some other sales that will still further bear on
the question, I think. There was one lot sold to Mr. Walter
Caldwell for $150 on Balch Street, perhaps half a mile from
the depot, and that is assessed this year for $125. Mr. Henry
E. Dodge bought a lot, paying $200 for it, that was assessed
this year for $200. Mr. J. V. Warner bought a farm on
Cherry Hill, so-called.
Q. On the road to Danvers ?
A. Yes; on that left-hand road there which passes down
toward the place where it is marked Danvers. He bought a
farm there, I don't know how many acres there are in it, and
he paid $2,000 for it, and it is assessed for $2,300. Mr. C. W.
Lord bought a tract of land there for $600, and it is assessed
for $600 ; that is below at the foot of Cherry Hill. Alma H.
Dodge bought a tract of land for $850, and that is assessed
this year for $850. Mr. Isaac Ray bought a very level tract
of land there, the tract that Mr. Perry had reference to in
his evidence, which has been taxed for a number of years, in
1886, at least, or 1885, for $1,200. It was sold to Mr. Ray
for $1,000, and in consequence of the sale establishing the
value, the assessors lowered the assessment to $1,000. These
sales foot up $4,800 cash price paid, and they are assessed for
$5,075. Hundreds, of course, look small to you, but hun
dreds to us means the same as thousands to a good many

90
people. These are all the sales I have any personal knowl
edge of.
Q. Have you heard of other sales in that section of the
town ?
A. There have been some sales made since Mr. Wallis
bought this field I have alluded to, out of which he offered
to sell me a lot. He succeeded in selling a few lots, but I
don't know what he got for those lots, and the trade had not
been completed so that they were assessed separately this
year, but they were assessed to the original owner, Mr.
Wallis, I think. The transfer was not made soon enough to
have them assessed to the new owners last May.
Q. What is the character of those lots and of the houses
that have been built ?
A. The lots that I first spoke of are all near the depot,
— near the North Beverly depot, — and near the post-office.
Q. All these sales are in North Beverly, are they ?
A. Yes, sir. The first that I spoke of are directly oppo
site the station : then there were others on Balch St.
Q. And the farm on the road to Danvers ?
A. Yes, and the land below there which I spoke about,
that was sold for $1,000, and is assessed for $1,000, is just
below, near where the brook crosses.
Q. How many houses have been built in North Beverly
within two or three years ?
A. I don't know as I can say within two years, but I
think the majority of them have been built within two years.
I have lived there between twelve and thirteen years (it
will be thirteen years next September), and in that time
there have been just thirteen houses built there, and the
majority of them have been built within a year or two. I
won't say within two years, but it may be within two years.
Q. The horse-railroad track was extended to North Bev
erly two or three years ago ?
A. Two years ago last May.
Q. What is the character of the houses that have been
built ?

91
A. The houses that have been built near the depot —
there are four of them — have been built by men who are
situated the same as I am, — men who work in the shoe-fac
tories, and men who found rents so high down town that we
found we must get back, and have gone up there and put
what little money we could scrape together into a lot, and,
perhaps, a cellar, and have built our houses ; and they are
nearly all, I guess quite all, mortgaged ; and we are depend
ing on the shoe business.
Q. They are small houses ?
A. Yes, very small houses.
Q. Your business is what ?
A. I am employed in a shoe-factory, sir.
Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) Are these lots which have been
sold, lots on which houses have been built ?
A. The same lots>on which houses have been built. All
these I have spoken of have had houses built upon them since
they have been bought.
Q. You think in North Beverly there have been thirteen
houses built within a year or two ?
A. I couldn't say within a year or two ; but certainly
they have been bmlt within three years.
Q. I understood you to say you could not say exactly,
but you thought most of them had been built within the last
year or so ?
A, The movement started with the extension of the horse-
railroad there.
Q. Then there is a movement there, is there ?
A. I suppose that had a tendency to start that movement.
Q. Some of these lots are lots on which houses have been
built? A. Those I referred to, sales of farming land, — I men
tioned two or three or four, — were for what could begot
out of the land, not to build on. Mr. Caldwell's land on
Balch Street was bought to build on, and has been built on.

92
Q. What do you think the other land has been sold for
out there ?
A. The Warner farm sold for $2,000.
Q. I thought you spoke of lots being sold out there?
A. Mr. Lord bought a lot ; I call it a lot, — a tract of
land. Q. How large ?
A. I don't know, I think Mr. Perry can tell you how
much there is in there. It is quite a large tract, — ten or
twelve acres, — it was bought for $600, and was assessed for
$600. Q. Have there been any changes in North Beverly, except
these thirteen houses and lots, that you know of, within a
year or two ?
A. Changes in real estate ?
Q. Yes.
A. No, sir; with the exception of the estate Mr. Perry
spoke of, which was sold to Mr. Randall, a man employed in
his factory. I didn't mention that because I think he men
tioned it.
Q. These are all additional to his ?
A. Yes, they are additional, and are those I am sure about.
Re-Direct Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) The valuations you have given
you took yourself from the books?
A. Yes, sir, the assessed valuation.
Q. And the valuation, as I understand, of the land ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is, in the valuation books, the valuation of the
buildings and of the land is separate ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you have taken the land alone ?
A. Yes, the land alone.
Q. And not the land and buildings together ?
A. No, for I knew what was paid for the land, and I
didn't know what the houses cost.

93
Q. You built last year ?
A. I did, sir.
Q. What did your house cost you ?
A. My house cost me $ 1,125, erected, painted, papered,
and with the key put into my hand ready to go into it.
Q. Is that about the style of the houses that have been
built there ?
A. The next house to mine was the exact pattern of
mine, and cost exactly the same sum, built by the same man.
Q. Is that the general style ?
A. Yes; there bas been one two-story house built this
year.

TESTIMONY OF JEREMIAH L. PORTER.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Something has been said about
the taxation on Rialside lands. You are a resident of Bev
erly, and live in that part of Beverly known as Rialside ?
A. I live in the centre of the town.
Q. But you were born there ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You are interested in a farm in Rialside ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is in Rialside, in the south-western part of
Beverly, west of the river ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was that land ?
A. That land was a farm.
Q. A farm owned by your father?
A. Owned by my father.
Q. Now go on and state what was done there and what
the result is, without my asking you particularly.
A. The farm is undivided and owned by six heirs. We
have developed a small portion of that land by laying out
and building streets. First, the County Commissioners laid
out a street called Bridge Street, which is the street running

94
across from near the depot towards the Danvers line ; that
was built, I think, in about 1870. We have laid out Win
throp Avenue, running from near that first house that you
see at the left of the Beverly creek, south about 850 feet.
We have sold all of the lots on that street. We have also
built another street during the last year, Fernwood Avenue,
running parallel with that, 1,380 feet in length. We have
also built Harris Street, connecting with these two streets
and running back into Bridge Street. We have sold on
these three streets an aggregate of 439,192 feet of land for
$7,637.50. There have been one or two very small sales
since, and I was unable to get the figures on them.
Q. Those were all sold in small lots ?
A. All sold in small lots.
Q. When did you lay out the streets, or when did the
sale commence?
A. Winthrop Avenue was laid out and budt in 1886, and
Fernwood Avenue and Harris Street in 1887.
Q. Now, the assessment this year on thia property was
how much ?
A. I am unable to give you the exact assessment ; it is
assessed as a farm ; the sales have been made largely during
the last year, and the assessment was on about $8,550.
Q. For how many acres ?
A. Fifty-five acres.
Q. That is without the buildings ?
A. That is without the buildings.
Q. Did that include your sales ?
A. That included the sales.
Q. What I wanted to get was the amount of land sold,
and the valuation of that land, if you have it ?
A. Perhaps I can give the Committee a better idea of the
value of that by showing the cost of construction of these
roads. This land we valued as a farm, at about $100 an
acre. We have built these streets ourselves, without any
assistance from the town, and we have spent $4,325 in build
ing the streets, most of that during the last year, since the
last assessment.

95
Q. This is the best land of the farm, of course ?
A. Yes, by far.
Q. What is the rest of the farm ?
A. The rest of the farm, a considerable portion of it, is
low, marshy land. Cross-Examinatio n .
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) Let me see if I get at this
rightly. As I understand you, you put into the assessment
of the farm, what you call the farm, all these lots that have
been sold?
A. These were the farm when they were sold ; some of
them were sold before the streets were built.
Q. What I want to know is whether the fifty-five acres
that were assessed for $8,550 includes these lots ?
A. Includes these lots.
Q. And you spent about $4,500 ?
A. $4,325.
Q. You valued the land at $100 an acre ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, you sold about nine acres ?
A. I haven't figured it in acres.
Q. I think it is about that. Then there are nine acres,
$900, cost $4,500, making $5,400 ; and you have sold your
lots for $7,500 ?
A. For $7,637; but you should take out of that the
cost of the construction of the roads, which would leave
$o,ol^. Q. I have done that already, when I say $5,400 : $4,500
for the cost of your work, and nine acres would be $900.
So, thus far, you have cleared about $3,000 on the value of
the whole farm ?
A. This is the best portion of the farm.
Q. You haven't sold all the lots ?
A. I have sold most all of the desirable lots. Some of
them that aire left are of very little value.
Q. What you have sold you sold at about the rate of
an acre ?

A. What we have sold, after deducting the cost of the
construction of the roads, was fifty-four one-hundredths of a
cent per foot.
Q. Between $800 and $900 an acre ?
A. Not so much as that, is it ? About $200 an acre.
Q. If you sold nine acres for $7,600.
A. The net amount is $3,312.
Q. That you got back, over and above all expense and
cost ? And how many lots have you got left ?
A. We have perhaps fifteen or twenty.
Q. Fifteen or twenty lots left, and you have got some
forty odd acres of land left besides ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) What do you say as to the
comparative value of the lots left ?
A. I should think they were worth, perhaps, two-thirds
as much as we have sold, I don't know but one-half wodld
cover it. Some of them are of very little value. This street
went through a ravine, and was of no value for building
purposes. Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) How many lots were there in
all on these three streets ?
A. I cannot tell you, sir.
Q. Pretty near ?
A. I should think there might be fifty.
Q. You had fifty to start with ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. As*I understand you, then, in a year you have sold
thirty-seven out of these fifty lots that you laid out ?
A. We have sold thirty-three.
Q. You have sold thirty-three lots in a year ?
A. In a little more than a year, perhaps.
Q. They went pretty well ?
A. Yes, sir.

97

Re-Direct Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) What was the farm assessed for
this year ?
A. About $8,500.
Q. Then these lots which were sold were assessed to the
owners ?
A. Those lots which were sold previous to the last of July
were assessed to the owners.
Q. How many lots were sold then ?
A. I should think there might have been a dozen of
them. Q. So that the valuation of the whole was more than
$8,500 ?
A. Yes, this last year, as it was assessed last year. Lots
that sold for $200 last year were assessed for about $175.
Q. Those were assessed for $175 this year, by the
assessors ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. ( By Mr. Steaens.) Have those lots been built on ?
A. Some of them.
Q. How many ?
A. I think about eight or nine.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) What is the character of the
buildings there ?
A. They are cheap houses; they are built mostly by
shoemakers who have, perhaps, put nearly all, and in some
instances, perhaps, more than all of their means into the
house and land.
Q. Houses costing how much ?
A. I should say $1,000 to $1,500.
Q. What is the highest price of any lot of land a foot?
A. I think about four cents per foot.
Q. Was that sale made since the valuation of this year ?
A. No, sir ; that was made previously, I think.
Q. That is a corner lot ?
A. A corner lot, corner of Fernwood Avenue and Bridge

98
Street. This is the county road running over to Danvers,
and these lots were on the corner.
Q. Near the bridge and near the railroad-station ?
A. Yes, sir ; within five minutes' walk of the station.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) Were you here yesterday
when Mr. Odell testified ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is this land you are testifying about anywhere near
the land he testified about ">
A. It is within a quarter of a mile.
Q. And it is somewhere near the schoolhouse lot, then ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I understood he testified there had been no sales over
there ?
A. He meant, probably, I suppose he meant, beyond the
woods ; there is a wood that separates the two.

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM H. LOVETT.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You are town clerk and auditor ?
A. I am.
Q. Of the town meetings that were held last year, Mr.
Lovett, how many were adjournments ?
A. There were a great many last March and April pend
ing the hearing and the investigation. There were thirteen
meetings in all, and nine of them were the annual meeting
and the adjournments, all relating to the annual March meet
ing, and at most of them no business was done, except simply
to meet and adjourn to another time.
Q. To await the action of the Legislature ?
A. Yes, sir ; and this includes the State election in
November. Q. So that there were three town-meetings besides, were
there ?
A. There were three meetings besides the annual March
meeting, and the November election.

99
Q. How many of them were in the evening, do you know ?
A. All of the three were in the evening.
Q. What is the whole number of voters in Beverly ?
A. There were 1,764 at the last November election, 194
in Precinct One, and 1,570 in Precinct Two.
Q. How many at the Farms ? How many between the
precinct line and the proposed division line ?
A. Between the lines, at the Farms, there are fifteen.
Q. That makes 210 voters at the Farms?
A. And three at Centreville, 209. There were 194 in
Precinct One, and there are 15 between the lines of Precinct
One and the bridge.
Q. What are the comparative expenses for poor in Bev
erly and in Beverly Farms?
A. The annual expense for poor in the whole town, the
average, is about $7,000. This present year we spent $183.50
at the Farms, but that is much more than usual for several
years past.
Q. Do you know about what the amount has been for
several years past ?
A. Last year it was less than $100 : it was between $90
and $100 ; it was stated in the evidence of last year. The
year before that it was $14.30, and in 1884 it was $25.
Q. How many voters are there who do not join in the
petition at the Farms ?
A. There are 173 in Precinct One, and 7 in Precinct
Two, including those between the lines who are petitioners.
Q. How many voters are there who are not petitioners ?
A. That leaves 21 in Precinct One, and 29 altogether, in
cluding those between the lines.
Q. Have you looked at any figures that indicate to any
extent what the population of Beverly Farms was forty years
ago? A. I only have the school children.
Q. What years have you taken ?
A. The school children in 1846 numbered 134 ; in 1847,
151 ; in 1848, 148.

100
Q. I don't care about every year, but whether there has
been any substantial change at any time in the number of
school children for the last forty years ?
A. It is less at present. In 1883 there were 127 in the
same district, and there were 13 between the Farms dis
trict and the proposed line of division ; in 1884 there were
122 ; in 1885, 127 ; in 1886, 126 ; and in 1887, 130. That is
in the same school district that the earlier ones were in.
Q. What is the fact in regard to the branch Public
Library at the Farms ?
A. There is a delivery system which was established two
years ago, similar to that employed in several other large
towns. There is a delivery station at one of the stores at
the Farms, and the books are taken from the library by an
expressman and carried to the store at the Farms, and those
who wish to take the books go there and get them ; and when
they have finished reading them they are sent back to the
store, and the express will take them back to the library.
The expressman has regular days in each week for calling for
them and delivering them.
Q. That is at the expense of the town ?
A. Yes; an extra appropriation was made two years ago,
and has been made since for that purpose.
Q. Whether or not the town pays the fares of school
children who go on the trains ?
A. It does ; there is an appropriation made for that pur
pose. Q. Something has been said about street-lights ; what is
the fact with regard to them ?
A. The streets are well lighted.
Q. And have been for how many years ?
A. For several years, three or four years.
Q. By the town ?
A. Yes ; it costs between $1,400 and $1,500 a year for
street-lights. Q. For the Farms ?
A. Yes, sir.

101

Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) When was this library arrange
ment made for the Farms ?
A. Two years ago.
Q. After the division agitation came up?
A. That was the first that there was any application made
for it.
Q. When did they begin to pay fares for the school-chil
dren? A. The same year ; no application was ever made before.
Q. Now, as to these town-meetings, you say there were
nine, including the original March town-meeting; that is,
there were eight adjournments of that ?
A. There were eight adjournments, I think.
Q. Of course any business could be brought up at any of
those adjournments, which was down in the articles in the
warrant for the meeting ?
A. It could have been, yes.
Q. They could have done any business ?
A. They didn't do it.
Q. They didn't?
A. At most of the meetings they didn't.
Q. At most of the meetings they didn't do any business?
A. Simply met and adjourned.
Q. You say most of them ?
A. WeU, not until after the close of the hearings of last
winter, and the investigation.
Q. You say the amount you paid for paupers at Beverly
Farms was how much last year ?
A. This present year it was $183.50, I think.
Q. And the year before it was how much ?
A. About $98 ; between $90 and $100. I haven't those
figures ; it was in the evidence of last year.
Q. And the year before it was $14 or $25?
A. Fourteen doUars.
Q. And in 1886 it had run up to $90, and in 1887 to
$183?

102
A. This present year there has been considerable sickness
in one of the families which has been helped.
Q. I am not talking about this year, I am talking about
1887. A. WeU, 1887 ; I caU that this year.
Q. Taxation has begun to tell, up there, has it ; running
up the amount paid to paupers from $14 to $183 since the
valuation was raised?
A. I think this family that was assisted never has con
tributed any taxes ; the tax-rate wouldn't affect them at aU.
Q. Did it all go to one family ?
A. Most of it was in one family.
Mr. Steaens. Perhaps the neighbors hadn't been so able
to help them as before.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) You said there are twenty-
nine voters who didn't petition. How many of the voters at
the Farms remonstrate ? do you know ?
A. I don't know.
Q. Do you know any thing about the remonstrants ?
A. I don't know any thing at all about the remonstrants.
Q. Do you know whether there is any one who remon
strates from the Farms ?
A. I know they object to it.
Q. Do you know anybody who remonstrates, who signed
the remonstrance that has been presented ?
A. I never have seen the remonstrance.
Q. Has the high school ever been located at the Farms ?
A. A great many years ago, when the high school was
first established, it was at the Farms for a year or two.
Q. At that time there were more scholars from Beverly
Farms, were there not?
A. I haven't the figures for that.
Re-Direct Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Did you see the remonstrance
last year? The statement was made that there were no
remonstrants from the Farms.

103
A. I haven't it in mind ; there was a remonstrance last
year, but I don't remember the names.
Q. What are the highway expenses for the whole town,
and how much at the Farms ?
A. The highway expenses this year have been about
$20,000. All the highways are divided into wards, and a sur
veyor is elected for each ward. There are fourteen different
highway wards, and at the Farms are Wards 3 and 4. In Ward
3 there has been expended upon highways this present year
$2,872.47 ; $274.13 of that has been paid to persons who are
not petitioners, and the rest to those who are petitioners. In
Ward 4 the total expenditure has been $3,475.30, and of
that $137.45 has been paid to persons who did not sign
the petition for division, and $3,337.85 to those who did.
Q. Who has had charge of the work at the Farms ?
A. Surveyors are nominated in caucus by the local cau
cuses from the different wards, and they are presented to the
town-meeting for ratification, and the town generally elects
those whom the caucuses select.
Q. What town officers are there at Beverly Farms ?
A. They have a member of the Board of Selectmen and
of the Assessors, School Committee, Board of Health, Engi
neer of the Fire Department.
Q. And surveyors of highways?
A. Surveyors of highways, constables, police officers,
night watch. Re- Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) You say they are nominated
at local caucuses ; do you mean to give us to understand that
any local caucus ever nominated the officers who are now
acting at the Farms ?
A. As highway surveyors ?
Q. Yes.
A. Last year I think they didn't have any caucus there,
but they did have in previous years, and the same persons
were elected highway surveyors this year who have been

104
selected for a number of years previously for the same
office. Q. Didn't the old Beverly people elect John T. Morse as
highway surveyor?
A. And he refused.
Q. And then they put in the old ones ?
A. Yes.
Q. That is no action on the part of the Farms people ?
A. They put in the same ones the Farms people had
selected by caucus several years previous.
Q. There was a caucus held there a couple of years ago,
where they nominated a selectman and assessor ?
A. I don't know.
Q. Do you know there were ever any caucuses held
there ?
A. I know about these caucuses for highway surveyors,
for I notified the chairmen who are appointed to caU the
meetings together, and they report to me.
Q. Then you know that last year there was no caucus held
at the Farms?
A. They made no return to me, and I presume there was
not ; they have in previous years.
Q. You don't remember that two years ago there was a
caucus held, and a selectman nominated and an assessor ?
A. I saw an account of it in the paper.
Q. Were those parties who were nominated, elected sub
sequently by the town ?
A. I think not all of them.
Q. Was there any one of them except a member of the
school-committee, Mr. Morse ?
A. I don't remember.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) I suppose you have known in
other cases men nominated by caucuses who were not elected?
A. It frequently occurs.
Q. (By Mr. Williams). This caucus was not a general
caucus ; it was only a caucus of the Farms people ?
A. The newspapers said it was a local caucus. The man

105
they nominated at the general caucus, didn't get but a very
few votes ; he didn't get the vote of the Farms, he only got
a nominal vote.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) Didn't carry his own part of
the town ?
A. No.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) How do you know he didn't
carry his own part of the town ?
A. About 200 vote down there ; and he only got a very
small vote.
Q. How many voters were there from the Farms ?
A. Generally a good many.
Q, Would you dare say there were more voters* from the
Farms at that town-meeting, than there were votes cast for
him? A. I have no doubt there were a great many more.
Q. Do you know any thing about it ?
A. I have no way of teUing absolutely.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) But these surveyors, whether
they were nominated by caucus or not, do you know whether
they are petitioners or not, for division ?
A. They are.
Q. They have been kept right along, have they ?
A. They have been surveyors for several years.

