CITY OF BOSTON.

BOSTON, June 8, 1875.

The undersigned, a minority of that committee, most respectfully dissent from the report of the majority, for the following reasons: That the evidence produced was wholly and completely a matter of pecuniary interest between party and party, and in no wise was it a demand of the great public who were inconvenienced by its present location at India wharf, and desired a change. That the evidence only elicited this fact: that certain interested persons, who, while loudly claiming to have the city's welfare at heart, were only seeking to advance their own cause, by making the City of Boston a party to aid them, by the purchase of the land necessary to attain that desired object, through the Mercantile-wharf Corporation; when, at the same time, the fact was apparent to every citizen of Boston, who might seek to inform himself, that ample and complete facilities had already existed for two years at India wharf, where the city had placed them; and in so far as ample room, general convenience, and facilities for transacting the business, in detail, of a vegetable market, general satisfaction has been universally expressed by all the occupants.

This fact is beyond the power of contradiction, by the evidence, before your committee, of a large part of the farmers and market gardeners, who were, and are, occupants of stalls at India wharf. But very few seemed to entertain any other opinion except that of general satisfaction, and only asked to be left to pursue and manage their own busi

ness, in their own way, without municipal interference, except the protection afforded every citizen, by the authorities, to pursue his calling unmolested and secure.

And, further, that the Mercantile-wharf Company, the principal party in this transaction, have long shown a desire to sell the city this land, and have been in treaty for this purpose for the past two years; but, owing to litigation on account of the laying out of Atlantic avenue, was temporarily abandoned. That they have so sought to make the City of Boston a purchaser, is apparent from the evidence produced before your committee, and that at an enormous profit, when we consider the cost of filling in the territory, and the betterment assessed thereon. For example, by the testimony of Mr. Hyde, who appeared as counsel for this corporation, and who was an officer of the company, it appeared in evidence that the city filled in, say about 81,000 feet, for which was charged $51,000. This amount covers about one-half of their property.

The whole amount, as testified to before your committee, being 165,560 feet, on which was assessed by the city betterments in the sum of $75,000 cash, and 34,000 feet of land thereon, in for extension of Clinton and Richmond streets, in addition to which was an assessment laid by the city of $10,000 for a sewer, and allowed and paid by the corporation. And it further appears in the evidence given before your committee, that the average cost of filling this territory, over and above betterments, and value of land, was $1.70 per foot, and yet, in March or April, 1875, the agent of this corporation named $5.50 as the price per foot; at the same time agreeing to extend Clinton and Richmond streets through and over the territory 50 (fifty) feet wide to Atlantic avenue. This may have appeared to have been a very generous offer. But when the fact was shown that the assessors' value of this territory in and for 1874 was $2.50 per foot, we fail to see what good reason can be given for demanding of the city

$4.75 per foot, unless the corporation imagined themselves masters of the situation," and that the necessities of the city would compel its purchase for a market, either at the present time or in the near future. Your committee are constrained to say, that from certain expert testimony, on the value of land in and about that vicinity, given in the early part of the hearing, tended strongly in that direction.

Much stress has been laid upon the fact that the present income received by the city of the market-house is equal to 24 per cent. on its original cost; and therefore the city should by all means purchase this Mercantile-wharf property at any price, as a matter of salvation; or, in plainer terms, perhaps we may say, that to arrest the deterioration of the market-house property, which will surely take place by the continuance of the Vegetable Market in its present location, at India Wharf, the city must purchase this property. This argument is a fallacy, and cannot be entertained for an instant by any intelligent man. The Market-house is a fixed fact, and its business, as well as its success, has been made solely by the thrift and untiring zeal and industry of its occupants, who have built up its enormous trade through close application and good, fair dealing. To use the common phrase, it cannot be wiped out; for wherever you may locate a vegetable market, suited to the general convenience of the people, you cannot disturb the business of Faneuil Hall Market, or hazard its success. It has continued through a long series of years (half a century), and the same line of policy is pursued there now in its method of trade as when it was commenced, — good articles, at a fair profit.

Much has been said as to the "monopoly" by the occupants of Faneuil Hall Market; and many intelligent people seem credulous enough to believe it to be true, to a certain extent. Yet to those who are conversant with the method of dealing there, and the character of the occupants of stalls and cellars, and understand the perishable nature of the several articles

"dealt in," pronounce this simply "an absurdity." The same reply can be made to the "Hue and Cry" of bonuses, which seems so alarming to many minds. And the conclusion they arrive at is, that the bonus is, in part, the increased value of the market-house, and belongs to the City of Boston as a part of its property.

"

This opinion, if practically carried out, as has been suggested by some few, in times past, who might have "envied these occupants their success, through a long series of years, would be, in plain terms, robbery. For what does any intelligent and fair-minded man mean by " Bonus"? Why, simply the value caused by fair and honest dealing, and uninterupted success, and commonly known as " Good Will," and is strictly the property of the person occupying the premises. We might, with the same propriety, take his wallet or pocketbook, and appropriate it to our own use, as to take this sum that a bonus realizes. In a word, it is part of his stock in trade.

The minority mention this matter of bonuses as an exemplification of the past success and general prosperity of the occupants of Faneuil Hall market-house, as well as “an augury" for the future, and proves the truth of this principle of political economy, that the less legislation the better in the matter of markets and market dealers; but allow them to pursue the "even tenor of their way," undisturbed, and free from a superabundance of municipal regulations. We are impressed with the force of this truth, "The greater the freedom, the surer the success," and we see no good and sufficient reason why the City of Boston should enter into the project of land purchases for a market, or in any way to control them, any more than they would to purchase and enter into any other branch of industry.

It is not within the scope of authority granted to a town or city government to do this; but it is their especial province, as the controlling power, to regulate, by municipal law,