ustxtxb_obs_1959_04_25_50_00007-00000_000.pdf

Padre Park Nearer Reality AUSTIN A national park on Padre Island, advocated by the Observer last year and since then pushed by Sen. Ralph Yarborough in the Senate, by the Houston Press and other dailies, and by State Rep. Roger Daily, Houston, became more nearly a reality Monday night in the state affairs committee of the House because of a snafu. Rep. Tom James, Dallas, said he had many objections to the Daily bill for the park, because under Yarborough’s S. B. 4, “the province we now exercise is seceded and given to the federal government.” “But out of respect for the author,” he said, and because he realized the issue was important to areas adjacent to the island, he offered a substitute plan that would give the legislature’s consent for the Department of Interior to establish the park. “I have misgivings on the bill in any form,” James added. Daily, surprising James and opponents of the park, yielded at once to the James substitute. Daily also yielded on the power of land condemnation for the state. The committee, 6-4, accepted the substitute, which says simply that if Congress authorizes a national park on Padre north of the Port Mansfield channel in Willacy and Kenedy countiesan area about 50 miles longthe legislature consents. James then opposed the bill as changed by his substitute. “In offering the substitute,” he said, “I did not cure my objections … I think it is a very bad bill. Under the terms of S. B. 4 … we will abdicate control from above Brownsville to South of Corpus Christi. For that reason I’m gonna oppose the bill.” Despite James’s opposition, the committee passed out the amended Daily measure, again by a vote of 6 to 4, with James among the no votes. Daily laughed after the hearing, “James set himself a trap and fell right into it, didn’t he?” Under the James substitute, Daily said, “I assume now that the Congress can just write the bill and establish the park.” Daily said his proposal was “more moderate. It permitted Texas to keep a certain amount of control over the organization of the park before we turn it over to the federal government.” Armand Yramategui, president of the Nature Clubs of Texas and veteran of a previous legislative fight in behalf of saving the whooping cranes at the Port Aransas Wildlife Preserve, said signs reading “No Trespassing” and “Lots for Sale” are “stormwarnings that the few remaining attractive beaches in the country are being preempted by commercial interests.” He cited a 1935 national park survey listing 12 areas containing 435 miles of beaches, then undeveloped, that would have been suitable for national seashore parks. He said only one of the twelve areas was acouired by the National Park Service in the years that fol lowed, the remainder having been bought and subdivided by commercial developers. “They are now ghosts of our departed opportunities … to save a people’s heritage,” Yramategui said. The first opponent to appear was John D. McCall of Dallas, a lawyer representing six corporations owning land on the island. He said he thought the bill had a “worthy objective” but objected to the cost of the state buying the land. At a second hearing on the bill, George Sandlin, Austin realtor with interests on Padre, opposed the Daily bill, arguing against condemnation proceedings as, he said, he was trying to work out a donation of land to the National Park Service. “He offered the state 2,000 acres. How would you get to it?” Daily asked. “Who’s going to build a road to 2,000 acres?” Daily told the committee that he agreed to limit the land for the park to the area north of Port Mansfield if Sandlin would not object to the bill in the House. This agreement was made, Daily said, but two hours later Sandlin testified against the bill. Ex-Sen. William Shireman, of Corpus Christi, also opposed the bill on behalf of some landowners. Frank D. Quinn, a member and formerly the chairman of the Texas State Parks Board, told the committee the board is on record for Padre Island National Park “and has been for many years.” Remember Box 13! Sirs: I was greatly embarrassed to read in the current issue of Newsweek that the Texas Legislature is about to pass a bill “to allow L. B. J. to have his cake and eat it too,” i. e., they plan to let him run for the Senate and the same time! They are going even further, so says the news story, and fix it so that “Dear Lyndon” can get his running over with in May instead of July and be all set to be “drafted” \(as he idency!! I just know so many Texans who do not go along with this idea of “fix it for Lyndon” that I wish you would publish my letter so that I can get a copy of it in the hands of every nice fellow on Capitol Hill. They probably think that the people want to do this as a matter of Texas pride”a chance to let a Texan run for high office”; but Dear God in Heaven!*not that Texan, not one for whom we would have to apologize!!! So here is my letter and thanks Dear Senators and House Mem bers of the Texas Legislature: Remember the Alamo! Remem ber Goliad! Remember Box 13, “We saw it from the very first,” he said. Daily hopes to have a floor run with his bill before the sesson ends. Alice, Texas!!! Are you going to let that Dictator in Washington come grandly down here and tell all of you how to change our laws and rules to fit his political ambitions? Don’t listen to that old cry, “Let bygones be bygones; let’s forget that scandal-ridden val, let’s try to put a Texas man in the White House.” I charge you that there are many Texans who would be ashamed and really fearful for our country if such a thing -transpired. People like Lyndon do not “change their spots.” Look at his arrogant handling of the U. S. Senate. It would be a major tragedy to let L. B. J. get to the White House!!! Why should the independent TEXAS Legislature follow his dictates, or those of his slavish lieutenants, and change longstanding rules and laws to suit his ambitious schemes? He may be Dictator in Washington; but please not Texas. Texans, stand in the breach, make L. B. J. follow the rules you and everyone else has followed for years; kill H. B. 158. Don’t slavishly move our primary date up to May: don’t let “Landslide Lyndon” run for two offices at once!!! Remember Precinct Thirteen! Moody, Austin. *I am not being irreverent; I mean this seriouslyI am praying that God will not so far abandon Our Country! LEGALS NOTICE TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the partnership firm of Aero-Charter of Houston