TESTIMONY OF JAMES A. WRIGHT.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You reside in Beverly?
A. I do.
Q. And whether or not you took the figures for the census
in 1885 ?
A. I did, in enumerating the census in 1885, the State
census. Q. In the course of your duties, did you enumerate all
the school-children ?

106
A. I did not enumerate the school-children in 1885. Mr.
Eben H. Moulton made the enumeration of school-chUdren
in 1885; I did not. I have done that subsequent to that
time. Q. You took the school-children in 1886 and 1887?
A. I took the school-chUdren in 1886 and 1887.
Q. How many school-chUdren are there at the Farms ?
A. In 1885, according to the return of Mr. Moulton, there
were 127. In 1886, according to my own return, there were
126 ; in 1887, on my own return, there were 130. That is
my recollection, and I think I am correct in it. I have the
figures in my pocket, if it is necessary to have them.
Q. Between five and fifteen years of age, how many ?
A. Those are the school-children, those between five and
fifteen. Q. You take them between the ages of five and fifteen,
as the statute requires?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you take the population of Beverly Farms ?
A. I did not take the population of Beverly Farms separ
rately. I took the entire population of the entire town in
1885. Q. Can you state what the population of Beverly Farms
is? A. I can state that I made an extract from the return in
the census office in this city for the committee in 1886, —
1885-86, at the first hearing. I made an extract from the
census for the committee, and I know what that was.
Q. What was that ?
A. That was 843.
Q. How did you take the census? Did you take the
streets ?
A. I went to every house. I made a record of the house,
whether it was wood or brick, or stone, or both, and the
first schedule anywhere in town I numbered No. 1. I made
out a schedule first for the head of the house, and I marked
it " Head of the house." Then I made out the next schedule

107
for the wife, if there was one, and that was " No. 2," and I
showed what relation she sustained to the head of the house ;
and then I took the children in the same way, and showed
their relation to the head of the house. If there were two
families in the house, of course the next one was blank as to
the house, but the head of the family was entered just the
same, and they were numbered consecutively. My first
schedule taken was numbered one, and my last one was the
complete number of the population of the town.
Q. And that was 9,186 ?
A. 9,186, as corrected. What I mean by corrected is
this : there were a number of people at the Farms, and some
in other parts of the town, who claimed they did not belong
in the town, and that they ought to be enumerated elsewhere.
Some people whom the census-takers enumerated in other
towns thought there were people in my town which should
be enumerated elsewhere, and they sent to me. There were
about 24 of these cases which were referred to headquarters,
and the final return was 9,186.
Q. What is the proportion of school-children to the pop
ulation in different places ?
A. The proportion of school-children to the population
in the town of Beverly is one school-child, one between the
ages of five and fifteen, to every 5.8.
Q. What is it in Essex County ?
A. In Essex County it is one to 5.7.
Q. What is it in the whole State ?
A. One to 5.5, a little more or less, I am not sure which.
Q. How does that come out in the Farms ?
A. The Farms with 127, as they had in 1885, and 13 be
longing in this outlying district between the two villages,
would give them 140 ; and 140 multipUed by 5.8 would give
that comparison for Beverly Farms. I believe that gave them
a population of 812 at the Farms. I would say that I also
corroborated my extract from the census by making a com
parison of my figures with those of Mr. Moulton, which were
taken in 1885. He took the census about five or six weeks

108
after I did my work, both based on the 1st of May. My
return showed 1,583 chUdren between the ages of five and
fifteen in Beverly, and Mr. Moulton's return, taken about six
weeks after, showed 1,578. There was a variation of five, he
returning five less than I returned.
, Q. I am reminded that it is claimed that the feeling was
so strong between the Beverly, and Beverly Farms, Grand
Army Posts, that the organizations could not unite in the
exercises on Decoration Day. Are you chaplain of the Grand
Army Post of Beverly ?
A. I am, at present.
Q. What are the relations between the two sections in
regard to Grand Army matters? Is there a Post at the
Farms ?
A. There is a Post at the Farms.
Q. Now, state what your relations are.
A. For any thing that I know, they are perfectly frater
nal. Q. Have you had meetings together ?
A. The last meeting held together was in December, the
19th of December, in attendance at a camp-fire.
Q. The 19th of December of what year ?
A. 1887.
Q. Any difficulty in meeting and uniting at that time ?
A. I know the members of Post 89 were very glad to
meet their comrades of Preston Post, and I have not the
slightest doubt that the comrades of Preston Post were per
fectly pleased to meet their comrades of Post 89. Every
thing was fraternal and pleasant.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) Is the " Beverly Farms Advo
cate " a paper devoted to division ?
A. If it is devoted to any thing, it must be to that.
Q. You have seen the paper, haven't you ?
A. I have, frequently.
Q. (Exhibiting a copy of the "Advocate.") Do you
recognize that as a copy of the paper ?
A. No trouble about that.

109
Q. Does this represent the actual state of feeUng of the
Beverly Farms district in regard to the Beverly camp-fire ?
(Reading.) " Twenty-five comrades of Preston Post attended the
camp-fire at Beverly last Monday evening, and had a very
enjoyable time. There were about six hundred veterans
present from different parts of the county, and they were
very handsomely entertained by Post 89.
" The exercises in the Town HaU were presided over by
Hon. John I. Baker, and consisted of addresses by Com
mander Woodbury, Department Commander Nash, Mr.
Baker, Rev. Mr. Butler, and Comrade Driver.
" Following the Town Hall entertainment, came the camp-
fire in the opera-house, which was enjoyed hugely by the old
soldiers till midnight.
" Post 89 deserves great credit for the success of the entire
affair, requiring as it did much effort and labor, and no small
amount of time and money."
A. It does, so far as Post 89 is concerned, and presumably
on the other side.
Q. I will read again from the same paper. (Reading.)
" The Sons of Veterans of Beverly did a very handsome
thing last Monday night when they detailed their excellent
drum corps to do escort duty to Preston Post."
Is Preston Post the one at Beverly Farms ?
A. It is.
Q. And Post 89 is the one at Beverly town ?
A. It is. Cross-Examination .
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) When you took this population
of Beverly Farms at 843, I think, what territory did it
cover ?
A. It covered the territory inside of the proposed divis
ion line.
Q. The whole of that now proposed ?
A. That is it. Well, I don't know about that: the line

110
may have been changed. I had a map with the division line
marked upon it, from which I made my record. I had that
to guide me.
Q. You had that to guide you in 1885 ?
A. No, sir, when I made the extract. I took no separate
census in 1885.
Q. You didn't have any separate census then ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, as to the illustration of the feelings between
the two sections in regard to Decoration Day, does the town
appropriate $200 for decoration services ?
A. It does, generaUy.
Q. Did the Post at Beverly Farms get any of it?
A. I do not know whether they did or not: I do not
know that they did.
Q. Don't you feel pretty certain they did not ?
A. I presume they did not.
Q. Now, " The Beverly Advocate," that represents, so far
as you know, the feeling of Post 89 ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I read this morning, a little while ago, to Mr. Perry,
an account of the doings down in Beverly. Perhaps you
heard me read some of it ?
A. I did.
Q. In which the Beverly Farms people were so pleas
antly greeted at old Beverly. Now, as I go along, I find
that a procession was formed to parade the principal streets,
in the following order : A marshal, then came the Post, then
the Salem Cadet Band, then the citizens of Beverly with the
Marblehead Drum Corps, and then the J. H. Chipman Post
89, G. A. R., with sixty men. So you turned out in that
procession and greeted them ?
A. I did not.
Q. Your Post did?
A. The Post did not.
Q. Then this is a lie ?
A. I don't know what that is. The Post as a Post did

Ill
not turn out, and I did not march in the procession. I do
not know that there was any procession, I never heard there
was. I know that there was a band of music.
Q. Weren't you there on that night ?
A. I walked out that night with my wife and little girl.
Q. "Several hundred citizens of Beverly," after them
marches a drum corps and Post 89, and the number given is
60 men. That is from the Beverly correspondent of the
" Boston Journal." That is a good reliable paper ?
A. I don't know but it is. I don't know but members of
Post 89 turned out as individuals, but I am satisfied it did
not turn out as a Post.
Q. Don't you think it kind of got together? Huddled
together ?
A. I don't know a thing about that.
Mr. Moulton. That is the Salem correspondent, I think.
Mr. Steaens. No ; it says the correspondent from
Beverly. The Witness. I know this, that if the Post had come
out in their usual way, I should have known it. I am
satisfied it did not.
Q. Now this matter that my brother has read about,
when the Preston Post came up there, that is the only time
they have been up there in a long time, is it not ?
A. So far as I know.
Q. And on this occasion the Massachusetts commander
was there, wasn't he ?
A. I believe he was. Re-Direct.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) I intended to ask you, Mr.
Wright, about the number of voters remonstrating against
the incorporation of Beverly Farms ?
A. I cannot tell you exactly, Mr. Moulton, but I can tell
you all that I know about it, and then you can judge.
Remonstrances were put around in stores, and carried into
shops, for signatures. About fifty names were on each

112
paper. Two of those papers were passed in, without being
checked off in the usual way.
Q. This is at Beverly ?
A. Yes, sir. Two of these papers containing about a
hundred names, were passed in, without being checked off.
There were checked off on the list 1,112 of the men who
were on the list, as voting last fall, the printed list before it
was corrected. I think it is safe to say that there are 1,200
or more of the voters of the town on that remonstrance.
And what I mean by a voter of the tovra, is a man whose
name is on the list ready to vote ; not a man who can qualify
and vote if his taxes were paid, but who is on the list all
ready to vote. I should say there were more than 1,200.
I know that there are 1,112, and that there were about a
hundred names^that went in without being checked off; and
I know there is another paper that has a number of names on
it. Of the actual registered voters, there are 1,112 who
remonstrate, and I should say it was safe to say that there
were 1,200 or 1,250 ; that is, as near as I can come to it, but
not accurately.
Q. Those are on the remonstrance, are they ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) (Showing witness a copy of a
town report.) Mr. Wright, do you recognize that, as the
annual report of the town ?
A. I do.
Q. Turning now to page 108, do you see an article in the
warrant for the annual meeting, with reference to seeing if
the town would grant the sum of $200 for Post 89, G. A. R. ?
A. I do.
Q. Do you know whether or not that article was put in
on the petition by your Post ?
A. It was. We generally appoint a committee to make
that request.
Q. That was on the petition of your Post ?
A. It is possible if we did not bring ourselves into notice
in that way, we might be forgotten, and we do not take the
chance of being forgotten.

113
Q. So far as you know, that was your own request?
A. That was the request of the Post 89.
Q. So far as you know, Preston Post made no such request ?
A. I presume not. It does not appear in the warrant.
Re-Cross.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) Among these remonstrants that
you designate as 1,112, did you make any distinction between
summer residents and those who live there all the year round ?
A. I did not. I think there may be a very few of that
class in there ; there might be two or three, but I recall just
one. Q. But you did not distinguish between them ?
A. I did not. I recall just one.
Q. Are there any from the Farms ?
A. On that remonstrance ? yes, sir.
Q. Who are they ?
A. Mr. Jonathan Ober, Mr. Albert Ober, Mr. Isaac
Smith, and Mr. Stephen Larcom. I believe all those reside
in Precinct 1. Then outside of that there are some others.
Q. Jonathan Ober, Albert Ober, Isaac Smith, and Stephen
Larcom ?
A. I know of no others. That point was not called to
my mind until a few minutes before I came on the stand ;
but I know this, that there are others that are on there.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Mr. Calvin Foster ?
A. Mr. Calvin Foster is one, and Mr. Kimball, — I don't
know his first name, — he lives on Hull Street.
Mr. Steaens. There are so few I suppose you can sug
gest them to him.
Mr. Moulton. No, I have no knowledge.
The Witness. There are a number of others. I think
there are five or six others.

114

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM J. BERRY.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You live in Beverly and are a
surveyor ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you make a survey for the petitioners?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You were employed by Mr. Loring to make the figures
for the petitioners, were you ?
A. I do not think it was Mr. Loring who employed me.
Q. I want to ask you what the distance is from Beverly
down to Beverly Farms ?
A. That is rather indefinite, Mr. Moulton.
Q. I want you to locate two points and give us the
distance between them.
A. From Town Hall down to Thissel's Bridge is 1.7
miles. Q. Thissel's Bridge is the division line ?
A. Yes, sir ; that is where it started.
Q. Now, the distance I had in mind is from Town Hall
to Marshall's HaU at the centre of Beverly Farms.
A. That is 3.91 mUes.
Q. Have you any other distances ?
A. Yes, sir ; I have quite a number. Shall I read them
off? Q. Perhaps you had better read them.
A. I start from Town Hall and go towards the Farms.
From Town Hall to Ober Street —
Q. Perhaps it is not necessary to read them. To the
Cove schoolhouse, what is the distance ?
A. One and one-tenth miles from Town Hall.
Q. What is the central point in the village on the Farms
side? A. I should say Marshall's Hall was.

115
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) Is that right opposite the new
engine-house ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where there is a hall up in the third story ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Now what is the point that is
equally distant between the two schoolhouses at the Cove
and at the Farms ?
A. It is between Mingo's Beach and the old Loring
Avenue. Q. Will you point it out on the map ?
A. I don't know that I can find the avenue. (Referring
to petitioners' map.)
Q. Perhaps you can find it on the other map better ?
A. I should think it was about there. (Indicating.)
Q. Well, is that correct ? Mr. Loring did not recognize
the locality at just that point when he looked at the map.
A. I should think this was meant to be Mingo's Beach.
Q. Won't you point it out on the other map ? Mr.
Loring says Mingo's Beach is not right on that map.
A. (Referring to remonstrants' map.) It would be about
there. (Indicating.)
Q. Point out the two schoolhouses, if you will ?
A. The Cove schoolhouse is here, and the Farms school-
house is here. (Indicating.)
Q. What is the length of the roads in Beverly, Mr.
Perry? A. 60.3 miles.
Q. And at Beverly Farms ?
A. 13.2 mUes.
Q. How far is Manchester line from Beverly Town Hall ?
A. The nearest way it is 5.2 mUes, or a little over, say
6.24 miles.
Q. What is the distance from CentreviUe to the centre of
Beverly ?
A. That I don't know. There is a mUe-post with " 3
mUes " marked on it close by Bald Hill, and I suppose that
is correct.

116
Q. Three miles from Bald HiU to Town Hall. Did you
survey the precinct line ?
A. On the atlas ; yes, sir.
Q. What is the area of Precinct One ?
A. 1,615 acres.
Q. And of the land between Precinct One and Thissel's
Bridge ?
A. I could only give that by estimating that piece of
Wenham. I do not just remember now what it was. The
whole territory asked for in the petition is 3,144 acres, and a
certain part of it is in Wenham.
Q. There are 417 acres in that part of Wenham?
A. I don't know ; I have forgotten those figures.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) You measured this distance on
the ground?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You ran down and up, and down and up, or did you
sight it?
A. Levelled it ; horizontal measure.
Q. And that is 3.90 mUes by horizontal measurement ?
A. 3.91 miles.

TESTIMONY OF JOHN A. MOULTON.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You reside in North Beverly ?
A. I do.
Q. You are one of the assessors of Beverly, and chairman
of the Board, I believe, this year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Will you tell me what the Farms tax on property is
this year ?
A. $93,879.36.
Q. What is the corporation and bank tax ?
A. $16,958.02.
Q. Making in all, how much ?
A. $110,837.36.

117
Q. How many farmers are there in Beverly owning farms
of more than twenty acres ?
A. There are sixty-three farmers owning farms upwards
of thirty-two acres, besides smaller estates.
Q. In what part of Beverly do they live ?
A. They live in the part that has been indicated as
Centreville, in North Beverly, in the road running to the
Wenham line, called Dodge's Row, from North Beverly
proper, and then running to the line of the western part of
Wenham, then running to the line of Danvers, on Elliott
street, which runs to Danvers, and also in this section known
as Rialside.
Q. What do you say as to the valuation of that farming
land in North Beverly as it is, the valuation as compared
with the taxed valuation ? You are familiar with it ?
A. I should say that in comparison with the sales there,
it was taxed for all that it could be.
Q. Do you know any thing about the valuation of Mr.
Benjamin Giles's farm at Rialside ?
A. I have not refreshed my memory particularly, but my
impression is, it was taxed in 1885 for $8,500. Since then
we have received information that it was in the market for
$6,000 ; and upon his application to us, to the board of asses
sors, representing that to be the case, I think the valuation
was reduced to about that sum.
Q. How many acres was that ?
A. 95 or 96, 1 am not positive ; between 90 and 100 acres.
Q. That runs from Beverly Creek to where? Perhaps
you had better point it out on the map.
A. It is located on Elliott Street, to which I have referred.
It is possibly one of those houses. (Indicating.) It runs
back to this water, then from Bass River, and it also crosses
over Balch Street, and I think the line runs down to this,
what is called Danvers River.
Q. Right by the Masury land that was sold for a school-
house ?
A. Yes sir.

118
Q. Where is that? Won't you locate that ?
A. I should say it was about there (indicating).
Q. And I understood you to say that Mr. GUes came and
said he was prepared to sell his farm for $6,000 ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know how long it has been in the market ?
A. Something over two years.
Q. Will you give me the valuation of the petitioners, and
also the valuation of the summer residents, the summer resi
dents who petition ?
A. The total valuation represented by the petitioners is
$1,511,025, of which 13 summer residents represent $1,124,-
875. Q. Now, what is the balance that is owned by the
natives ?
A. $386,150.
Q. Do you know how many petitioners are not taxed?
A. I do not.
Q. Take the actual tax paid by permanent residents at
Beverly Farms in 1886, and how does it compare with the
tax paid in 1885, before the rise in valuation?
A. The amount of money involved, with the rate being
reduced $3.20 on a thousand, is a little less than it was in
1885. Q. Can you tell how much ?
A. I think last year an investigation revealed the fact
that it was $500 or $600; I am not positive as to the amount.
Q. What is the net income from the Farms, subtracting
the interest on the sinking fund and the debt ? That is, the
tax paid by the petitioners is'how much ?
A. By the petitioners ?
Q. By the Farms. The tax paid by permanent residents,
petitioners. A. I have not that.
Q. Very well, take the tax paid by the whole Farms,
stated before.
Mr. Steaens. That has aU been arranged.

119
Mr. Robinson. If the Committee wUl bear with us for
a moment, I think we can agree upon aU the substantial fig
ures, and save an hour's testimony.
Q. I understand you have not there the net valuation at
the Farms ?
A. I haven't it here. I assisted in compiUng it, and I
think Mr. Murney testified to it yesterday. I can furnish
it later in the day.
( By Mr. Qua.) A member of the Committee desires you
to state the character of the land that you spbke of on the
farm you pointed out ?
A. The GUes farm which I referred to? From my
knowledge of it T should think there was perhaps half of
it that was very good tillage land ; the remainder is rather
rough, cheap land, wooded and rocky ; rather poor pasturage
and not first-class woodland.
Q. ( By Mr. Geeenwood.) What quality of wood ?
A. Pine wood, so far as I know ; on this land over here,
pine wood. Quite a large part of it is pasturage, and not
very fine pasturage.
Mr. Robinson. Now, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, we
have agreed upon a statement of these statistics, and we have
here two copies which we will give to the reporters, so that
they wUl be just alike ; stating the amount of valuation in
the two parts, and the amount, the proportion of taxes that
each part pays, the division of the corporation tax between
the two, the number of polls in the two, and the proportion
of the expenses that would be assumed by Beverly Farms,
on the proposition that they have made, $60,000, and the
amount that Beverly Farms would spend upon itself after
division. We have agreed upon all these figures, and will
save your time by putting them in.
Mr. Steaens. The Committee understands that we do
not agree that this is as it should be, but we agree that
according to the present valuation it comes out this way.

