The New York herald., 1871-01-12
ZEAL ESTATE PROBLEM.
Suit Against The City Based on Alleged Half
Ownership Of q Closed Street.
Old City Sales Of the Common Lands in the
Vicinity Of the Central Park-How the Prea-
ent Suit Came About and All About IT.
Some Curious Real Estate Reminis-
cences from the Beginning Of
tho Present Century Up to
tho Present Tine.

curious and at the same time interesting suit
was begun yesterday In the Superior Court before
Judge Freedman. The suit involves question OF
ownership as to q strip OF land 600 feet long by
twenty-five feet wide, said strip embracing the
twenty-five feet depth Of the northcriy front OF
Seventy eighth street, between Fourth and Fifth
enues or course IL will be seen that the value OF
the land In question, real estate Is now held In
this vicinity and with Its prospective increased
value, cannot be represented without drawing
largely on the maneratiye capacities OF the n!ne
digits or In other words, that II s OF anfOss ncacu
liable value. To maze the mater clear 1t IL neces
sary to indulge IN blu OF
PREDATORY HISTORY.
In 1901 the city owned about a thousand acres OF
land this part OF the island which long had gone
by the name OF "common landsn portion OF It
embraced what is now Central Park. On these
lands there was the utmost freedom OF .'squatter
sovereignty and hence the name by which they
are generally known. At this time this locality was
remote from the commercial centre of our embryo
metropolis, anu when the clty's present extensive
growth and the great Park, with It's destiaed cor
don OF palatla brown stone fronts, formed no part
OF the Widest inag inings OF those most glowlngly
prophetic OF the efys future greatness. To encour.
age settlement In riis direction the city began TO
self portions OF the land selling every alJernaet
square ana retaining possession Of the remainder
TO say mat these lands were
SOLD FOR A SONG
Is trespassing only slightly on the precincts Of
byperbole, and TO say that thousands in our city
descended from those who from savings in the sale
Of tailow and making boots and cutting halr and
professional labors with the sartorial goose made
purchases here are riding in thcm carriages to-day
and enjoying all the gilded accessories and refine
6nents OF wealth--Drown stone frouts aud lveried
servants ana TIE hrst ews IN our chnrches!and mont
rsrer paintings and Foreign travel and, in short,
all the luXurieS. aild homage and trlumphs
That money commands SIS only stating
in ITS swift result seeming more the gigantic pro-
duct Of wonderful enchahtinent than plain straight
forward reality 10 fact nevertheless 10 which many
in these days Of pseudo pride and pomposity or pre-
tence are very o,h to revert. The
WnRriGIG OF TINE
that has brought about the wonderful pecuniary and
social changes just described III tie intern brought
with II other changes From ceiling lots the city be-
came purchaser In 1884 Russell d. Miner bought Of
Mr. Westbury quite tract Of lard, including the
iana referred TO above-hat Is The present Seventy
eighth street, between Fourth aid Faith avenues.
The city bought this tract Of Mr.. Miner. After this
last purchase this part OF ne island was divided into
their situations and directions laid out respectively.
And now we come TO the
PRESENT BONE OF CONTENTION,
Fronting l,ie southeriy side OF the tract sold by
Mr.. Miner was street hity feet wide In the redi-
seventy eigbth street laid suf the northeriy side Of
the latter street corresponding with the original
southery side OF the street facing the land sold by
Mr.. Miner. Under the provision Of the common
law laying down the rule that the owner OF land
bordering on street owns IN fee simple the land
the middle OF the street aud Ia case Of sucn street
being shut UP can CLAIM all the rights OF such
ownership, Mt. Miner brings suit for pay from
the CRY Tor this hall OF the former street ana now
constituting the northeriy front OF Seventy eighth
street. The
GROUNDS or Mr. MINERS CLAIM
are very simply Told, and IN fact have already been
partially explained. lie insists that the city, having
changed the situation OF the st ees from hat they
Va ftla ftlnn A Ia q fnd nj
street into lots that the ownership OF half the old
street reverts 10 ham. 1T the time Of the sale Mr..
Miner executed deed OF release to the city, but lie
now sets up that TINS deed was
!, PROCURED BY FRAUD,
ana Is, therefore, not binding upon him. His great
effort Is directed to two pointshlst, to show that
common law, referred to as applying TO the owner
ship OF street, and the same being vested m the
owners OF adjacent properly, has full and binding
force III this case; and secend that the deed OF re.
lease was procured from him by lraud. The
CITYs POINTS oF DEFENSE
are that the common law IN question does not ap
ply to streets in cities. and consequently that Mr.
Miner has no legal title TO any'portion Of the land
embraced M the old street. 1t is also denied that
any fraud was practised in proving the deed OF re-
lease Tue earnestness with which 1t is determined
TO contest these counter claims Is shownln
THE COUNSEL ENGAGED.
For Mr. Miner there appears Mr. Lather r. Marsh
and Mr. John B Ueviin. of the ablest real estate
lawyers In the city. Representing the city are Mr..
vanderpoel. of brown. Hall yanderpoei, and Mn.
Agernon s. sullivan these two gentlemen, FOR their
well known abilities in conesting suits involving
title to real estate, having been specially selected
by MI OGOfludil, inc Ct,uiise 10 tile tOrpOfall0D
whose other pressing duties prevent his giving his
Individual attention to the case
TRIAL
WIN, doubtless. last several days, and, as will he
seen, Involves features OF interest unusual In civil
suits Very little more than the prelminaries OF the
trial We're finished yesterday. IL is being tried be-
fore jury. To-day the testimony win begin TO
assume an interesting character, as some or the
largest real estate owners and dealers In the city
Will be called witnesses. Meantime IL should
have been stated above That the city III all lis sales
OF the lots partly embraced III this disputed strip of
land gave warranty deeds To the purchasers, that
the present owners can in no way be disturbed.
The brunt of battle has TO be borne by the city and
with 1t the abiding event, the expense Of deeat,
HnQud The inter be Tie result.