will be dissolved, and notice is also hereby given of the intention of said firm to become incorporated under the name of Aero-Charter of Houston, Inc. Witness my hand this 16 day of March, 1959. AERO-CHARTER OF HOUSTON ny JAMES R. FISH, One of the Partners NOTICE J. S. Honigblum doing business as Nu-Horizon System has incorporated such business, effective March 26, 1959, under the name Nu-Horizon System, Inc. J. S. HONIGBLUM TO: All persons having claims against the Estate of B. M. Steiner, deceased. Take notice that all persons having claims against the estate being administered to present same within the time required by law; that letters testamentary were granted on the 3rd day of March, 1959; that the personal representative of said estate resides at 2808 Windsor Road, Austin, Travis County, Texas, and that the mailing address of the Executrix is 1102 Perry-Brooks Building, Austin, Texas. CITATION BY PUBLICATION THE STATE OF TEXAS TO John N. Leggitt, Defendant, in the hereinafter styled and numbered cause: You are hereby commanded to appear before the 98th District Court of Travis County, Texas, to be held at the courthouse of said county in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, at or before 10 o’clock A.M. of the first Monday after the expiration of 42 days from the date of issuance hereof; that is to say, at or before, 10 o’clock A.M. of Monday the 11th day of May, 1959, and answer the First Amended petition of plaintiff in Cause Number 102,323, in which Frances M. Leggitt is Plaintiff and John N. Leggitt is defendant, filed in said Court on the 24th day of March, 1959, and the nature of which said ,suit is as follows: Being an action and prayer for judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for decree of divorce dissolving the bonds of matrimony heretofore and now existing between said parties; Plaintiff alleges cruel treatment on the part of defendant towards her of such a nature as to render their further living together as husband and wife altogether insupportable; Plaintiff further al leges that no children born of said union and no community property was accumulated; Plaintiff further prays for relief, general and special; All of which more fully appears from Plaintiff’s First Amended Original Petition on file in this office and to which reference is here made; If this citation is not served within 90 days after date of its issuance, it shall be returned unserved. Witness, 0. T. MARTIN, JR., Clerk of the District Courts of Travis County, Texas. Issued and given under my hand and the seal of said Court at office in the City of Austin, this the 24th day of March, 1959. 0. T. MARTIN, JR. Clerk of the District Courts, Travis County, Texas. By GEO. W. BICKLER, Deputy THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS In the name and by the author ity of the State of Texas NOTICE is hereby given as follows: TO: Pat Jones, Dave Jones, Martin Jones, Kate Gilmore and husband, Tom Gilmore, Johanna Sexton and husband, John Sexton, Mary Ann Nolen and husband Will Nolen, and the children of the above named parties, and the unknown owner or owners of the property hereinafter described or any interest therein; the heirs and legal representatives and the unknown heirs and legal representatives of each of the above named and mentioned persons who may be deceased; and the corporate officers, trustees receivers and stockholders of any of the above named or mentioned parties which may be corporations, defunct or otherwise, together with the successors, heirs and assigns of such corporate officers, trustees, receivers, and stockholders, and any and all persons, including adverse claimants, owning or having or claiming any legal or equitable interest in or lien upon the following described property delinquent to Plaintiff herein, for taxes, to-wit: FIRST TRACT: Lots 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23, in Block Three in Boulevard Heights according to the map or plat of said Boulevard Heights recorded in Volume 2, page 144 of the Plat Records of Travis County, Texas, composing one parcel of land, together with all improvements thereon situated. SECOND TRACT: Lots 8 and 9, Block 3, in Boulevard Heights, according to the map or plat of said Boulevard Heights recorded in Volume 2, page 144 of the Plat Records of Travis County, Texas, composing one parcel of land, together with all improvements thereon situated. Which said property is delinquent to Plaintiff for taxes in the following amounts: $491.48, ex elusive of interest, penalties and costs, and there is included in this suit in addition to the taxes all said interest, penalties and costs thereon, allowed by law up to and including the day of judgment herein. You are hereby notified that suit has been brought by the City of Austin as Plaintiff, against the above named persons, and the State of Texas and the County of Travis and the Austin Independent School District, as Defendants by petition filed on the 18th day of February, 1959, in a certain suit styled City of Austin vs. Pat Jones, et al, for collection of the taxes on said property and that suit is now pending in the District Court of Travis County, 53rd Judicial District, and the file number of said suit is 113,179, that the names of all taxing units which assess and collect taxes on the property hereinabove described not made parties to this suit are, NONE. Plaintiff and all other taxing units who may set up their tax claims seek recovery of delinquent ad valorem taxes on the property hereinabove described, and in addition to the taxes all interest, penalties, and costs allowed by law thereon up to and including the day of judgment herein, and the establishment and foreclosure of liens, if any, securing the payment of same, as provided by law. All parties to this suit, including Plaintiffs, Defendants, and Intervenors, shall take notice that claims not only for any taxes which were delinquent on said property at the time of this suit was filed but all taxes becoming delinquent thereon at any time thereafter up to the day of judgment, including all interest, penalties, and costs allowed by law thereon, may, upon request therefor, be recovered herein without further citation or notice to any parties herein, and all said parties shall take notice of and plead and answer to all claims and pleadings now on file and which may hereafter be filed in said cause by all other parties herein, and all of those taxing units above named who may intervene herein and set up their respective