120

Proposed town, tax on property . . • $93,879 36
Proposed town, corporation and bank taxes . 16,958 02
Total income of proposed town . • • $110,837 38
Estimated expenses for new town (including
State and county taxes, interest on one-half
debt and sinking fund) .... $70,000
Income from corporation taxes . . • 16,958
Valuation of proposed town .... $7,334,325
Total Beverly tax on polls and property . . $188,324 88
Total corporation taxes  27,219 13
Total income of Beverly  $215,544 01
Expenses assumed by proposed town (includ
ing one-half interest on debt and sinking fund
and State and county taxes) .... $60,000
288 polls in Beverly Farms.
Beverly Farms pay on property . . . $94,000
Beverly pays on property ..... 89,000
Tax to be raised, the corporation and bank tax
being deducted, on property at the Farms
for their expenses after division, including
running expenses and one-half the State and
county tax, and one-half interest on debt and
sinking-fund  $53,042
Rate at Farms to raise $53,042 is $7.25 per $1,000.

Amount to be raised in Beverly, if divided, for
present expenses  $155,544 01
Amount to be raised by tax on property, deduct
ing corporation and bank tax in Beverly and
income from polls  $140,377

121
Rate to raise $140,377 on valuation of $6,952,775 wiU be
$20.19 per $1,000.
Present rate, $12.80.
Increase of tax rate in Beverly, over 55 per cent.
Decrease of tax rate in Beverly Farms, 44 per cent.
Mr. Robinson. I want to caU the attention of Mr. Wil
liams to a statement in his opening, which is in error. He
stated that seventeen men of Beverly Farms are employed
by summer residents, but over eleven hundred are absolutely
independent of them. That would seem to be eleven hun
dred men. I suppose that is not so.
Mr. Williams. Certainly not. It should read " eleven
hundred people." There are not so many men in Beverly
Farms.

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT R. ENDICOTT.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You reside in Beverly, Mr.
Endicott ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And have, aU your life ?
A. All my life.
Q. What is your business ? What has been your business?
A. I have been a retail dry goods dealer for forty years.
Q. Are you well acquainted with the people of Beverly ?
A. Very well.
Q. And of the Farms, as well ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I wUl ask you generally, Mr. Endicott, what you say
as to there being any unfriendly feeling or hostiUty between
the people of the two sections ?
A. As far as I know, there is no unfriendly feeUng in the
old town. Of course, during the excitement of the last year
there might have been some chaffing back and forth, when
people met; but certainly the old town, as far as I know,
don't entertain any iU feelings.

122
Q. What do you say as to the population of the Farms,
compared with what it was years ago, twenty, thirty or more
years ago ?
A. The native population which occupied the land along
there have entirely moved away.
Q. WeU, as to the size of the village ?
A. I should not think it was any larger, if it was as large.
Q. Whether there has been any substantial growth in the
number of permanent residents for forty years ?
A. I should think that it was less rather than otherwise.
Q. You are the executor of Mr. John Pickett's will?
A. I am one of them, I am administrator.
Q. You are administrator with the will annexed ?
A. With the will annexed.
Q. And the estate has been appraised, has it ?
A. It has.
Q. This is one of the estates marked by Mr. Loring as
not paying its fair share of personal taxes. What is the
amount of personal property according to the appraisal ?
A. I should rather not state the exact amount, I would
state it in general terms.
Q. Has not the inventory been filed ?
A. It has not, no, sir. - I have never received it. It has
never been handed to me.
Q. An inventory is to be filed, I suppose ?
A. An inventory has been made, or is in the process of
being made.
Q. He died when?
A. He died Dec. 3, I think.
Q. State as nearly as you are inclined to, Mr. Endicott,
the amount of personal property ?
A. I have not gone over the figures exactly, but my im
pression is that he was taxed for about $100,000, and that in
addition to that, he held about $20,000 or $21,000 worth of
bank stocks, manufacturing corporation stocks, etc. The re-
.mainder of the property, a large amount of it was in bonds.
If you take those bonds at their par value, which is all the

123
holders will get for them if they keep them until they become
due, his property would be appraised for a few thousand
dollars more than he was taxed for, a very little more.
Q. Can you say how much ?
A. Well, I should say, without having the figures before
me, about $15,000.
Q. What do you say as to the effect of any increase of
taxation upon the trade of Beverly ?
A. I think in regard to the retail trade, I took the direc
tory the other day, and went over the number of dealers in
all branches, and there are something over one hundred ; I
counted one hundred names, but some of them are in differ
ent classifications and appear several times. I would say in
regard to those that they have hard work to get any thing
more than a living. The tendency of modern times is to
concentrate trade in great cities, like Boston and Salem.
And ever since the horse-cars have been running to Salem, —
they run every fifteen minutes, — it draws off a very large pro
portion of the trade, and these retail dealers have all they can
do to hold their own.
Q. Have there been any changes in business during two
or three years that indicate any thing to your mind ?
A. There have been two faUures within a week or two ;
people have given up business.
Q. In what line of business?
A. One was a paper-hanger and crockery-ware dealer,
and another was a grocer.
Q. What do you say as to any growth in Beverly now,
any increase there of business, of population during the last
two or three years?
A. I should think it had rather retrograded than other
wise. There was a time when it was almost impossible to
find a house to rent. Now, you wiU see a good many houses
with the sign up " to rent." I do not think there has been
any increase, certainly not within a year, and I do not think
there has within two years. You asked me in regard to ill-
feeling, and I would state that I have two children in the high

124
school, and I have asked them particularly if there was any
taunting or nagging of the children, and they said there was
not, they did not retain any ill-feeling whatever. Possibly,
last year, when the excitement was at its height, children
might have had some chaffing back and forth, but they said
they treated those children from the Farms, what there were
there, the same as all the rest of the folks, — played with
them. Q. Have you ever heard, except at the hearing in the
Beverly case, of any bitterness between sections, or of any
children being annoyed that came from the Farms to the
school in Beverly ?
A. I do not think there is any thing of the kind, as I say,
any thing more than temporarily. For a few weeks last year
there was a good deal of excitement. There might have
been more or less chaffing, but it is not a feeling that would
remain with children or with people. With regard to the
feeling on the other side of the line, of course I cannot say.
Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) Have you buUt a new block
there ?
A. Yes, I have remodelled one.
Q. When ?
A. I gave up business about two years ago on account of
UI health, and I added to the building, made two stores
where I had but one before.
Q. Do you rent them?
A. Yes, sir ; it is all rented.
Q. Now, with regard to this Pickett estate, do you mean
to say that estimating the personal property at the cash
value, that it is taxed within $15,000 ?
A. Yes, sir. I have not the figures before me. I have
not been over it very carefully ; but that is my impression.
Mr. Pickett was supposed to be worth a good deal more
property than he has left.
Q. I understood you to say that there was a large amount
of bonds which you estimated at par ?

125
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What are those bonds ?
A. Some Union Pacific.
Q. First 6s ?
A. I cannot state. I think they are 6s.
Q. Well, then, they are first 6s. Those sell for 115 or
116. What else ?
A. He has some C. B. & O., five per cent bonds.
Q. Debentures ?
A. I am not sure about that.
Q. Are they the latest issue, or are they extension 5s ?
A. I am hardly familiar enough with them to testify.
Q. Well, there are not any of them but what are at a
premium ?
A. I would state that the bonds generally are a good
class of bonds, and they would be worth a premium if sold
immediately. Q. Now, you are making $15,000 under-taxation ? They
have under-taxed for $15,000, taking these bonds at par ?
A, Yes, sir.
Q. And they are a good class of bonds that are at a pre
mium. And how many are there of them ?
A. I cannot state exactly.
Q. About how many ?
A. I was not aware I was to be asked any questions
about them.
Q. About how many ? $100,000 of them ?
A. Oh, no, sir.
Q. How many ?
A. I should think about $20,000, as I remember, but
there may be more, or there may be less. As I said, I had
no idea I was to be questioned about them.
Mr. Moulton. I thought you understood it.
The Witness. No, I did not. I was not here yesterday.
Q. What is the other property, the character of it ?
A. He was engaged in the coal and wood business, and
he had wharves, sheds, shops, and a large number of teams.

126
Q. What does the other personal property consist of ?
A. There is over $20,000 worth of bank stock.
Q. I mean, of the taxable property. You gave us that
before, I think.
A. $1,000 of manufacturing stock, I think.
Q. That would be non-taxable property, if it is in this
State. Well, is there any thing that is worth more than par
excepting these bonds ?
A. Yes, sir ; the bank stock is.
Q. I mean of taxable property ?
A. No, sir, I do not know that there is.
Q. Then taking the bonds at the premium, you would
make somewhere from $15,000 to $20,000 under-valuation
on that estate, would you not ?
A. I should think the premium on those might bring it
up nearly to $20,000.
Adjourned until 3 P.M. *

SEVENTH HEARING.

Wednesday, p.m., Feb. 1, 1888.
The Committee met in the Green Room at 3 p.m.. Senator
Ladd of Worcester, the Chairman, presiding.
The Chaieman. A majority of the Committee being pres
ent, and the hour having arrived to which this hearing was
adjourned, we wUl now proceed.

TESTIMONY OF AUGUSTUS N. CLARK.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You are an old resident of
Beveriy, Mr. Clark ?
A. That is my residence, yes, sir.
Q. For how many years have you lived there ?
A. Since 1828. I am nearly sixty.
Q. What has been your business ?
A. My business in Beverly was that of a shop-keeper — a
druggist — for thirty years, up to the time of the war, when
I quit there ; since then I have been doing business in
Boston. Q. You are one of the men whose names were mentioned
by Mr. Loring as a person who was likely to have personal
property that was not taxed. Will you state to the Com
mittee what the facts are in relation to that ?
A. I have been careful always to make a statement to the
assessors of my taxable property ; I have always thought it
the duty of every citizen to do that. Since I have been in

128
Boston my property has been pretty largely invested in real
estate in Boston. I am taxed for, perhaps, $40,000 or
$50,000 worth of real estate in Beverly, and something like
$80,000 in Boston. I have no personal property to any
extent. They taxed me, I think, about $7,000 for income
the last year, and that is all the money that I had then. I
noticed in the newspaper that I was estimated at $10,000,
and I have been looking around this forenoon to see where
I could invest it. I suppose Mr. Loring would not say that
I had it unless he knew it.
Q. Have you examined the petition that was presented
for the division of Beverly, Mr. Clark ?
A. I have.
Q. How many names of petitioners are there that are not
taxed in Beverly, that pay a poll-tax, or a property-tax,?
A. I would say that I was struck at the discrepancy
between the voters' list, 194, and the petitioners' list, which
was some 300, as it was a question in my mind where the
other 100 came from. I then spent some little time in
making an examination of the record, to see where those 100
and more came from. I have been over the record with the
collector of taxes ; and I find 97 of the petitioners do not
pay, either because they are not taxed, or because they did
not pay their tax. I find that 55 of these 97 never were
taxed; that is, in the years 1886 and 1887, — I didn't go
back beyond that, — and they were not taxed in either of
those years, 55 of them. I find that 7 were taxed in 1886,
and not in 1887. The inference is that they were not there
in 1887. I find that 13 were taxed in 1887, and not in 1886,
indicating that they were not there in 1886. I find 17 were
taxed both years, and did not pay their taxes ; making 97
persons who either were not taxed, or did not pay their tax.
Q. (By Mr. Williams.) You say 97 " voters " ?
A. 97 persons. They are petitioners. I find, upon
further analysis, that 12 of these were coachmen for summer
residents, who are not taxed, not assessed.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Did you state how many were
directly in the employ of summer residents ?

129
A. I looked at the voters' Ust, went over that very care
fully ; and, of the 194, 1 found 34 of them were in the direct
employ of summer residents ; some of them were coachmen.
I looked at the street invoice which the assessors made ; and
against the names they marked "Laborer," or, "Laborer,
Watson," or "Laborer, Linnehan," as though these men
were in their employ. There was quite a sprinkling of
these ; but I did not figure them up.
Q. Mr. Clark, whether or not you are thoroughly
acquainted with the people of Beverly Farms, and whether
you have been during all the years you have been living in
Beverly ?
A. WeU, sir, I think I knew every famUy in the town of
Beverly for twenty-five or thirty years, and was interested in
their occupations.
Q. How does the number of permanent residents at the
Farms, and the business at the Farms, compare now with
the same things thirty or forty years ago ?
A. I think the population forty years ago was as large as
it is to-day ; it is simply a matter of judgment. I judge
something from my knowledge of the families, and I judge
something from the voters. I was pretty active as a mem
ber of the town committee in the exciting contests, I think
covering from 1835 to 1865. I think I knew about every
voter in town ; and at the Farms there were, I think, more
voters, considerably more, than there are now on the voting-
list. I remember one campaign particularly, the time of the
Harrison campaign in 1840 ; from my recollection of it, and
by inquiries I have made, that there were 150 or more who
marched in procession from Beverly Farms headed by a
band. That did not include those that had to be carried in
carriages or those that were out of politics, of course.
Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) Old Beverly has grown more
rapidly then than the other part of Beverly ?
A. Oh, yes ; there has been considerable increase there.

130
Q. The prosperity seems to be on the Beverly side of the
line, does it ?
A. Oh, the industries of Beverly, what you call the indus
try, which makes the increase, is larger, I think, on the other
side. The industry has always been growing there; there
was considerable industry there.
Q. That has all died out at the Farms ?
A. That has all died out. My friend Moulton employed
quite a number of hands, a hundred or more, and Benjamin
Thissel employed some. That must have been in 1845 or
along there. He carried on a very extensive business.
Q. How much has Beverly grown, do you suppose ?
A. The industry?
Q. Yes. How much have you increased the population
on your side of the line ?
A. Well, the population on this side of the line has in
creased more than it has at the Farms, as far as all-the-year-
round population is concerned, although we have consid
erable floating population there.
Q. You have doubled your population, haven't you ?
A. Since I have lived there ?
Q. Yes.
A. No, I guess not ; I should think not. My impression
is, it was in the neighborhood of about 5,000.
Q. Then in the growth of Beverly you have had to make
up also for the population of the town, which I understand
you think is not as large now at Beverly Farms as it was
forty years ago ?
A. I think it was quite as large in the matter of all-the-
year-round population forty years ago as it is now.
Q. I say Beverly Farms has not done any thing towards
making up this increase in the population of the town ?
A. Yes, I think they have. Beverly Farms was repre
sented, I think, by about twelve names. I think twelve
names comprehended the whole population of Beverly Farms
for a good many years.
Q. I do not care to go into the detail, but I understood

131
you to say that you did not think the population of Beverly
Farms is any larger than it was forty years ago ?
A. I said it was as large forty years ago as it is now.
Q. Yes. It is not. any larger now than it was then.
Now, the town has grown from 5,000 to 10,000.
Mr. Moulton. He was going to say something, I think,
about these families having moved from Beverly Farms to
Beverly town.
Mr. Steaens. I should be very glad to hear it, if he was.
Q. That is, the tendency has been towards making Bev
erly grow and thrive and prosper, while Beverly Farms has
not done any thing more than stand still ?
A. They have come up to help us.
Q. In other words, the drain on Beverly Farms must
have been for forty years, in the way of men or money ?
A. The drain on this population that I speak of, repre
sented there by a dozen names, — when I kept my store there
they were all cousins and aunts.
Q. I don't care whether they were cousins or aunts ; I
don't want to take up too much time. I am simply getting
at the fact.
A. I only found fifty of them that represent those names,
and several of the family names are entirely extinct. This
population is now kept good by those who come in to make
up the population.
Q. The property you are taxed for now, in the way of
personal property, is your $7,000 income ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did I understand you to tell the committee that you
have no taxable property ?
A. I have no taxable property. I had none last May.
Q. Last May ?
A. Last May, when the taxes were made for this year.
Q. Had you made any changes in your property previous
to May?
A. Well, yes; not very much; not in the last two or
three years; I have not made hardly any changes in my
property. My income I have invested in real estate.

132
Q. I didn't know but you changed your property some
what before the first of May. You spoke as though the first
first of May it might be different ?
A. No.
Q. Now, you had none on the first of May, only the
$7,000 ?
A. Yes, I did. I had a onehorse shay.
Q. Well, I am not asking about a dollar's worth, or a
hundred dollars' worth ; I am asking about something that
is material and substantial.
A. I had no money.
Q. I see Mr. Loring did not say you were worth $40,000,
but he alluded to A. N. Clark and family. Do you know
who he meant by that?
A. Yes. I have a daughter who has $100 in a savings
bank, as she told me this morning ; and I have a wife, and
she thought she might have a couple of hundred.
Q. Did they think they had any more ?
A. When it was reported in the newspapers that A. N.
Clark and family had $40,000 that was not taxed, it created
considerable amusement.
Q. I only ask you whether or not there is any famUy
property, any trust property ?
A. No, no trust property.
Q. Nothing only what is included in your statement, so
that owning all this real estate, you have accumulated no
personal property ?
A. None at all.
Q. Have you an^interest in any apothecary-shop or drug
gist's store ?
A. I had, but I have not now.
Q. How long ago did you have it ?
A. I sold out my business in 1862, or 1863 it might pos
sibly be.
Q. You have no money loaned on that property ?
A. No, sir.

133

TESTIMONY OF HOOPER A. APPLETON.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You live in Beverly, Mr.
Appleton ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your business ?
A. Farming, surveying, etc.
Q. And you live in that part of Beverly known as
CentrevUle ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How much land do you own there ?
A. Some seventy acres.
Q. How near the division line do you live ?
A. Well, the line goes through my place, leaving my
house and barn and a few acres of land, that is, my home
stead, in Beverly, and the other part is cut off by the line.
Q. (By Mr. Robinson.) See if the gentleman at the
map points out correctly your place.
A. Yes, sir ; he does.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You say you are a surveyor,
Mr. Appleton ?
A. Yes, sir ; I practise that business some.
Q. Have you followed the line of division ?
A. Yes, sir; that is, from the course of the brook, as
represented there, to the Wenham line.
Q. From the brook to the Wenham line ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. WiU you state to the Committee how it cuts property
between those two points ? If you have got any paper you
can refer to it.
A. In starting from the brook there is about an acre of
low land there : we call that a brook ; sometimes there is a
brook and sometimes there is none. After emerging from
that you go over 80 rods of tillage land.

134
Q. If you will, tell the Committee how many estates are
cut, whether there are any that are not cut, and in what
shape it leaves the land, and that will be all that I want.
A. Fourteen rods brings you to hard ground, tillage
land. Then you go about 80 rods over tillage land; then
you come from that to Hull Street, and about two-thirds of
that is pasture land. Then you cross Hull Street, and there
is 80 rods and upwards of tillage land again ; and from that
to the Wenham line is rough pasture.
Q. How many estates does the line cut ?
A. It will cut about 19, I think.
Q. Does the land form the boundary line ?
A. I do not think it does, not to any extent.
Q. How is it with the lots as they are now ?
A. Well, they are cut into all shapes. You take the lots
on Standley Street, — the line cuts most of them in two, leav
ing the front on Standley Street, and the back land may be
in Beverly Farms.
Q. Now, Mr. Appleton, you know the people residing at
the viUage on Hull Street?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Whether or not they are in favor or opposed to
division ?
A. I think they are opposed to it.
Q. Have some of them signed a remonstrance ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many, do you know?
A. There is George F. Corning, Henry N. Cole, and
Marvin Downs told me he would, and I don't know but
what others.
Q. How far wiU the chUdren of these families have to go
to school in case of division ?
A. WeU, if they buUd the schoolhouse where the petition
ers say they are going to, on the Une between Wenham and
Beverl)- Farms, it wUl be about a mile and a half.
Q. How far to the Farms schoolhouse ?
A. About three miles.

135
Q. On that side. Now to the Centreville school, for these
parties ?
A. About half a mile.
Q. When you say a mile and a half you are not speak
ing of the Farms schoolhouse, but of the schoolhouse in
Wenham ?
A. In East Wenham.
Q. And that is located about here, is it ? (Indicating.)
A. That is where they say they will locate the new one.
*" le old one is a little back of that.
Q. A little further up this way ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know Mr. John Dodge of Wenham ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is he one of the largest land owners in that part of
Wenham that it is proposed to incorporate in Beverly Farms ?
A. I think he is ; in fact, I know so.
Q. Whether or not he has signed a remonstrance this
year? A. I don't know, only by hearsay.
Q. You know that he is not in favor of division ?
A. He told me he was not.
Q. What did he tell you about it ?
A. He thought he was better off where he was, to remain
as we are.
Q. Did he tell you any thing else ?
A. Well, he said he had seen enough of it.
Q. Any thing else ?
A. WeU, not lately.
Q. How much land does he own there ?
A. I understood he owned over one hundred acres ; I
don't know exactly. I know he has got a large territory.
Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) He thought he would be better
off where he was ?
A. Yes, sir.

136
Q. Do you know what the tax rate is in Wenham ?
A. Yes, I do ; I have a little property there. I think it
is $10 on $1,000.
Q. He thought he would be better off to stay in Wenham
than to come over and be annexed to Beverly Farms ?
A. Yes ; that was his expression.
Q. Did he tell you that he thought the taxes would be
higher in Beverly Farms ?
A. WeU, I don't know. I didn't ask him any questions.
We merely met one day.
Q. Didn't he tell you that he had been told so ?
A. No. I don't recollect that he did.
Q. When he said he thought he would be better off to
remain where he was, did he mention any thing except the
question of taxation ?
A. No, sir ; we did not have any conversation.
Q. You don't know of any thing that he might have
aUuded to ?
A. I don't know what he might have alluded to.
Q. He thought he would be better off ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You do not know exactly what the tax rate is in
Wenham? A. I think it is $10, as I recollect my tax bUl.

TESTIMONY OF JOHN GENTLEE.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) You live in Wenham, Mr.
Gentlee? A. I do.
Q. How near the part of Wenham that is represented on
the map ?
A. Within about half a mile.
Q. You have been a selectman of Wenham for about how
many years ?

137
A. Twenty-five, I guess. I cannot tell the exact number
of years, but twenty-five, I think.
Q. You testified at the hearing last year, and presented
some figures, I believe ?
A. Yes, sir ; I think I did.
Q. You appear to represent the town of Wenham ?
A. I appear by vote of the town for the residents of the
town of Wenham.
Mr. Moulton. Well, whatever you desire to say in rela
tion to the question, I have no doubt the Committee will be
wUling to hear.
Mr. Gentlee. WeU, I desire to say that a large majority
of the voters in the town of Wenham object to division,
some on one account, and some on others. One is that they
object to having the land taken out of the town where they
can control the appropriation and have some control in elect
ing the officers, appraising the land, and making the taxes.
Another is that the town is too small now; it is smaller
than we wish it was, and they don't wish any more taken
away. Then they think it is unjust for so few tax-payers to
take away the rights of so many. There are 64 tax-payers
in that smaU piece, and the petition is represented by only
9 real-estate tax-payers, 11 all told ; that is, tax-payers and
voters. Q. That is, there are nine resident tax-payers on real
estate who sign that petition ?
A. There are nine real estate tax-payers who sign this
petition, and two who pay a tax on personal property. The
whole amount of the real estate is $22,950 from the assessors'
books, and that of the petitioners amounts to $8,250, includ
ing land and buildings ; their personal is $1,900, their tax
levy $296.26. Eight of them pay a poU-tax, and two of them
are exempt. Of the 419 acres taken, the petitioners own 63f .
Q. It was stated to the Committee yesterday to be 130
acres, I think.
A. Mr. Dodge has' taken his land out of the petitioners'
list; then Mr. Henry Dodge, the man who owns the mill.

138
would not sign because he promised not to sign against it.
Mrs. Williams owns quite a large tract, but we would not
take any females. Mrs. GUman owns quite a large tract.
These are residents. Mr. Dodge and Mr. Benjamin F. Burch
stead signed a remonstrance. I carried it to them.
Q. So that the petitioners only own 53 acres of that, all
told? A. They return 53 1 acres.
Q. And you know from your acquaintance with the
country about, how large it is ?
A. Yes. I was on in 1860, and we went on to every
piece of land in town, large and small, and appraised it, —
a committee appointed for that purpose.
Q. You have spoken of Mr. John Dodge who owns 130
acres ?
A. 129 acres, I think.
Q. Did you have any talk with him about his reasons for
not signing the petition ?
A. Well, not much. I asked him if Mr. Williams or Mr.
Stearns should ask me why he had changed his mind, what I
should say, and I asked him to come up himself and explain
to the Committee why he had changed his mind, and he said
he was a man who never went on to the stand, and didn't
want to go into court anyway. He said the reason was, he
thought at the time of the first petition the question would
be decided on its merits, but if there was going to be any
thing else used besides its merits, he was out of it. That is
all that I had to say about it.
Q. Is there any thing else that you want to add?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. You are acquainted at Beverly Farms ?
A. I lived there years ago, I cannot say I know so much
about it now. I knew everj' place and every house.
Q. What is the occupation of the people there ?
A. You have me now.
Q. Are there any farms there ?
A. One.

139
Q. One only ?
A. One you would caU a farm. Of course, there are
gardens there. Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) I don't know whether I under
stand your figures. How many resident tax-payers are there
in that triangle ?
A. Including females ?
Q. No. I say how many resident men tax-payers ?
A. 1 think there are fifteen. Not fifteen that pay a real-
estate tax ; there are but thirteen that pay a real-estate tax.
Q. There are thirteen that pay a real-estate tax ; how
many of them sign ?
A. Nine who pay a real-estate tax.
Q. How many remonstrate ?
A. A hundred and sixty-one. There are sixty-four owners
of the real estate.
Q. I am getting at the residents. Now how many
remonstrate on the Wenham side ?
A. Two.
Q. Nine out of thirteen petition, two remonstrate, and
two say nothing ?
A. Two say nothing.
Q. Now about Wenham. How does that triangle affect
Wenham, as regards revenue and expense ?
A. I think they take out rather more than they put in.
Q. So it is an advantage to the town of Wenham to get
rid of them ?
A. No. We don't care about it.
Q. WeU, it is, for money ?
A. It is at the present day, from a financial point of view.
Q. From a financial point of view you are better off with
out them ?
A. To-day, we are.
Q. That is, as far as we know how to act ?
A. Sometimes it is.

140

CHARLES H. ODELL recalled.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) Capt. OdeU, do you know
whether in the valuation book of this year Mr. John Pickett
was doomed to any amount as against the $20,000 that Mr.
Endicott spoke about this morning ? I don't know whether
you can answer that question or not.
A. My impression is that he was doomed for $33,000. I
have not the valuation book here. I do not think there was
any change from last year to this year. I think it is some
$32,000 outside of his horses and carriages.
Mr. Williams. (Referring to valuation book.) He is
doomed at $32,000.
Q. Then he was taxed $32,000 for the $20,000 that Mr.
Endicott mentioned this morning ?
A. That is what we doomed him, $32,000.
Q. Did you hear Mr. Loring's testimony that Mr. David
Sears was taxed in Beverly, and was not taxed in Boston?
A. 1 did, sir.
Q. Have you any evidence upon that point ?
A. I have, sir.
Q. State what it is.
A. I have a letter from Mr. Duncklee, one of the asses
sors of the city of Boston.
Q. Please state what it says.
A. (Reading.) Assessors' Office, City Hali., Boston,
Feb. 1, 1888.
To whom it may concern :
It appears from the records of this department that David
Sears was assessed in Boston for a tax of 1887 on poll and
personal of $80,000.
It also appears that he has been assessed for the same items
since 1878. Joshua S. Duncklee,
One of the Assessors, City of Boston.

141
Q. Have you been over the schedule of property of the
Sears estate ?
A. I have, sir.
Q. WiU you state what the facts are in regard to the
amount ?
A. I say, we treated this estate as we did all estates.
Q. That is not what I want.
A. In the first place, the whole amount of the estate was
$1,073,594.91. The Witness. As appears by the return of the first and
final account —
Mr. Steaens. In 1874?
The Witness. March 2, 1874. This is the first and final
account of Frederick R. Sears and Charles U. Cotting, ad
ministrators with the will annexed of the estate of David
Sears, late of Boston, deceased, showing the distribution of
said estate. Said account was aUowed by the probate court
for the County of Suffolk on March 2, 1874. Attest, J. H.
Paine, Assistant Register. I find the whole expenses charged
before there was any distribution made, was $124,594.91.
Then there was paid to Mrs. E. E. Sears, widow, on account
of personal estate, $318,000 ; less paid March 27, 1873, $500;
AprU 2, $1,200 ; AprU 9, $800 ; May 8, $500 ; Nov. 19, $1,000;
Jan. 22, 1874, $1,000, making $5,000 ; which leaves $313,000
as her share of the estate, and that was paid to her in stocks,
mortgages, and bonds, as follows —
Mr. Moulton. There is no need of reading that.
The Witness. Well, sir, I have been all over the whole.
Q. How much is taxed ?
A. I have here the amount taxed by the town, and how
much is taxed by the State by the report of the tax com
missioner. Q. How much is taxed by the town ?
A. $55,105.06.
Q. Is there any thing else that is taxable?
A. No, sir ; not to her. There were four children at that
time. Miss EmUy E. Sears was given a mortgage, we do not

142
know whether it was a mortgage note or not, which would
make her more than we have assessed her. She was only
assessed $42,000, doomed. We put that too low. She was
given the note of J. M. Parker for $60,000, which would give
her $77,264.75. Miss Emily E. Sears lives in Beverly.
Henry F. Sears, his account was paid in the same way, his
father distributing so many shares of the Fifty Associates,
Equitable Trust Company, and so forth; his amount taxable.
was $9,484.04. Miss Miriam M. Sears died. The estate
was divided among the three equally ; they were given that
also. Q. Now, what is the sum total taxable in Beverly ?
A. The total amount taxable in Beverly was $151,237.89.
Q. How much are they taxed for ?
A. They were assessed in Beverly for $199,600.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) On personal ?
A. On personal.
Q. (By Mr. Moulton.) How much more is that than
is taxable ?
A. $48,362.11.
Q. I don't know that the fact has ever appeared in evi
dence, or the explanation of it. It was mentioned at the
view that Mr. Charles U. Cotting's barn was assessed at
$6,000. What are the facts in regard to that ?
A. That is true. It was a clerical error ; it was so
assessed in 1885 ; and, in copying off the next year, it was
put down the same; it came out here during the hearing,
and I went to see Mr. Cotting, and told him I was very sorry
it had happened. He said he never had noticed it. I told
him he had been paying for more than he owned, and he
said he was not aware of that.
Q. What was the clerical error ?
A. An extra cipher ; instead of being $6,000, it should
have been $600. He immediately applied for an abatement,
and we granted it. This year Mr. Ober and some parties
were at work upon the barn for some month or two, and we
have added $200, making it $800 this year.

143
Q. When was that abated ?
A. That abatement was made after we found out about
the error at the hearing here. We didn't know it before.
Q. Did you know it before the hearing here ?
A. No, sir, we did not ; and the tax had been paid at the
time when I went down to see Mr. Cotting about it.
Cross-Examination.
Q. (By Mr. Steaens.) Have you got the book of 1885
here? A. I have not, the Committee have.
Q. In 1886 you put this in at $6,000? Do you know
what it was put in at in 1885 ?
A. I think it was $6,000, and we copied it in in the same
way in 1886.
Q. You copied it in in the same way ?
A. That is, it was put down wrong in the book, and
copied into another book.
Q. What was it in 1884?
A. I cannot tell you. I was not on the Board in 1884 or
1885. Q. So for two years you put it in for $6,000?
A. One year the present Board put it in.
Q. And the other Board put it in at $6,000 ?
A. Yes, sir ; the other Board put it in at $6,000.
Q. And you had it in at $6,000 ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You didn't take any pains to correct it ?
A. Not from looking at the property.
Q. Don't you go around with a fresh book every year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When you go over an estate, don't you put it down
in columns, land and buildings so much?
A. No, I don't think we do.
Q. You do not ? Don't you have an assessor's book ?
A. We have what we call a street-book for taking the
estates, and where there is any change in the buildings or
any thing of that kind, we make a note of it.

114
Q. Then you don't make a re-assessment every year ?
A. No, sir.
Q. You go along, and if there have not been any changes,
what do you do then ? What do you do when you get up
to your office ?
A. WeU, last year we did very little with buddings, and
we would have been governed a good deal by the previous
assessments. Q. How did you act last year ?
A. We reviewed all the real estate : the buildings we
did not. This year we have reduced the buildings at the
Farms that were valued too high. Last year we did not pay
much attention to the buddings : we did more on the land
than on the buildings.
Q. Do I understand you to say that you did not make
any change on the buddings in Beverly Farms last year?
A. To reduce them ? No, sir, I do not think of any that
were reduced. I do not know but there might have been
two or three reduced last year, but there have been quite
a number this year.
Q. You made some changes, didn't you ?
A. Only where our attention was called to it.
Q. Now, I argued this case last year, and this question
came up. When the Committee went down there they called
attention, didn't they, to Cotting's barn?
A. I think it has gone all over the State.
Q. Didn't the Committee, when they went down there,
want that barn pointed out to them as one of the instances
of over-taxation ?
A. Yes, sir. I think it was ; I. won't be sure about it, but
I think it was.
Q. There is no doubt about that. Now, when we came
up here that question was brought up, and you never offered
a word of explanation, did you ?
A. I don't know.
Q. Your attention had been called to it as a case of over
taxation ?

145
A. I don't know. I was not with the Committee. T
didn't go down with them. The first time I ever heard of
that barn was in this hearinsr. O
Q. That was the first you ever heard of it ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, the counsel knew about it? They went down?
Mr. Moulton. No, sir ; I never heard of it.
Q. WeU, you went down with the Committee, and saw
that barn pointed out to you as a piece of over-taxation?
A. I think the first time I heard of that barn was in this
room. Q. Did anybody offer the slightest explanation of that
last year in this hearing ?
A. I don't think it was pointed out; it might have been.
The evidence of last year will show ; but if I am not mis
taken the first time that barn ever came out was in your
argument. Mr. Moulton. I did not go with them last year. I think
Mr. Sohier went. Perhaps the estate was pointed out to
him. Q. There is not any doubt about its being pointed out.
But there was no explanation made in the opening of Mr.
Sohier, or in the argument of Mr. Moulton, or in the argu
ment of anybod}'' else, as to why that was done ?
A. I answered that, and said I did not think the subject
was mentioned until you made your argument.
Mr. Steaens. The cipher business, this is the first time
it was put in.
Mr. Sohiee. No, it was put in last year.
The Witness. I will bring the abatement book up, and
show you when it was abated. We have the abatement in
the book, and Mr. Cotting's letter.
Mr. Sohiee. It was put in by agreement; and you will
find it was printed. (Referring to p. 226 of remonstrants'
book of arguments and testimony.)
" C. U. Cotting's barn, which was mentioned in the argu
ment for the first time, .was assessed $6,000 last year, on

146
account of a clerical error. It should have been $600, as it
was in 1884. This year it was copied from last year's valua
tion book at the same value, of $6,000. It has .been abated."
Mr. Steaens. I would like to say this to the Committee :
That not a solitary word of evidence was introduced to
explain this ; but afterwards, when the book was made up,
they wanted to put in a lot of stuff, after I had argued the
case, on what I have questioned about.
Mr. Moulton. It was put in by agreement.
Mr. Stearns. I agreed you should put in any thing you
had a mind to.
Mr. Sohiee. It was not put in after argument.
Mr. Steaens. Yes, sir. It was not testified to by a living
soul. Mr. Moulton. If the agreement amounts to any thing, I
suppose it is properly in the record.
Mr. Steaens. I agree it is properly in the record.
Mr. Robinson. I understand it was not testified to by
anybody. Mr. Steaens. It was shown to the Committee.
Mr. Robinson. I was not present with the Committee
last year.
Mr. Williams. I was, and I will swear to it.
Mr. Robinson. I don't think it is properly in here, in any
shape. Mr. Steaens. WeU, you and I have got that to start
with, and we will make the best of it.
Mr. Robinson. Before we pass from this, let me refer to
the record. Here is the record with regard to putting in that
list (pp. 217 and 218, remonstrants' record).
" The Chaieman. We wiU not close the case untU that
is definitely settled. With that exception, I understand
your case is closed."
Mr. Steaens. We agreed they should put in any thing
which they wanted to, and they put that in.
Mr. Moulton. Was not that submitted to you before
it went in ?

147
Mr. Steaens. I presume it was. I never saw it. I sup
pose you put in what you had a mind to.
Q. Now, Mr. OdeU, I only want to ask you one question
further about this Sears estate. You brought up that old
inventory of 1874?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have yon made any inquiries to know what change
there is in that property ?
A. I have. I have been inquiring of parties.
Q. Of whom ?
A. I cannot tell you now who it was.
Q. You cannot name anybody, then, that you made any
inquiries of to find out how the Sears estate stands ?
A. I don't think of any one in particular. I inquired at
the city haU and other places. As I say, we have treated
this estate the same as we have treated all others.
Q. They are Beverly folks, are they not, and the personal
estate is taxed in Beverly ?
A. This estate was probated in Boston, and we came to
the Boston Probate Court to find out.
Q. Don't you call them Beverly residents ?
A. I do.
Q. And tax them as such ? And Charles U. Cotting, the
one that owns the barn, is trustee of the property ?
A. He is the one that pays the tax.
Q. A good man ? A good fellow to stand a tax, I should
think, if he don't know the difference between $6,000 and
$600. A. He never complained, sir.
Q. Do you know any thing more about the Sears estate
than that which you have stated?
A. I do not.
Q. Your information is 14 years old?
A. Yes, sir, it is.
Mr. Moulton. I shall not ask the Committee to wait.
There is another witness whom we expected to put on, but
he is not here. We rest here, Mr. Chairman.

148
The Chaieman. Have you any thing in rebuttal, Mr.
Williams ?
Mr. Williams. No, sir, we rest here.
The Chaieman. We will adjourn until tomorrow morn
ing at 9.30 o'clock.

LIST PUT IN EVIDENCE.

VALUATION AND TAXES IN THE PROPOSED
TOWN OF BEVERLY FARMS.

Faems Peecinot.

Non-Residents.

FerBOnal.

Henry Adams .
Sydney Bartlett
Benjamin G. Boardman heirs,
Edward Boardman .
Mrs. Edwin A. Boardman
Edwin A. Boardman, heirs
J. ElUot Cabot .
Hall Curtis
James F- Curtis
Charles H. Dalton
George Dexter .
Reginald H. Fitz
Mrs. Ozias Goodwin .
Mrs. E. W. Gurney ,.
Francis L. Higginson
Otis Howe
Charles E. Hubbard .
Charles C. Jackson .
Henry P. Kidder, heirs
Henry Lee
James Luke
Otis H. Luke .
Frank Morrison
John T. Morse .
Samuel T. Morse
Charles J. Paine
C. J. & R. T. Paine, trustees
Robert T. Paine

$2,200

Eeal.
$24,400 2,075
3,025 2,775
17,950 20,025
36,200 7,1008,325
61,850
15,850
40,000 21,100
45,400 91,800
12,100 32,450 30,40096,10077,70013,300 16,700
15,400 16,100 29,100
64,250
45,800 64,375

150

Non-Residents.

Personal. Real.

Henry Parkman .... fl,200

Elizabeth Perkins

21,800
EmUy W. Preston
19,500
Emily West Preston
11,300
WiUiam G. Preston .
9,350
Robert S. Rantoul
26,675
WiUiam B. Sewall
20,900
Charles G. Stone
2,800
Charles Storrow
63,975
Sebastian B. Schlessenger .
104,100
Eugene V. R. Thayer
68,650
Ellen T. Vaughan .
4,800
Andrew C. Wheelwright
30,500
Henry Whitman
39,500
Twenty-eight small es
tates
14,300
Totals
$2,200 $1,351,000
Summer Residents taxed on personal property,
John A. Burnham
John Burnham et als. trustees
Franklin Dexter
Frederick Dexter
F. Gordon Dexter
James P. Farley
George Gardner, estate
Geo. A. Gardner trustee for E. Loring,
Helen M. Gardner
Edward B. Haven
Franklin Haven
George P. King .
John Knowlton .
Augustus P. Loring .
Caleb W. Loring
Caleb W. Loring, trustee .
Ellen Loring
Louisa P. Loring
Thornton K. Lothrop
Thornton K. Lothrop et als. trustees
Charles J. Morse
Personal.
$140,000
Real.
746,050
$45,400
9,000
25,000
34,775
106,950
52,150
5,400
258,000
76,825
29,400
102,200
1,350
64,600
433,150
65,600
9,100
4,400
14,200
51,000
92,525
8,500
16,175
8,600
53,800
125,350
654,675
11,200
8,600
151

Summer Residents taxed on personal property. rereonal.
E. RolUns Morse .... $12,000
John T. Morse, Jun  4,300
Mrs. John T. Morse .... 10,000
WiUiam C. Paine .... 675
Charles A. Reade .... 30,000

Real.
$18,750 50,650
60,000

Totals

. $2,453,425 $1,034,875

Between Faems Peecinot and Peoposed Line.

Non-Residents.
Frank Bartlett .
Sidney Bartlett .
Ira D. Batchelder
Martin Brimmer
Alexander Cochrane
Charles U. Cotting
William Endicott, Jun.
John L. Gardner, Trustee
John Tudor Gardner
Abigail Gentlee .
George A. Goddard
Jane L. Gray
WUliam H. Hathaway
Susan N. Jackson
John G. King .
Charles G. Loring
WUliam Powell Mason
Francis W. Palfrey
Charles L. Pierson
Daniel W. Preston
Thomas E. Proctor
Cora L. Shaw
Michael W. Shepard
Horace B. T. Taylor
Stephen G. Wheatland
Asa Whiting, Heirs of
Solomon Woodbury .
George A. Gardner .
Totals

Personal.

$1,500

1,100 1,000 350

Real.
$23,175 27,350 925
76,700
44,600 20,600
40,700 10,700 2,600 900
32,750
41,050 1,400
55,50056,80064,80062,40025,500 24,050 150
53,80037,550 600
3,500
45,700 550860
2,575

$3,950 $757,775

152

Summer Residents taxed on personal property.

Personal.

Real.

John G. Cushing, Heirs .

. $154,400

$39,700

Richard T. Parker .

1,000

20,360

Mary T. Parker, by trustee

11,000

George Z. Silsbee, Trustee

130,200

16,750

William G. SaltonstaU

20,800

15,600

Mrs. Joseph S. Cabot

129,850

69,800

William Amory Gardner .

43,625

41,676

Elizabeth Howes

65,000

William B. Howes, Heirs of

120,000

Catherine P. Loring .

8,860
Emily D. Tyson
54,000
66,860
George D. Tyson, Heirs of
60,000
Arthur Dexter .
11,000
Franklin Dexter, Heirs of .
62,150
81,860
Francis Amory, Heirs
7,000
Totals.
. $840,025
$361,326
Total valuation of proposed town
$7,334,326
Owned by non-residents and
other
summer residents .
. $6,804,575
Owned by permanent residents
407,825
Owned by Beverly residents
121,926
$7,334,325
Income peom Taxes in Peoposed Town.
Property tax
. $93,879
Corporation taxes
. 16,958
1 nt'.fil mpmnp Tynin 'f"Pi"VPQ
$110,836
Property tax of non-residents
. $27,071
Property tax, other summer residents'. 60,027
Corporation taxes (received almost ex
clusively from above)
16,948
$104,056 5,220
Tax of permanent residents
.
Tax of residents of Old Beverlj
T .
1,560
Total income from taxes
$110,836
LIST OF SALES AND VALUATIONS AGREED
TO AND PUT IN EVIDENCE.

SHORE LAND, VALUATIONS AND SALES IN BEVERLY
FARMS.

Wm. Powell Mason, land and buildings, $41,000

Alexander Cochrane
Emily D. Tyson
Stephen G. Wheatland
Reginald H. Fitz .
Eugene V. R. Thayer
Henry P. Kidder .
Andrew C. Wheelwright
Mrs. Whitman and Miss Perkins
Thomas Gaffield and Martin Brimmer
Thornton K. Lothrop
Franklin Haven (Miller Hill Lot)
Franklin Haven (Haskell Street Lot)

Assessed
1885. 1887.

Prices Paid.

s, $41,000

$62,400

$80,000 00

. 15,000

19,600

30,000 00

. 14,000

34,850

55,000 00

. 13,250

20,700

25,000 00

. 22,600

40,000

45,000 00

. 17,000

38,650

70,( 00 00

. 30,000

66,100

112,000 00

. 19,100

30,500

45,000 00

. 32,850

39,000

75,000 00

. 4,300

7,975

24,041 50

. 15,800

25,375

35,000 00

Admitted Values.

$1,700

¦86,000

$6,000 00

600

1,000

1,000 00

$227,200 $392,150 $603,041 50

VILLAGE LOTS, BEVERLY FARMS.

James J. O'Brien
C. E. Hubbard .
Abigail Young
Abigail Young

Assessed
1885. 1887.

Prices Paid.

$1,150

$1,450

$2,200 00

6,000

15,950

20,000 00

150

300

425 00

100

150

325 00

154

Assessed
1885. 1887.

Prices
Paid.

Town of Beverly .

$1,500

$4,350

$4,691 00

Ellen Vaughan

800

80O

1,850 00

Caroline E. Lovering .

800

925

1,850 00

Sarah L. Ober

1,500

2,972

8,000 00

W. C. Loring

550

2,600

5,000 00

S. A. Fogg

150

350

812 00

$12,700

$29,847

$45,153 00

HILL LOTS, BEVERLY FARMS.

^

Assessed
1885. 1887.

Prices Paid.

. VV. Gurney ....

$10,500 $17,900

$22,500 00

Ts. Cabot (on || of the whole) .

9,388 20,626

32,000 00

$19,888 $38,526 $54,500 00

Totals of all above

$260,788 $461,523 $702,696 50

SHORE LAND, VALUATIONS AND SALES ON BEVERLY SIDE.
COVE ISALES.

H. W. Peabody
A. A. Lawrence
William Hobbs
W. O. Grover
C. Almy
C. Torrey
J, W. Lefavour
W. D. Pickman
W. Sohier .

Assessed
1885. 1887.

PricesPaid.

. $12,000

$15,700

$10,7c0 00

13,500

15,600

8,100 00

9,000

9,000

6,000 00

. 12,000

14,000

11,000 00

in Burgess estate

, 4,400

4,500 00

7,000

7,500

6,000 00

. 15,000

18,300

20,000 00

. 22,800

24,475

40,000 00

in Burgess estate

, 7,500

8,000 CO

$116,475 $114,350 00

CLOSING ARGUMENT FOR REMONSTRANTS
BY HON. GEORGE D. ROBINSON.

EIGHTH HEARING.
The Committee met at 9.30 a. m., the Chairman,
Senator Ladd of Worcester, presiding.
Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen, — Whatever shall be
the conclusion of this Committee in this important
matter, we shall all feel that the Committee have given
us a full, candid, honest hearing. We appreciate it,
and know that not only is it our due, but that it is a
pleasure and an honor to receive it. Neither can we
pass to the consideration of this case without acknowl
edging the courtesy of our friends upon the other side,
and, certainly, our relations are most cordial and agree
able. Nor can any man do justice to this occasion who
does not also recognize the kindly and hospitable spirit
with which we were all entertained at the village of
Beverly Farms. The ladies and gentlemen there I am
sure we are under obligations to ; and in their ardor and
enthusiasm they never forgot the kindliness of the
occasion, or the generosity of the spirit of hospitality.
It is apparent to me that they, in their associations with
Beverly for over two hundred years, have learned the

156
ways of good things ; and as they will continue here
after in the same association, they can be trusted to be
equally friendly, not only to every one who may come
within their borders, but to each other whenever they
meet. Since 1668 this town of Beverly has had its existence.
Whatever has made for the glory of Massachusetts or
Essex County, she has had her share in ; wherever there
has been a battle to be fought, whether in the establish
ment of the American Union, or in its preservation, her
sons have been on the bloody field, and they have con
tributed their part to our common honor and glory. She
cannot be touched nor dismembered, no one would dare
to destroy her, no one would attempt to undermine her
honor and her renown, no one could do it, without send
ing a thrill of displeasure throughout the whole borders
of Massachusetts. She has a population of 9,186 ; of
polls, 2,725; of registered voters, 1,764 ; an acreage of
8,635, a valuation of $14,287,100. You cannot be asked
to divide her because of her size. The average of the
acreage of the towns in Massachusetts is 13,066 ; 246 are
larger, and only 73 are smaller. You cannot be asked
to separate her because of her population, because all
over the Commonwealth you will find municipalities
that have a larger number of inhabitants. You know of
Chicopee and Weymouth and Pittsfield, and scores of
others, that will serve as illustrations. She has not
failed in any duty or obligation as a town. She is not
brought to the bar to answer for any defects or failures.

157
She and her sister towns are older than Massachusetts
herself. They created the State, not the State them.
Why, then, without abundant reason, should the
Commonwealth be asked to step in to disrupt her
borders, and tear off a portion of her territory to
erect it into a separate town 1 Not because there are
separate villages, because all over the State you will
find samples of the same thing. Everybody's town,
almost, is more than a single cluster. Here and there,
as interests spring up, men and women congregate and
dwell, and they are parts of the Avhole town, voting
together, exchanging the courtesy and the business of
life, and all acting together for the well being and good
order of the whole. Nor is it because, I think, that a
minority cannot govern the majority in a town. Our
government rests on the principle that the majority has
the light to govern, and we stand upon that basal fact
and element, and we fall when we depart from it. It
is not worthy of consideration, that in a town where only
a few hundred, a very small percentage of the voters,
are in one part of the town, or whether they live in
different portions of the town, they cannot always have
their own way. And we know very well, that in all
these great political controversies, one set of men goes
down, and another comes up ; the wheel turns, and
fortunes change, and the result is another one and con
trary. And yet that is the stability of our power ; that
is the source of our municipal, and state, and national
strength.

158
Nor, again, is there any ground for division in the
fact that differences arise among the people, that they
sharply contest questions of- principle and policy. That
is so in every town. If the people are only intelligent,
if they are loyal, and if they are honest, they are striv
ing after the one thing, that is, good government ; and
it is a healthy sign, that they differ, and state their dif
ferences. Have they given substantial justice to all the
people dwelling on their acres'? Have they secured
equal privileges to the people ] If so, then they have
served in the highest degree the purposes for which the
town was established. They have certainly, upon all
the testimony here, and it stands uncontradicted, Mr.
Chairman, — not imagination, but testimony, — con
ferred all the general benefits for which towns can be
called upon : such as schools for the education of aU,
public schools, the safety of the State ; the roads over
which every man, without regard to his financial means,
may travel without pay ; the care of the unfortunate
poor ; the protection of property from the invasion of
fire ; and so on, every thing that makes for the high
standing and the success of the town.
Surely, gentlemen, I shall rely upon you, that out of
your own motion merely, or out of what you know of
the history and record of Beverly, you will not volun
teer to interfere in a division of her territory or her
people. You come from other towns and cities. You
lay your hand upon one, some other men just as high in
power by-and-by will lay their hands upon yours, and

159
tear out what is as dear to you as this portion of Beverly
is to the old town.
But it is said there is some reason for it, and it will
be my duty to investigate what that reason is. It is
said, and I do not quarrel about slight differences of
figures, that 302 petitioners ask for 2,744 acres of this
land. They ask to include 288 poll-tax payers, and to
take with them |7, 334,325 in valuation. They allege a
population of about 1,300. I think it must be apparent
to you that that enumeration is undoubtedly incorrect.
It was taken for a purpose, under a pressure, and you
know very well that strong interest will even bias a
man's power to count sometimes. The census that was
taken in 1885, before there was any controversy, when
this matter was not dreamed of, must be nearly correct
even to this day. But that has been, verified by the
actual books of record in the State office, and it is
found that the population will not exceed somewhere
between 900 and 1,000. And then you apply all the
tests that we know how to apply, the number of polls
as to population, the number of school-children as to
population, and it sustains the figures of 900, and
utterly destroys and negatives an assumption of 1 ,300.
You cannot account, on any principle of percentage
that has been stated and is acknowledged everywhere,
for the fact that there is any such population there.
They say they are large enough in territory to be a
town. We say they are, and have no dispute about
that. There are other towns that have less. They

160
say they are large enough in population to be a town.
For that purpose, just that alone, I say they are, be
cause there are other towns that are smaller. Let us
not dispute about things we cannot differ about faudy.
They say they are rich enough, and I say they are in aU
conscience. (Laughter.) They are too rich, that is, com
paratively speaking. She is, as they contend here, rich
enough, but her wealth is in the hands and the grasp
of a few men, mostly summer residents and non-resi
dents of the town, that is, men who have gone there
for the purpose of a summer sojourn, no matter whether
they are recorded on the voters' books or not. But the
permanent residents, that is, those who grew in and out
of Beverly, who are Beverly-ites, farmers originally in
stock and blood, they altogether own about $410,000.
But I say she is rich enough.
What are the grievances and the reasons that are
presented for division 1 She is four miles away from
Beverly town, it is said. There is no doubt about it.
The Creator put those localities just that distance apart.
We might have done differently, but that great trust
was not committed to us. It is four miles, not four
and a half; there is no testimony of that kind No
matter if it is in my brother's opening, no matter if
it may be in the closing argument, the evidence is, —
and that is all we are bound by, not imagination, not
theory, — four miles by measurement, and nobody dis
putes it. It has never been any less, never any more.
Many other towns are just so situated. The people

161
went in there to Beverly Farms, — these very people
who are underneath this whole movement, who own
this locality, who have got the seven millions in their
pockets, leaving the little balance of about four hun
dred thousand dollars to the rest ; they went in there
when it was four miles away from the town-haU. It
has not stretched out any because they came. The
means of communication have increased, and so it is
not so far as it used to be. Methods of travel have,
as we say, annihilated distance ; and men come and
go, — we all do, you, gentlemen, all of us, — from our
homes with that facility that makes us feel almost as
if there was no distance that separates us.
WeU, it is said that for ten years they have been
sighing and weeping and longing. Nonsense! non
sense, I say, upon this evidence. You cannot find it
here. You find some one single man or another who
says, in the printed or spoken testimony, that he has
heard it talked about. But, gentlemen, you know
weU enough, as you have read it and heard it, that
this thing has all grown up within two or three years,
and that it was born in the brain of a Boston man,
Mr. Lothrop; that it was put forward as his project,
and that the old residents there voted against it, and
took no part in it, and have not, until they have been
worked into it and manipulated, and have found their
bills paid and their expenses run for them, and so now
they do not object. No, three years will cover it all;
the whole time is within that space.

162
Do they say they have been outvoted? So they
have, perhaps. I have sometimes been outvoted my
self in town-meeting. (Laughter.) J cannot be the
whole town. Sometimes I think I ought to be. I
suppose we all get that idea, but we get outvoted ; and
that is what this American Republic and this Common
wealth and these towns are for. And if you gentle
men all live with me in a town, what a baby I am to
talk about your outvoting me ! Wliat are you for,
except to stand up and express your intelligence and
your judgment as you wiin You are just as much
answerable to the community and to God above you
as I am.
No town ofiicers? That is not true. They have
had them, and they have them now. As you know, in
towns wherever there are separate villages, the officers
ai-e apportioned by common consent, not by necessity ;
and so these people have had their selectman and their
assessor and their school-committee man and their mem
ber of the board of health, their engineer of the fire
department, and they have them now. They have been
elected, not defeated, by the town. Beverly has not
taken aU the offices over to the central village. She
never thought that was right.
It is said there are differences in the conditions of
the people. So there are, and there are everywhere.
In the town proper, as it may be called, the central
village, there are, it is said, electric lights and side
walks and other conveniences. So it is everywhere. So

163
it is in the town in which I live, but the farmers and
the people round about, who perhaps walk in the night
in the darkness, and very likely in the mud, are not
any the less loyal. They recognize that where the
thousands of the people assemble, and do their business,
there must be facilities greater than where the scattered
farmers may dwell upon the hillside. These are not
farmers out there at Beverly Farms. There is only
one farm, the witnesses said, out there. It is a mis
nomer to call it the Farms. Said John Knowlton in
his testimony, printed in the book, it is all nonsense
(that is not his language, but that is the substance of
it), it is aU nonsense to call it Farms. It is not a
farming community ; there are not any farms there.
There is no barrier between these two parts of the
town. You saw what there was, gentlemen. You
rode over it with us all, and you did not knoW where
one began and the other ended. Barrier! Mountain
range ! Impassable stream I (Laughter.) Uninhabit
able portion of the country ! Where was it ? You
may look on the map, and put your memory right to
the locality, and you cannot tell where it is. A little
brook there. Beverly Farms men cannot get across
that brook ! Nobody living along that line ? But you
all saw as we went in that long and winding way over
the hill, for the purposes, I suppose, of the view in
Beverly Farms, went away off up over the hill because
it was a nice balmy day (laughter) : you saw what kind
of a country that was up there, and you saw that people

164
can live there, it is not marsh land up there. It is
a good, healthy, dry place. Not very valuable ? No,
but it is healthy. (Laughter.)
Well, there is some trouble about town-meetings.
They do have town-meetings, and it is said that people
should go to them, and so they ought. But I say, shame
on a man who is not big enough and honest enough to
attend to his duties as a citizen, no matter if he has to
go four miles. Haven't some of us, in our early days,
travelled more than that to get the conveniences of town
and schools and churches ? And possibly we have not
dwarfed into insignificance because we had pluck enough
in us to step over what might seem to the lazy man an
obstacle. Distance is nothing in such a matter as that ;
and men are not fit to ask to be incorporated into a
town, who groan about their inability to attend a town-
meeting at Beverly, even as the town is now consti
tuted. Can't get any thing, it is said. Why, gentlemen,
every thing they have asked for they have got, and they
know it. They haven't named one thing that they have
requested of the town, that has not been granted to
them ; not one. They did begua two years ago, to teU
some things that they wanted, and what did the town
do ? Stand back and say, "No, you sha'n't have them " ?
On the contrary, at the very first town-meeting they
voted every thing that was asked for. And now our
friends would seem to intimate, m the course of this
examination, as if that is against us, as if it was done
for a purpose. Well, it was done for a purpose. It

165
was the purpose not only to be fair, but to be abundant
ly generous with these people. Is it any discredit to
us that we did not want to cut them off from any thing,
that we would readily grant them every thing they
asked? And so they have had their branch library,
they have had their water, they have had conveyance
for their children to the public schools, they have had
their street lights and their police, they have had schools
and schoolhouses, they have had roads, they have had a
steam fire-engine, and a new engine-house — and you
saw it, and know whether it would be creditable to any
town in this State to own that property — and all has
been paid for, as it should be, out of the town treasury.
They haven't done any more than they ought to, but
they have done just all that these people asked. They
have only to present a request, and it is granted. It is
even anticipated. And the testimony in this case shows
you what, gentlemen? It shows that when the citi
zens, the old permanent residents of the Farms, went up
to the town-meeting and asked for certain things, like
this fire-engine and fire-engine-house, the town was
going to grant it, and did grant it ultimately, but these
summer residents walked up there and filed a remon
strance, and their names are appended to it, against
Beverly Farms having these very same things. And
now by proxy the same men come in here and whine
that they haven't had what they wanted.
Now, take the roads. The town spends upon all
the highways, $20,000 a year, and they apportion that

166
money to different districts in the town. It intrusts its
expenditure to men selected for that purpose, the sur
veyors. Out of the $20,000 Beverly Farms district has
had $6,147.30. Isn't that its fair proportion ? By whom
has it been spent ? By a hostile man living at Beverly
town ? No ; but by the same two men who for years
have done the same thing. The men selected by and
having the confidence of the people in Beverly Farms,
long before this question arose ; and, in fact, expended
by two men who are themselves petitioners before you.
That does not look like prejudice or unfairness.
Take the high school and the other schools. The
universal testimony unquestioned is that the schools of
Beverly are of very high rank. The school-committee
so testified, and all agree to it; the teacher who was
called corroborates it. There is no lack there. The
town has given them the school they wanted, and given
them the teacher they required, and kept the same
one, although an urgent and an ardent advocate for
the division of Beverly. She is still in the control
of the school. And Mr. Loring, who certainly is not
without some sort of interest in this matter, says that
in every respect the school-committee and the teachers
have acted magnanimously and generously in this whole
question of education. They say that the high school
at Beverly is too far away. Well, gentlemen, how
many scholars are there at Beverly Farms for a high
school, suppose they undertake to go alone ? Not
enough to make a decent school ; I mean decent in

167
size. Says Miss Ober, she talks of thirteen this year,
the ordinary number would be five to seven or nine.
What kind of a high school would that be? What
kind of qualifications would be demanded? How
much of the spirit of an organization would be created?
Another fact is patent and strong in its inferences.
The summer residents do not send their children to
the public schools. They send them over the railroad
in the cars to Boston, or they provide teachers for them
within their own houses. They are abundantly able
to do that. They do nothing to maintain the standing
of the public schools. Let them say nothing about
the success of the common schools in Beverly Farms,
when they keep theu* own children away from them.
For I undertake to say, that the man who raises chil
dren, — I don't care if he multiplies his wealth by the
millions, — and is able to put them into a private
school, and to educate them there, has thereby not done
his duty to the State and the Republic. I dare to tell
him that he owesit to all the people around him, the
children of the poor, to put his alongside them, let them
sit on the adjoining benches, let them go out and come
in, with the friction, and even the annoyance, and
possibly the rudeness, of the others, so that one may
help the other, and both be elevated into proper man
hood and womanhood. (Applause.) This sort of half
hearted aristocratic nonsense that some people believe in
and practise finds no sort of support in any fibre of my
nature. (Applause.) I know pretty weU, I know weU

168
enough, what it is to sit on the little old wooden bench
of the common school. It has never got too hard for
me. And you show me the men in Massachusetts, or
in the United States, who have amounted to any thing,
who will leave, or have left, any thing to be written
on their tombstones but dollars and cents, and I will
show you the men who started low down, and were not
afraid when they were boys to be associated with some
body who was not rich. (Applause.)
Well, they tell us that this is an extravagant town,
that it has a large debt. So it has, but for what pur
poses ? For the support of those institutions which are
necessary for the very vitality of the town. It is not
extravagance when money is spent for schools, and
roads, and bridges, and water and fire protection. But
then, again, this debt has not increased in the recent
years. Mr. Loring testified last year, look at it, and
you will find his statement, that the net debt was
practically the same now that it was in 1875, thirteen
years ago. Well, these people have gone out there
and bought these places and settled there ; and they
went there when the debt was just as large as it is
now, practically. There was no objection then. They
chose it as their place of domicil, — a few of them
did, and the rest as thek place of habitation for the
summer, when they quit their real residences in Bos
ton and other cities. It is true there has been an
addition for water, but that water was put in at the
request of Mr. Thornton K. Lothrop and others, who

169
must have high service for their houses in Beverly
Farm.s; and if it did cost $150,000 it comes with poor
grace Irom them to criticise it, and I do not under
stand really that they do make any objection because
of the expenditure.
They tell us, too, that they pay out more than they
get. They say they pay in a surplus of $49,000 to
the town more than the town spends upon them to
keep them going; and that is, no doubt, true. But
that is not a good and a reasonable argument to make.
It is the argument of a man who has his pockets full,
and says, "I will keep all I have except what will
contribute to my own gratification." It is the argu
ment of utter selfishness, whenever it is made. Why,
suppose the people down here in the Back Bay in
Boston, who Hve along on these wide and spacious
and elegant avenues, should button themselves up and
say, " We will not pay any thing more than is spent for
us, and our families, and our households." Wouldn't
that be dangerous doctrine in Boston? Wouldn't it
be threatening in its intent for Massachusetts ? Once
in the while you have heard some old grunter say in
a town, " I haven't any children, and I sha'n't pay any
money, if I can help it, to educate other people's."
But he is not a man whose appearance is established
in marble for the admiration of coming generations.
(Laughter.) He is not written up and emblazoned in
the history of his town or his State. May God bless
him now and hereafter in his littleness, and may

170
there be enough of eternity hereafter so that he may
grow somewhat into the stature of a decent man.
(Applause.) Money isn't good for any thing for us
who have a little brief mortal life, except to spend it
properly; and no man can spend his wealth to any
better purpose than in uplifting his fellows, and, possi
bly, pouring out his dollars in a proper way for the
benefit of the mechanic, and the toiler, and the laborer,
the poor girl, and the children of all these families that
seem so humble, so that the great mass may be leav
ened, and the whole raised into dignified citizenship.
Well, a city form of government, it is said, is coming.
But there is plenty of time, gentlemen. You needn't
divide Beverly this year on that account. Their popu
lation is a little over 9,000, and you know it takes
12,000 at least to make a city. Chicopee has been
threatened with cityhood for a great many years, and
it has been fluctuating between 11,500 and 11,799
for about ten years, and she probably will not be a city
just at present. Beverly is quite a town, but there
doesn't any thing indicate she is going to jump into that
great size right away. Gentlemen, I beg that you wUl
not act precipitately on this matter, for I really think
you can fairly trust to the probabilities and say she will
not be a city before next January. (Laughter.) You
need not act upon the assumption that she will.
Now, I come to another matter, and I approach it
with a good deal of hesitation, because, if the facts were
as alleged, I should feel, perhaps, that there was some

171
show of reason for a division. I hesitate the more
because it is an entirely unnecessary assumption. It is
thrown into the case in the ardor of the minds of a few
men and women. I refer to the statements about the
hostility between the different parts of the town and
among the members of these two communities. I don't
know what my fair-minded friend and elegant gentle
man who opened this case was thinking of. He is a
calm, agreeable gentleman ; I know him of yore. He
has a warm grasp and a tender heart, and he is a truth-
teUing man ; but when he got up here and said that
they had been " spit upon," thalf they had been " taxed
to death," that they had been called " ingrates " and
" foreigners," and that there was a " common hatred "
and a " common feud " between them, and that they had
been " stoned," and that they had been " burned in
effigy," I thought he must have got into the " Witch
Woods." (Laughter.) Why, bless me, he don't know
what he is talking about, although he has been three
years upon this project. There is no evidence upon
any of these things, and everybody knows it. Who has
exercised his salivary glands upon any Beverly Farms
man? (Laughter.) Have you named him? What
man has been burned in effigy? Who has told us that ?
No matter what these open-mouthed and constant talk
ers will tell you all around in the byways. No matter
what those very enthusiastic gentlemen who rode in that
big sleigh were ready to jerk out at every corner in ac
centuated tones. No matter about this or that in the

172
way of imagination. The fact we want, and it is not
here. And it is stretching the case a good deal to try
to put people in such a position that they really think
they have been spit upon when they have not. I rather
think a Farms man knows when anybody spits on him.
I guess so ; yes, I know so. Ingrates and foreigners !
Paupers, said one. There has been no such testimony
in any way here. They say they cannot be reconciled.
Well, they haven't come to any such condition of things
as that. It is not so. Oh, it is terribly overdi'awn,
wickedly exaggerated. My friend was swept off of his
feet. If he weighed twd hundred pounds he would have
kept on the solid earth. (Laughter.)
Well, now, let us see what the grievances are, and
see all there is about them. Here is Mr. Loring,
Augustus P. Loring. He doesn't need to be looked
after very much, or tenderly handled. He thinks he
knows about all there is, and what he doesn't know
of the division question the rest of us wouldn't care
to pick up. (Laughter.) Now, he says a few boys
insulted him. Well, I have met with that sad fate
myself. (Laughter.) I used to think sometimes, when
I kept school, that the boys didn't entertain perfect
reverence for me. I wondered at it, but it was so
nevertheless. (Laughter) Well, Mr. Loring got off
the train to buy a paper, and there were some of the
Beverly boys who whooped her up on him. (Laughter.)
That hurt him, didn't it ? Bad boys ! But I wouldn't
wonder if even my old friend, John I. Baker, used to

173
do that sort of a thing when he was a boy (laughter),
as good a fellow as he is. I don't know about you,
either, Mr. Chairman, and I wouldn't tell if I did
know. (Laughter.) But the boy that has not done
something that would shock the sensibilities of the
old man, or even of as old a man as Mr. Loring, is
a rare boy, to say the least. (Laughter.) Well, what
was done to Mr. Loring ? Any thing very serious ?
Anybody stone him? No. He says he has been on
the school-committee, and that he has been before
the town officers, and in all the relations wherever
he has approached the town and the people, he has
been treated in a proper, and respectful, and perfectly
honorable way. He says that the man who brings
his goods to him from the store harangues him on
the question of division. Well, let him harangue
him ; it won't hurt him any. It doesn't hurt an intel
ligent man to be talked to upon a prominent subject
like this. They got a little excited down there last
year in both these villages, I should think, from what
I read in the papers. I rather guess both of them
made some noise. One got ready to and didn't, per
haps (laughter), and the other got ready to and did.
(Laughter.) That is all the difference.
Well, the schools are all right. That is what the
teachers say. They all say that Mr. Hurd, the princi
pal of the high school, — and you recollect the ques
tion I put was about the high school, not about the
others, because the Farms children don't have occasion

174
to attend the others, — even Miss Ober says Mr. Hurd
is a gentleman in every way, and he does every thing
he can to prevent any ebullition of feeling. That
seems to be the universal testimony. Mr. Loring
himself says that the teachers are not open to any
objection on that score, and he knows it, for he is
situated right where he can tell. Miss Ober got
against a snag. I submit that Miss Ober volunteered
a little bit of talk which, perhaps, it would have been
just as well, and quite as polite, if she had kept to
herself. She is a nice lady, I have no doubt, but she
was a little heated over this question. Probably she
had got all ready, expecting that the bill would go
through, as it did, to have her little shout when she
got home to Beverly Farms You find her in the
cars riding with a stranger, a lady, to whom she had
not spoken, and whom she didn't know. A gentle
man comes along from another town, and speaks to
the other lady, and Miss Ober interjects her remark.
I don't know what men will do under such circum
stances ; but I do know what women are liable to do
(laughter), and Miss Ober did just the same as all
the women of this blessed Commonwealth have been
in the habit of doing, and as the sex started to do
soon after the Garden of Eden. (Laughter.)
The scholars are amicable. This talk about the ill
feeling between the scholars is not substantiated. It is
all disposed of, gentlemen, by this last testimony that
crowns the case, fron^ which you learned that Ford, the

175
son of a coachman living over in the district way down
there in the Cove, in Beverly Farms, beyond the Cove,
was chosen by the Beverly High School Association
president for the last three years. That boy, I have no
doubt, is bigger in his manhood, to-day, than these
little pygmies that are going axound and trying to
convince him and others that his associates don't know
how to treat him properly.
The Grand Army of the Republic has been alluded
to ; and when I read from the " Beverly Farms Advo
cate " I took the very Bible of the petitioners. (Laugh
ter.) I took what they support, and what supports
them, as far as it can support any thing. I read from
that, that Post 89 had received with abundant hospitality
the Preston Post; and it flowers out into thanks for
the courtesy. No one would dream from that, that
there was any want of good feeling. It was asked if
that was not when the Massachusetts commander was
present. That, indeed, was the occasion; but the
Massachusetts commander was not in the editorial
sanctum of the " Beverly Farms Advocate," if it has one.
The " Farms Advocate " expressed its judgment upon
the condition of feeling between these two Posts. And
if they didn't have in Preston Post an appropriation to
use for the decoration of the soldiers' graves, you know,
upon the unquestioned evidence in this case, that it
was because they did not petition for it as the other
Post did.
Children will often be impertinent. There will

176
always be excitement among boys and girls over ques
tions in which the fathers and mothers are interested.
I don't doubt at all that in all your towns you find even
the little boys and the little girls trying to be Democrats
and Republicans, in State and National contests ; and
they have clubs, and they march, and they insult
each other, "just like the men." (Laughter.) And
the women get heated about it, too, and they talk;
and you would think that there never could be peace
any more in the land. But the ballot-box closes, and
it is overturned, and the result ascertained ; and the
sun shines the next morning, and peace and liberty are
secure, no matter what the political orators have told
us. We all go right on in the march of progress.
Happy is it for this land of ours that the solid sub
stratum of sense is deep enough and strong enough so
that the flimsy vaporings of a day have no influence.
Now, it is said that these people can never agree.
They do agree now, even at this minute, and they smile
at this assumption that they are on these terms of hos
tility. Why, says Mi-. Loring, this will continue until it
is settled one way or the other. That is Mr. Loring's
opinion. Undoubtedly. Undoubtedly, so long as this
controversy is kept open, there will be talk about it.
But, gentlemen, the argument is not necessary or logical,
that that leads to one result, and that, that there must
be separation. Mr. Loring says, settle it one way or
the other, let them go or let them stay, and be done
with it, and there wiU be no more talk about it. I
don't doubt that.

177

Such contests in many towns and cities have thus
been ended. We remember them all around the State.
Towns that have been set off have got over their feehng,
and villages that have not been set off have got over
their feeling, and every thing has gone on all right.
And the man who says that any community of Massa
chusetts people, as intelligent and orderly as they are
on both sides of that proposed line, will not behave
themselves as citizens, because the State, in its sove
reign power and judgment, concludes it is not best
to make two towns instead of one, underrates the intel
ligence and the honesty of the people. Mr. Chan-man,
you know pretty well, and I have no doubt some of
your fellows do, that that argument was used many
years ago, that it was no use to try to have people
stay who had made up their minds to go, for they
never would stay, and they never would be happy and
loyal and reconciled again. And in the many years
that you bore the musket, sir, it was all the harder and
the heavier, and the wounds were the deeper, and the
deaths were the more numerous, because of the men
even here in the North, who said that when eleven
States of this Union, and eight and one-half millions
of the people, were determined on secession, and de
clared they would never stand again under our glorious
flag, the contest was hopeless ; but the loyal North
said, " No, we will have peace and obedience and sub
mission, and time will work out the feeling and the
sanctification, and bring back the loyalty." Well, what

178
is the glorious history of this country from that time
down to this hour ? Partisanship out, every man knows
that in those eleven States to-day, and among those
people, there is a greater loyalty to the National Gov
ernment than there was before the war. (Applause.)
Every one knows that a man from the North can travel
through those States in greater peace and safety than he
could prior to the breaking out of the Rebellion. There
is no question about it. We may differ about questions
of party politics, but that is honest and right, and we
can't stand in the face of the inevitable fact and the
honest conclusion.
Well, if, when from the Potomac to the Rio Grande
there was but one flame of secession and defiance, and
no hope of reconciliation, it was said. Peace has tri
umphed, and fellowship has been re-established ; I think
we may well say that over the little brook down there
near the Cove, possibly the white angel of Peace will
spread her wings, and flit from one side to the other, and
the people will be neighborly, as they always have been,
and good friends and good fellows together. (Applause
and laughter.)
Some of these considerations are sentimental ones.
But we are affected so deeply and so tenderly by senti
ment in our devotion to principles and to rights, that
you cannot touch the native town of a man, or his home
of adoption, without awakening a thrill of sympathy
and impulse in his breast. It is indeed sentiment to
speak of these things, but without sentiment we are

179
poor human beings. There are some people who do
not want to talk about such matters. They are inter
ested in doUars and cents. By-and-by, — let me say
what we aU know, — doUars and cents will not count.
Then the substantial things of soul and life will come
in, and possibly from some fireside where wealth has
not accumulated may go up a spirit that is pure and
white, and which shall honor the life on earth abun
dantly. But these questions of dollars and cents, and expendi
tures, are proper and right for consideration. They are
necessary in the development and the good order of a
town. And so I approach that side of the question with
the same confidence. It is said that they have been
" plundered." That is the word ; " plundered." That
is a good word ; terribly misused, though. (Laughter.)
My brother unwittingly disclosed his own sentiment
when he said that last year they plucked a bird of pass
age, and got his tax out of him. Ha! ha! It was
" mUch cows," a little whUe ago, in his illustration ; and
then it was the taU of a dog which he had wagging
(laughter) ; and then he struck upon " bird of passage."
WeU, what is a bu'd of passage, for taxation purposes ?
It is a man who doesn't live anywhere, especiaUy at
the first of May, but who Hghts here and there and
doesn't leave any thing worth speaking of. You can't
find him. He is Hke a flea ; now he is there, and now
he isn't. (Laughter.) These birds of passage that my
friend speaks of, are just the feUows that Massachusetts

180
doesn't want to encourage and support. Birds of pass
age ! Well, we have got all kinds of birds in Western
Massachusetts, and I wouldn't wonder if we have got
some of this kind there, but they are not quite so nu
merous as they seem to be down this way. We don't
run to birds of passage quite so strong up there ; we are
a little more flxed in our dwelling-places. When you
hear of a man whom you don't know where to locate,
whether he is in Boston, or Beverly Farms, or New
Hampshire, you don't know where he is, and he is worth
millions upon millions, it is a good title to give him the
name of bird of passage. I don't think the assessors of
any town wUl hurt anybody very much if they do pluck
him, and I don't know why my friend should complain
of it. I think he should have said in his opening, " AU
honor to the assessors of Beverly ; they have caught a
fellow who was trying to cheat the town and the State
out of his fair proportion Of the payment of the pubHc
burden, and they have put theu* hand on him and said,
' My friend, you can't live here under our great shield
and under the protection of our laws, and be such a
mean, insignificant scamp as you are.' " (Laughter and
applause.) If he takes any credit in that sort of a bird
of passage, I am glad that the assessors of Beverly have
caught him ; and I hope Beverly will keep on choosing
the same men, who seem to have their spectacles on, it
is said, until they get in the whole coop of that kind.
(Laughter.) WeU, they say the valuation has gone up down

181
there. Yes, the valuation has gone up. The rating
has been made higher. Yes, but it has not got above
the property. Never you fear about that. Now, at
one of the hearings two years ago, it came out for the
first time, as you have read in this testimony, that there
were a great many people there who had a large amount
of property they didn't pay taxes on, and those valuable
estates were referred to right here in this room. And
the Beverly assessors were here, as they ought to have
been, and they learned that fact right from the mouths
of Mj.-. Augustus P. Loring and others. Well, what
were they going to do? Mr. Augustus P. Loring in
formed them and the town and everybody else that
there were those people who were taxed insignificant
and unjust sums. The inference was that Mr. Loring
himself was unfairly treated, as he was, and so *was
everybody ; so was every shoemaker who had his little
house over in Beverly, no matter if it didn't add but a
few dollars to his tax, for it was just as big to him as
a few thousands to some other people. What, I ask,
were the assessors to do ? Were they to tax these peo
ple or let them go ? They didn't ask to be let go, but
with the same sort of fatality and misfortune that a great
many people have, they hadn't thought to mention to
the assessors the property they had. That is aU there
was about it. Undoubtedly they were glad to do their
part, but it had not been signified to them that it
was necessary; nobody had come around to say to
them, "Really, are you doing aU you ought to?"
(Laughter.)

182
Now, let us see how we get at this matter of valua
tion. It is not guess-work. My brother WiUiams
doesn't know any thing about it. What my other
learned brother knows, I am not going to say, for he
wiU teU you. (Laughter.) But the rest of us, I under
take to say, do not know about the valuations of real
estate in the town of Beverly. We have not the means
necessary for a judgment. Under the law, the town
chooses assessors of taxes. They are required to make
a full and fair cash valuation of the property, and to
assess the taxes so that each may pay only his just pro
portion. They are sworn officers. Their oath is not
lightly taken, I hope and trust and believe ; and, there
fore, I think that when town officers, standing in that
position, do a duty of that kind, their judgment is
entitled to more confidence than the loose statements of
men who come upon the stand here and are not sworn,
and who for a purpose at this time are ready to guess
about some person's property. I myself have a feeling
that we ought to accord to our fellow-citizens, who are
in town or city offices, a spirit of fairness. There is a
Httle too much of this undermining and cheapening of
official jurisdiction. There are scamps in office, un
doubtedly, but the men who come to the Legislature,
and the men who are the selectmen, the men who are
the overseers of the poor, the men who fill the ordinary
official places in the towns and cities, I take it are
honest as a rule. I should have a heavy heart if it
were otherwise in my mind. I have no patience or

183
sympathy with the men who go around and say, " WeU,
aU these fellows are thieves, rascals." No, I think if
we have any thing that is worth keeping, and if there
is any thing left in Massachusetts, it resides in the
average intelligence and honor and integrity of the
people ; and, therefore, I am going to give some credit
to the assessors who swear they will do their duty
honorably, and proceed to do it.
You were taken down there the other day in that
wide and spacious barge to see the country. The land
was covered with snow, the air was full of frostiness
and discomfort, and though we might have looked very
wise, I think we didn't feel very wise at the time. I
have no doubt that every one of us felt that he was a
very poor judge on the value of property in Beverly
Farms or Beverly at that time. We went around and
looked about, and we saw this place and that place, and
things were pointed out to us, and the excitement of our
attendants came in on the one side or the other, and,
" This was the place," and " That was the place," and
the elocution and gestures were multiplied upon us until
it was worse than a haUstorm. (Laughter.) We knew
a good deal about it, didn't we, from our own observa
tion? But I am not going to set myself up as a judge
whether the tax rate and the valuation in Beverly Farms
is fairly put or not. I am going, to get at it in a proper
and statutory way. I can imagine aU sorts of things.
I might possibly have a personal quarrel with the as
sessor who I thought wanted to value my house too

184
much, but I guess after all the judgment of my neigh
bor who lives across the street, or of others in the same
town, or round about in the same county, on such a
question as that, would be freer from bias than mine.
I have no doubt a good many of you felt as I, perhaps,
said there, that the whole thing wasn't worth ten cents
an acre, — on such a day as that. (Laughter.) It
makes a good deal of difference whether you go there
in the winter time or summer. When we were up on
the hills there, and looked away out, and saw the break
ers of old ocean dashing against the rock-bound coast,
and beyond the white caps on every hand, it looked too
cold and frosty, and we didn't want to stay there to ad
mire it. But in July and August, it is quite another
sensation, as we all know. Then we would deHght to
visit there, and linger upon those hUls, and sit upon
those rocks.
Full and fair cash valuation ; just proportion of tax
ation. Now what is the remedy, if the assessors make
a mistake, or go wrong? It is all written in the statute
book ; it is all provided for. Any man who is dissatis
fied, has his remedy of appeal to the County Commis
sioners. One man, Mr. Haven, and he is the only one,
has appealed ; but we know well enough that if the
others thought that they were unjustly treated, they
would have done the same thing. It wUl not be said, I
trust, that they are not able to carry on an appeal, that
they cannot use their money, or that they haven't any
by which they could employ counsel, any one of these

185
gentlemen, to prosecute an appeal. That is altogether
too flimsy. They are able to take care of themselves,
and if they thought they were taxed too high they would
say so, and they would say so to the Board of County
Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners
have heard Mr. Haven's case. They very properly have
withheld their decision, so as not in any way — I hope
that was their motive, if no other — to influence or
indicate a judgment on the matter, leaving you to
pass upon this question, unbiassed in any degree by
what might seem to be their opinion. But we know
very weU that that appeal has gone on in the proper
way, and is to come to a conclusion. Now, I say that
every one has the same opportunity, and would use it if
he felt there was any occasion for it ; and the fact that
they have not, is a ratification and confirmation of the
assessment Hst made by the assessors.
WeU, isn't that land valuable? Nothing but rocks!
Can't be used for tUlage ! A forsaken place ! It cer
tainly looks Hke it in the winter. But there are a great
many Beverly towns in Massachusetts, many such a set
tlement. We have one at my home. There is one in
your town, Mr. Chairman; there is in everybody's
town. There are plenty of places where people live,
but there is but one North Shore in Massachusetts.
There is but one place where there is a crop of Beverly
rocks with the resounding sea in the front. Old ocean
does not play her music for the ears of the residents of
Berkshu-e. Those in other counties have no such con-

186
dition of things as you find there, except right on the
shore. So you may go all through Massachusetts, and
you do not find those elements of grandeur and sublim
ity which constitute the real value of these locations.
Not valuable ! Well, they are valuable, because people
think so, because people want them, wiU have them,
want to pay for them. When you put them up for sale
people of intelligence and good judgment buy them, and
that fixes the value. You change the conditions, and
you change the value. We can supply you from Hamp
den. County rocks in an abundant amount and to satisfy
you, and we won't charge you any thing near what the
Beverly rocks are worth. If you will come and live on
them, we wUl sell you those rocks cheap. There are
plenty of them, extending way up into Berkshire and
aU along on the hills.
Mr. Stearns. And better rocks, too. (Laughter.)
Ml-. Robinson. And better rocks, too, undoubtedly.
At any rate, I want to advertise our rocks. (Laughter.)
Of course we don't aUude to our private rocks, because
we haven't any. (Laughter.) If people didn't want
these places down there they wouldn't buy them, they
wouldn't sell for any thing. But some people want
them, and can afford to have them. That is the secret
of it. You will find it so to a degree aU along on
the shore in various locaHties. I cannot afford to buy
one of those places. I hope, Mr. Chairman, all of
you gentlemen are able to, but I cannot. It is too
much for me. I can't pay any $112,000 for a house-

187
lot; but I don't blame any man who has his ten or
fifteen mUlions of dollars, and doesn't know what to do
with the income rolling in upon him every day, — I
don't blame him if he wants to enjoy a summer place
like that, and is willing to pay what would be a de
structive price to me and to the great majority of
people. I have known people to go and give an ex
travagant price for a picture, a great price running up
into the thousands of dollars, or for some little piece
of maxble. WeU, you show that to a shoemaker or
a hod-carrier, and he is not going to put his milHons
into it. (Laughter.) He would rather have some
thing else. It is beef, and pork, and cider, and a little
tobacco, perhaps, that he had rather have. Possibly
another man wiU have luxuries of another kind. I
might mention even a horse that is deceptive and
tantalizing, but I won't, for that is the domain of my
learned brother. (Laughter.)
WeU, the people wanted assessors there, after the
meeting two years ago, to fix the value on the lands,
and so they proceeded to choose them. They went
down to Beverly Farms for one man, and they selected
for that purpose whom? Mr. Thornton K. Lothrop,
certainly an able, competent and honorable gentleman,
one who would know about the value of those estates in
Beverly Farms, and who would know, probably, some
thing about the personal property of the people living
in Beverly Farms. He hadn't gone to Europe ; don't
let anybody say that to you. He was there, but he

188
declined to serve. Then they proceeded to choose some
body else. They tried to get the best. They wanted
to get a man upon the board who would, if they were
wrong, set them right. It may be said that the Farms
people named somebody else, but they didn't elect him.
Perhaps so. There are people who have got left in
elections before for various reasons. It is not conclu
sive upon their honor and abUity at aU. They might
have been fair men.
It is said that these assessors went to work for a
purpose, and you have had the testimony here of Mr.
Dow and Mr. Ober that Mr. Odell said he went on
the board in order to accomplish a certain purpose.
Mr. Odell says to you — you have had him here, and
you can judge about it, I am not going to try this
question upon any narrow lines — he says he didn't say
any thing of the kind, and had no such purpose in his
mind, and was not asked to do any such thing ; that
he was urged to go upon the board, pressure was
brought to bear upon him, I suppose because they
knew he was a competent man, and he assented. But
that is not a substantial question, gentlemen, no matter
whether he did say it or did not. The question is, what
was the result ? Did they make a fak valuation ? No
matter what the purpose was. No matter if OdeU
accepted the office for the purpose of doing the very
thing which they say he did, so long as he did not do
it, that is, if he did not make an exorbitant and unfair
and unjust valuation. If he did not, then there is no

189
ground of complaint. So the important thing is to see
what is the result.
Now, let us take it by parts, real and personal prop
erty. Let us take the real estate first. There are
various ways of getting at the value of property. One
way is to ask a man what he thinks it is worth, and you
estimate the value of that opinion by the grade of his
intelligence and opportunities for judgment. There are
other ways of finding out. What have been the sales
of such property ? We all know that thatj is a good
way, and a great deal better way than the other, pro
vided you take, not one instance of a sale, but take
many, and get an average. Now, you have had the
talk, which I wUl proceed to discuss by and by, of gen
tlemen who were giving simply a guess. You have
also had the indisputable and uncontradicted evidence
in regard to all the sales of real estate that have been
made in the town of Beverly, whether on the one side
or the other of the proposed line. It is going to be
some Ulumuiation to us to know what the facts really
are. There wUl be a good deal of talk around here,
you won't hear it probably, but other people wiU, that
" There is a piece of property that is taxed for so much,
and it wiU be sold for a great deal less." But you
never find anybody to set a price on it. There was a
good deal of loud talk the other day, on that famous
ride, about such a place and such a place being for sale,
but those inteUigent and well-informed gentlemen could
not tell any thing about the price. It was for sale, oh.

190
yes ! " What is the price ? " " We don't know. We
don't set a price until a man comes along and offers
something for it." Is that the way people deal who are
very anxious to trade and get rid of property they do
not want ? Now, let us take the valuations and sales of
shore lands in Beverly Farms. And I undertake to say
that these figures cannot be controlled. They stand
beyond anybody's impeachment. They are admitted,
in fact, by the other side ; they say they are true.
There was talk about their submitting one single sale
that should qualify or explain some of these, but it has
not been put in, and therefore I know it could not be,
because my friend would not leave any thing out.
Listen now while I read, giving first the name of the
purchaser, then the valuation in 1885, then the valua
tion in 1887, and then the prices paid.

SHORE LAND, VALUATIONS AND SALES IN BEVERLY
FARMS.

Asse
1885.

3sed 1887.

Prices Paid.

Wm. Powell Mason, land and buildings.

$41,000

$62,400

$80,000 00

Alexander Cochrane . . . .

15,000

19,600

30,000 00

EmUy D. Tyson ....

14,000

34,850

55,000 00

Stephen G. Wheatland .

13,250

20,700

25,000 00

Reginald H. Fitz .

22,600
40,000
45,000 00
Eugene V. R. Thayer .
17,000
38,650
70,000 00
Henry P. Kidder .
30,000
66,100
112,000 00
Andrew C. Wheelwright
19,100
30,500
45,000 00
Mrs. Whitman and Miss Perkins
32,850
39,000'
75,000 00
Thomas Gaffield and Martin Brimmer
. 4,300
7,975
24,041 50
Thornton K. Lothrop .
.
15,800
25,375
35,000 00
191

Admitted Values.

$1,700 $6,000

$6,000 00

600 1,000

1,000 00

Franklin Haven (Miller Hill Lot)
Franklin Haven (Haskell Street Lot)

$227,200 $392,150 $603,041 50
Now we wiU take the village lots in Beverly Farms,
and see about them, the kind of property that the
poorer people, as they say, own.
VILLAGE LOTS,

James J. O'Brien
C. E. Hubbard .
Abigail Young
Abigail Young
Town of Beverly -
EUen Vaughan
Caroline E. Lovering
Sarah L. Ober
W. C. Loring
S. A. Fogg

BEVERLY

FARMS.

Assessed
1886. 1887.
$1,150 $1,450

PricesPaid.
$2,200 00

6,000

15,950

20,000 00

150

300

425 00

100

150

325 00

$1,500

$4,350

$4,691 00

800

800

1,850 00

800

925

1,850 00

1,500

2,972

8,000 00

550

2,600

5,000 00

150

350

812 00

$12,700 $29,847 $45,153 00
Now, hiU lots at Beverly Farms; let us look at
those. HILL LOTS, BEVERLY FARMS.

E. W. Gurney
Mrs. Cabot (on |f of the whole)

Totals of all above

1886. 1887.
$10,500 $17,900
9,388 20,626

PricesPaid.

$22,500 00
32,000 00

$19,888 $38,526 $54,500 00

. $260,788 $461,523 $702,696 50
Then I come to the Cove sales, over the other side,
and you wiU recoUect that the property there is of
another class.

192
COVE SALES. Assessed Prices
1885. 1887. Paid.
H. W. Peabody  $12,000 $15,700 $10,750 00
A. A. Lawrence  18,500 15,600 8,100 00
WiUiam Hobbs  9,000 9,000 6,000 00
W. O. Grover  12,000 14,000 11,000 00
C. Almy  iu Burgess estate, 4,400 4,500 00
C. Torrey '  7,000 7,500 6,000 00
J. W. Lefavour  15,000 18,300 20,000 00
W. D. Pickman  22,800 24,475 40,000 00
W. Sohier  in Burgess estate, 7,500 8,000 00
$116,475 $114,350 00
So the valuations on the Beverly side are more than
the purchase price, while on the Farms side they are
very much less.
Now, take the personal property at the Farms. No
one claims that there is any error in any of it, that is,
as to the amount. Mr. Loring says, " I don't think
there is any over-assessment of personal property at
the Farms." I think we may well say that there is no
suggestion here that there is. Therefore they properly
pay their personal property tax.
Now, as to the real estate, let us go into this question
of judgment, as involved in the question of sales. Mr.
Loring said that the sales in Beverly Farms have been
from 110,000 to |20,000 an acre. He said further that
there were no valuations made by the assessors above
|9,000 an acre in any case. He said further that there
has been no sale of land at Beverly Farms at less than
the assessed value. Now, we wUl drive a nail right
into those statements, because they will hold people

193
down when they get a little wild and visionary, and apt
to go outside of the facts in their statements.
Mr. Franklin Haven, Jr., was brought here, and he
testified that the Thayer land, including the marsh,
seven acres, was sold for |10,000 an acre ; the Kidder
estate, sixteen acres, for over $112,000; that the
Whitman sale was for $15,000 an acre ; the Tyson sale,
five and one-half acres, $55,000. Thayer paid, he said,
$70,000 for his land, and buUt a very expensive house
on it, and he would seU it at a loss of $30,000 on the
whole. But when Mr. Haven was asked with regard
to the assessment, and shown that the land was put
in at $38,650, and the buUdings at $30,000, making a
total of $68,650, he said that was not too much. Mr.
Franklin Haven, Jr., also said, " I know of no sale
below the assessed value."
Now, let us linger a little whUe under the eaves of
Cotting's barn. (Laughter.) Cotting's barn has been
so historic a building that it has been worth more than
$6,000 to the other side. A little mistake in a figure.
In looking over the evidence of last year I found even
brother WUHams left out a figure, and where it should
have been $7,391, he put it down $391, and he had to
come in the next day and ask to put in his thousands to
correct it. Even he made a mistake.
Mr. Williams. That was the printer. (Laughter.)
Mr. Robinson. He says that was the printer. It is
not kind, but it is quite natural, to lay it to somebody
else. (Laughter.) Be that as it may, somebody made

194
a mistake about Cotting's barn, and the joke of it aU is,
— there was a great deal of eloquence over it last year,
and fim, which is always welcome, it is the spice of life,
— the joke of it all is that in the printed evidence that
was put before the committee it was stated and left in
the book, before the argument was made, that Cotting's
barn had been put down at $6,000 by mistake, instead
of $600, and that before the argument was made, that
tax had been abated. WeU, of course, I am glad it
didn't reach the attention of the counsel on the other
side, because we should have lost all that fun about
Cotting's barn. But the people down there in Beverly
Farms, the young men who go down, these enthusiastic
attendants, will never forget every time they take a
sleigh load along, or one man in a single sleigh, to
show the coast, to say, " There is Cotting's barn."
(Laughter.) He won't say any thing about the mistake.
Of course I don't want them to cease talking about it,
and I hope we shaU hear about it to-day, for I know
there is now just as much occasion for it as last year.
The wonderful fertility and inventive genius of my
learned brother is beyond measure, and I expect that
even that barn may be exalted and illuminated so it wUl
be a bright feature upon the landscape, and the United
States Government may save many thousand dollars on
lighthouse account.
But if the valuations are not too high, it is said they
are disproportionate. Well, that is a fair criticism, be
cause I said the tax must be in just proportion. Now,

196
let us see. If it is disproportionate it must be as com
pared vrith the rest of the town. Nobody says it is dis
proportionate as to Beverly Farms itself. You were
taken around through Cabot and Rantoul Streets, and
saw what was there, and you might think the land
there is worth something, but you cannot make up your
minds about it except upon the evidence. I assume
you do not know any more about it of your own knowl
edge than about the other towns and cities in the State.
The testimony is that the valuation is not dispropor
tionate. Mr. Haven and Mr. Loring are ready to guess
about it, and give what they call the judgment of indi
viduals, but as to sales they say nothing whatever.
Now, what testimony have we introduced ?
Take North Beverly, that is a part of the town which
is remote. There you have four sales that have been
testified about, as foUows : —
Sale $2,200 assessed $1,950
1,000 " 1,000
600 " 600
3,700 " 4,300

$7,500 $7,850
Take Beverly Centre, ten sales, as foUows : —
Sale

.3,800

assessed

$4,200

5,000

il

4,500

4,500

a

4,700

2,220

u

2,000

196

.ale 3,000

assessed

3,000

1,500

2,250

• 1,230

1,700

3,000

2,575

1,360

1,000
3,000
2,150
$28,610
$28,075
There were three other sales at Beverly Centre which
brought $4,810, and the property was assessed for
$4,700. There were four other sales at North Beverly, of
house lots, small ones, amounting to $900, assessed at
$800. There were six other sales at North Beverly, amount
ing to $4,800, assessed at $5,075.
Then there has been some testimony with regard to
Rialside. Some sales have been made there of smaU
lots for small homes. A farm has been cut up, a por
tion of it been sold, the best part disposed of, and the
marsh lots and the remote lots kept, so that the rest of
it is worth but a little, as the owner said. A large sum
of money has been spent in developing it, and it has
been sold so that there has been a slight advance, and
I am ready to give what the fact is, over and above
what the assessment was for. There is no doubt about
that. Now, not one word has been offered to contradict
or explain these facts. Not one man has made any criti-
197
cism upon these facts and figures. They stand undis
puted. The petitioners have had two years to look
into this question. More than that, they have been
assisted, as you must know, from the fact that Mr.
Franklin Haven has taken an appeal in his immediate
tax case, and his case has been conducted, I doubt not,
by able gentlemen, and some of the other petitioners
here have had the benefit of any suggestion or fact that
might come from that investigation. So, taking it alto
gether, it is remarkable that there has not been one
single thing put in to contradict or explain these figures,
or control the unavoidable conclusion from them.
The witnesses here, you wUl judge of their intelli
gence and fairness, testified that all sales that have been
made within their knowledge, they have reported ; and
they are situated, some as residents of North Beverly,
another as an auctioneer and real estate agent, — all as
people who are conversant in these matters, — so they
would know.
As to personal property in Beverly, that is, in the old
town, Beverly Farms being all right, says Mr. Loring,
let us see what is the matter with Beverly. Well, Mr.
Loring's ignorance to him is bliss. It would be, indeed,
folly to him to be wise, because there is comfort in not
knowing any thing about a matter, provided a man can
submit his guess. He started out one day with the whole
sale declaration, that he thought he could name six
persons who ought to be taxed for $4,000,000 more
than they were. He was pressed, and he did not want

198
to tell. He said his other statements had got him into
trouble, and I should think they would. I should think
he would have a whole crop of troubles after him, if
he keeps going on in this way ; and, perhaps, trouble
" will be a corrective to him, and he wUl learn something
by and by. He told, of course, what he knows about it,
and he says : This is only a guess of mine, I don't know
any thing about it ; I don't know any thing about their
investments, I don't know what they are, but I judge
these people ought to pay so much more. Well, if he is
so well posted, perhaps he will get on the Board of Assess
ors by and by and bring his information and intelUgence
to bear. He proceeded to present some names. You
would not have much confidence in the statement of
a man who said he did not know any thing. But he
would proceed to doom them, that is what he would do.
So he proceeded to write the doom of these different
people who live in Beverly. And he started out with
$1,500,000 more on the Sears estate. And within two
minutes, though he had come in possessed of all his in
formation (he had his full judgment when he started),
and within two minutes he dropped down to a very re
spectable figm-e in his own judgment; he took off 25 per
cent from the $1,500,000, right off, the fii-st opportunity.
WeU, that did not strike you, in my judgment, very satis
factorily. He could not teU any thing definite about any
of the Sears famUy or theu- investments. Then he de
clared Mr. A. N. Clai-k and family had $40,000 that
they ought to be taxed for. Mr. Clark came up here,

199
and he said he wished he had ; he would be happy. I
don't doubt him. And he said that he had a wife and
daughter, and that one of them had about $100, and the
other about $200 in the savings bank, and that is all
they had. WeU, I sympathize with him. Possibly Mr.
Loring can make it right with him, I don't know, but
that is the only way it can be fixed up. Then he struck
again upon David Sears. He said : " There is $500,000
to be put on David Sears." He asserted Mr. Sears was not
taxed in Boston. Now, it comes right out here, on the
unquestioned proof of the assessors' office in Boston,
that David Sears has been taxed always here in Boston,
taxed a poU and property tax, and is now taxed this
year. Then off goes $500,000 of Mr. Loring's esti
mate. Mr. E. L. Giddings he doomed at $25,000.
But it appears that it is aU invested in his business
in Boston, and taxed here. Dr. Charles Haddock and
famUy were doomed for $30,000, and it appeared by
the statement of the assessors that he had nothing, and
they knew it. So I vrill not spend any more time about
this matter, but you can take them all and look them
up. Take the Sears inventory, and it will be said that
it was made in 1874, and it may have increased since
that time ; I say on the other hand it may not have in
creased ; we don't know ; if it may have, the invest
ments may have been put into something that is not
taxed in the State of Massachusetts directly. He does
not know of a single investment, and he cannot teU
any thing about it. He said he could tell about the

200
Farms people. He said he could tell whether F. Gor
don Dexter was taxed more than he ought to be or not,
but he would not. He is a good witness, isn't he ? He
ought to be kept for future emergencies. If there ever
is a town petition of any kind, and any testimony is
wanted on the question of valuation from a man who
doesn't know any thing about it but who is vrilling to
guess, send for Augustus P. Loring. (Applause.)
An honest young man, I have no doubt; I would
not say any thing against him personaUy, for the
world ; I have not any belief against him, but he
is carried off of his feet in this talk ; it is his only busi
ness, I judge, to go around, working up an issue ; it
stays with him, it sleeps vrith him, and he thinks of it,
and dreams of it, and he walks with it until it wiU not
down. That is all there is of that. He will know more
in future years probably.
The problem of taxation is not an easy one, and when
it is applied to ourselves, it is not agreeable. I believe
the State of Massachusetts appointed a tax commission
some years ago, to see what could be done to make the
methods of taxation sure, unerring and satisfactory to
the people ; and I remember a friend of mine saying in
regard to it, that the only principle that could be applied
to that was that, " T'other feUer ought to be taxed."
That is all there is to it. The scheme is all right, it is
the application of it to which objection is made. We
don't want the typhoid fever on our side of the street,
we don't have fever and ague here, we are sorry for the

201
other fellow, but we would a little rather he should have
it than we. "Taxation must be appHed, of course,
rigorously, but pass my house." That is the way we
talk about it. Somebody said, — not here in this room,
but outside, — and somebody will say : " Well, there is
no such value in that land ; nobody but fools will give
any such money as that for it." That is a serious
imputation, of course, for here you see men of good
judgment have bought. Again it may be said :
" If they should try to seU, nobody else would
want to buy it." That is an unnecessary assumption.
There are plenty of people who would buy it, plenty
of people in Boston who are worth enough to buy
it. The Back Bay is crowded with those who have
their millions untold, whose wealth perhaps even the
assessors do not know the depth of, and they are ready
to buy that land, and put up their houses where they
may enjoy health and comfort, peace and prosperity
only a little fraction of the year. To take that property
at the Farms and carry it away, and let it be taxed by
itself, and let it lay its own tax by itself for its own use,
I say is unfair and unjust. One-ninth of the population
of the town wants to carry away one-half of the prop
erty. The valuation per poll in Beverly would remain
at $2,660, and the valuation per poll in Beverly Farms
would stand at $25,466, or nine and one-half times as
much. And is this Massachusetts, where it is proposed
to do that?
Let us see what the effect on taxation would be.

202
The figures are agreed to, upon the present system of
valuation. Beverly Farms has now a valuation of
$7,334,325 ; she receives in corporation and bank taxes,
$16,958; she has 288 polls. It is agreed, on the
statement of Mr. Loring, that she must raise annuaUy
$70,000. To get this amount, less the corporation and
bank taxes and poll taxes, the tax rate would be $7.15
per $1,000. Further, Beverly would have, after the
proposed division, a valuation, as now established, of
$6,952,775 ; she receives in corporation and bank taxes,
$10,261, and she has 2,453 polls.
It is agreed that she must raise $155,544.01. To
get this amount, less the corporation and bank taxes
and poll taxes, the tax-rate would be $20.19 on $1,000.
The present rate is $12.80. The result would be,
that Beverly would increase her tax-rate fifty-five per
cent, and the Farms would decrease theu- tax-rate forty-
four per cent. And this is Massachusetts yet !
State it in another way. Beverly's whole income
for the year by tax on property and polls is $188,-
324.88, from corporation and bank taxes $27,219.13,
making a total of $215,544.01. That is what, by her
present method of administration, she needs and spends.
If the Farms goes off, Beverly will save in the running
expenses of the Farms, including half the state and
county taxes, according to Mr. Loring, $30,000,
and one-half the interest on debt and sinking-fund,
$30,000, making $60,000; then she wUl need and
must raise at the present time the balance, or $155,-

203
544.01 ; the income from corporation and bank taxes
is $10,261, from polls $4,906, amounting to $15,167,
and leaving to be levied on property, $140,377.01.
With the valuation as stated, $6,952,775, the rate of
taxation would be $20.19 on $1,000, the same as
before, now tested in two ways. If the same principle
is applied to the Farms, the tax rate would be $7.15
on $1,000.
Now, aU the answer that is to be made to that, I take
it, all that I can think of, is this : Put up your valuation
in Beverly ; if the tax rate would be doubled, then
double your valuation and you will have no trouble.
The only difficulty about that is that while it is a plaus
ible scheme, it does not rest on the facts. There is no
fact here in this case that justifies the doubling of the
valuation ; that is begging the whole question, that is to
give up aU the facts in this case. It is not admitted,
says my brother, and he wUl so argue, no doubt ; it is
not admitted that that is the true valuation of Beverly.
But, gentlemen, it is the proved valuation of Beverly, it
is the testimony, and that is better than imagination or
wUd assertion. Put all the sales in the town, in both
viUages, right up here on the wall, let any man study
them and contradict them if he can, as any one may do
here to-day, and I ask you, in view of the fact that
the proof stands wholly unquestioned, by what right
can it b'e asserted that the valuation in Beverly
Farms is not right, and that the valuation in Beverly
is not right? Facts we want, and facts we have.

204
There is no dispute about them. If yon say the valua
tion ought to be more in Beverly, on what evidence does
it rest ? On none whatever ; only upon pure, unjusti
fiable assumption.
Let us see how this town would stand as to something
else. What have they to do if they start out alone ?
The Farms would take a hundred and fifty chUdren,
Beverly would have fifteen hundred to educate. The
Farms would have thirteen miles of road, and Beverly
would have forty-seven niiles of roads to take care of.
As to the poor : Beverly spends $7,000 a year to take
care of the poor; the Farms, 1884, spent $25, that is,
that is the amount reported to have been spent by the
town in the Farms; in 1885, $14; in 1886, $90; in
1887, $183.50. That is the whole pauper expenditure.
And the question was put whether some of these people
who had been overtaxed, had not been receiving pauper
aid, so that it had got up from $14 in 1885, to $183.50
in 1887. Well, I hope they will have aid if they need it ;
but, so far as I can judge from the names, I do not think
the taxes wiU be immediately increased on that account.
Compare this showing with other towns. Here it is
proposed to set up a town with a valuation of over
$7,000,000, without any poor people. Let us see what
the other towns are doing in the State. I take them at
random. You can find the statistics in the Report of
Polls, Property, and Taxes in the State, and in the
Report of the Board of State Charities in regard to
the support and maintenance of the poor. Other figures

205
just as good may be taken ; but these come at random
from the reports. Peabody has a valuation of $7,186,900,
and pays for paupers $7,312. Framingham has a valu-
stion of $6,845,450, and pays for paupers $3,292. Chic
opee has a valuation of $5,844,065, and she pays for
paupers $12,286. The Httle town of Chester pays $441
for paupers, on a valuation of $513,138. The town of
Stow pays $782 for paupers, on a valuation of $963,359.
Plympton, down in the southern part of the State, pays
$31 1 on a valuation of $291 ,258. Beverly Farms would be
burdened with $183.50 on a valuation of $7,334,325.
It was said long years ago, " The poor ye always have
vrith you." I should add. Except at Beverly Farms.
(Laughter.) Is that the kind of a town that ought to be
created ? WiU that make it any easier for these other
places to pay their burden of taxation ?
Then the depression in business in Beverly. The evi
dence on that point comes from a man who certainly
knows aU about the shoe industry there. And you have
it from Mr. Perry that from 1885 to 1887 the loss in the
product has been 20,798 cases, or in valuation $1,039,900,
and that the labor loss, being 30 per cent of the whole,
was $311,970. And he says that there is no increase or
development of the business, but a decrease, that any
additional burden upon it would be serious and perhaps
disastrous, and if it went on for ten years it would bring
ruin to that industry, as has already come to the fishing
industry of that town. It is said that strikes are the cause.
Strikes have had something to do with it, but the burdens

206
of taxation will lead to a smaller share of profits and
greater discontent ; at any rate, the just and sound argu
ment is that it is not always safe to stretch the cord to
the highest tension, and blame somebody else if he do
an imprudent thing under an unbearable pressure. There
are difficulties in this matter of social life and business ;
we do not want to aggravate them, certainly.
Then there is another very patent feature of ine
quality and unfairness in this matter, and that is as to
the territory between the precinct Hue and the proposed
line. Now, gentlemen, if these petitioners actually wanted
to get local self-government, as they wUl probably say,
to lay their own tax and expend it in theu- own method,
it is a little gratuitous for them to take in that territory
there where there are no people living except a very
few that belong in Beverly Farms. It is a little suigular
that when Mr. Loring laid his pointer upon the map the
first day, striking down from that point which he indi
cated at the top, against the Wenham line, to Plum
Cove, that on the left between the precinct line and the
proposed line, was included an immense amount of
property and a very few people. It is a Httle singular.
Haven't they valuation enough? Do they want the
earth? Well, let us see. Between the lines on the shore
there are a very few permanent residents, eight voters,
and these people are clustered right around there on the
edge of the shore ; but what I am to say is that if you take
them away from Beverly, their little chUdren, instead of
going half a mUe as they do now to school, wiU have to

207
go two miles to Beveriy Farms. That is no convenience,
is it ? Right in that space that I now speak of, the
valuation is $2,041,575, paying a tax of $26,152.16; of
which the summer resident and non-resident valuation is
$1,963,075, and their tax $25,127.36. WiU you teU
me any reason whatever, that Beverly Farms has for
getting that piece away from Beverly ? What sort of
justice is theVe in pretending that that ought to go?
To iUustrate : They say the assessors have ratified their
proposed line. Well, look at it. What is the proposi
tion ? Let us see who are the people that live there,
right there in that place. Non-resident people who own
their real estate and pay their taxes on personal property
elsewhere, where they live. Let us run them over.
These are the people that Hve in Boston : Frank Bartlett,
Sidney Bartlett, Martin Brimmer, Alexander Cochrane,
George A. Goddard, John G. King, Charles G. Loring,
F. W. Palfrey, Charles J. Pierson, Thomas E. Proctor,
weU-known names, exceUent gentlemen, but they are
non-residents ; their estates add largely to the valuation,
but they have no interest in Beverly except in the real
estate that stands there upon that gore of the dis
trict. Now, I say there is not any reason in the world
(and it characterizes this whole proposition), there
is no reason in the world why anybody in a sense of
fairness should undertake to draw a line that would
put these people and their property, so that the
Farms can lay their hand on it, and increase their
valuation from $5,000,000 up to over $7,000,000,

208
taking non-resident property and carrying it off. WeU,
on the same piece of land, there are Stephen G. Wheat
land of Salem, Charles U. Cotting of Brookline, WU
liam Powell Mason of Walpole, N.H., the heirs of John
P. Gardner, and five ladies, who own property. And in
all that district on the shore, there are petitioning
Richard T. Parker, Arthur Dexter, William G. Salton
stall and Arthur G. Silsbee, four voters', beside four
others who are employees of summer residents, among
all these people, owning land, and living there. Now,
gentlemen, I don't know of any thing that illustrates the
unfau-ness of the propositions involved in this matter,
better than the statement of that fact.
But, gentlemen, there is another question more im
portant than all, and that is the question of policy for
this State, and for the Legislature, which overlies and
crowns all this ; and you may take all your schools and
roads, paupers and valuations ; but it does make a large
and perpetual difference, what policy the Legislature of
Massachusetts shall adopt in regard to applications for
club and class towns, a town of wealthy people near the
water, and a town of poor laboring people just over an
invisible line. How it woiild look on the map pictured
that way ! What a resort it would be for those people
who do not feel wiUing to pay any more than they are
forced to in taxation ! Birds of passage would aUght
there. You know there are other places right around
here of the same kind. Swampscott is all ready to

209
break out whenever you wUl give the slightest indica
tion that there is any success to be hoped for. Glou
cester is another one. Marblehead another. Down
here in the southern part of the State I know of
another place that has not come here yet, but it is in
a fine position, and has all the elements. On Jerusalem
Road, in portions of Cohasset, Hingham, and Hull,
there i^ a cluster of nice people, friends of mine, in a
beautiful, harmonious community, owning summer prop
erty worth mUHons of doUars, and some of them are
thinking it would be a good place to have a town of
this easy and restful kind. So it would, on this same
principle. But I submit that the fathers wrote into the
Constitution the declaration that " government is insti
tuted for the common good, and not for the profit, honor,
or private interest of any one man, family, or class of
men." It may be called by some people demagoguism
to talk about this, but I vrill dare to stand any charge
of that kind. I say that every such policy as this, in
its appHcation touches every town and city in tht? State;
yes, and every individual, and strikes at the welfare of
us aU.
There is strength in our communities, I submit,
Mr. Chairman, not in the people highest in wealth nor
lowest in poverty, but in the great body of the middle
classes of our people, those that own a little home,
mortgaged, perhaps, to begin with, bearing their

210
burden, coUecting their savings, learnmg to be
thrifty and economical, and becoming, by-and-by,
more substantial and self-supporting. They never
escape taxation. No tax-dodgers among them, no.
This is not a party question, but it is politics in its
highest estate. I have not any tkade against wealth.
We all like it. It is pleasant. And I have abundant
gratification of heart in the charities many of these
rich men of Boston apply to relieve misfortune and
distress. But I would not give anybody the temptation,
Mr. Chairman, that there should be a town created into
which he can go, and although he shall spend abun
dantly in charity that blesses and is twice blessed,
yet possibly he may be all the time saving it as taxes,
secreting his estate so that somebody else in some other
part of the State shall carry the burden by force, and is
entitled to quite as much credit as he.
Small towns indeed are to be applauded and encouraged.
Yes. And we look back with pleasure to the little country
towns where we were familiar with the place. But after
all, gentlemen, those were not places any thing like this,
those little country towns up in the hills where we
were born ; they didn't have any such condition of
things as here presented. There was not any such
disparity of pecuniary resom-ces, such as now before
us, a valuation of over $7,000,000, of which only
$410,000 is held by people who really live there, who
were born there, while the rest of it has been carried
in and kept in that community.

211
When DeTocqueviUe came to this country and admired
our institutions, he said that thc one thing that brought
this whole matter forcibly to his mind and glorified
the establishment of the fundamental principle of our
government, was the equality of the conditions of
our people. That was in 1831. And he wrote his
book, which everybody has read, " The Democracy of
the United States," and commended the condition of the
people in our towns and cities. He did admire our
town system, but he admired it and expressed his
admiration upon that basis of equality. So long as we
keep there, we shaU be safe. But no such things
were dreamed of in 1831 as are now applied for.
It will be a graceless task and useless to take your
children by the hand and ask them to walk with you
back into the inspiring realms of history of the Com
monwealth, and point out the glorious days of the grand
old fathers who conceived and preserved the State,
it wUl be in vain for you to direct the Httle children
and try to teach them in this loyalty and patriotism and
devotion to principle, if we shaU write on our statute
books, laws that falsify the history of the Common
wealth. High-sounding resolutions may do well for public
declaration, but legalized inequality of public burdens
will not be commended by our people.
Other town divisions have been made. Yes. Other
towns have been divided. That has been the process
from the begiuning, and undoubtedly when there is

212
proper cause it must stUl continue. Cambridge once
had its Cambridge Farms which became the immortal
Lexington. Springfield has sent out of her loins a
cluster of towns like Holyoke, and Chicopee, and Aga
wam, and Longmeadow, and even down into Connecticut.
And now it is said by some people you must grant it,
because they keep coming and coming and coming ;
it is the better way to get them away from here. Are
they so disagreeable that we want to turn them outdoors?
No, I presume that is not it. Is it true that they always
get it? No, they don't. It has been said that they
always get it if they keep on asking for it. There is
never but one storm that has not cleared off, and if they
keep before you all the time, they never have been final
ly refused. In 25 years I find that there have been 120
petitions for incorporation as separate towns ; 40 have
been granted and 80 have been refused. Then, it is not
true that they always get it.
My friend here, the witness Odell, said something
about that he was tired of fighting so long. I have no
doubt that on both sides there are many people in this
controversy who would be glad when it is over, as Mr.
Loring said, settled one way or the other, and content
and delighted, whichever way the judgment may be.
If there is injustice done to these people, they in
Essex County are close by and would see it and know
it. And yet, you know very well that the fact is that
Essex County is alive on this question, and vrith one
voice is protesting against this movement. Why,

213
just listen to what the town of Danvers, just across the
line, said last year in its resolution : —
" Whereas, The town of Danvers believes that the
division of towns is a matter of deep concern, not only
where it is proposed, but to every town in the State,
and to the State; therefore, be it by us, the citizens of
Danvers in annual town-meeting assembled,
" Eesolved, That we are strongly and decidedly op
posed to the action of the Massachusetts Legislature in
dividing the town of Beverly ; that we deem the pro
posed division of the town a great public injustice,
an unwise division of territory, an unjust division of
property, and a grossly unequal imposition of the
burden of taxation. That while the whole country
is greatly agitated by the disturbed relations of labor
and capital, we deem it no time for the State of
Massachusetts to legislate in favor of the wealthy and
leisure class, and against the farmers, manufacturers,
and working people of the State."
All I have to say, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, is,
this is not a question of local self-government. These
people have it now. The issue is not that for which the
fathers in 1775 and the years that came after fought,
nor is it that for which the sons surrendered all they
had from 1861 to 1865, and were sustained by this
community ; but it is, in fact, a violation of the solid
principles upon which this government is founded and
from which we cannot depart, except with threat
ening danger to our institutions. Shake the foundations.

214
attack those of the State and the RepubHc, and the re
sult will come to you in disaster at a time you little
imagine. It may be said you approach this question to
decide it, and let other matters take care of them
selves. That is not the part of prudence, nor of pa
triotism. On the first line is ofttimes decided the contest.
Many a general commanding his troops, knows that at
the outposts was- the strong and decisive work accom
plished. Your duty, gentlemen, as I apprehend it, is to
establish a principle. You have it in your power to
maintain the right. I shall trust in your judgment. I
shall know, whatever it is, that it wUl be honest and
true and pure; if it differs from mine, I make no
quarrel or criticism upon you; if it shaU agree with
mine I am sure that you will find Essex County and
Massachusetts, from one boundary to the other, will ac
cord you the praise of a proper execution of your duty.
(Applause.)

3 9002 00574

1 I

,1 i'

<.iti-'

,'?''*•'
j'/"

'¦ Jl'" i" 'J I ' "' , ^',/ t,' " ' I' i?-ii^' 'V'^^'Ui^h)'
, ^.^.M"''^ \'a ?.. ¦?:  ^:C'M

4

fc»

%^

i;,''t<,''

;ri

' I

M

'i(^j,4

a-

yj (* <

VJMi

'I Ifl

vi'f ?iu,
h • ,< '-'i ' if.
,"!,' '„•, i'"'
, • H' ... Wl' W!
'1,4 '' >i,"Si
I'l ^T'!,*^!)'
,llJ,l,!(,,lj,i