New-York tribune., 1873-07-26
UPTOWN TAXATION.
4 Study IN ASSFSgMTNTS.

TITS BROUGHT TO LIGHT-FALLACIoUs EEDUC-
TON OF TAX RATES.
Messrs McCaiIerty, Koch, and Cooper the
Committee appointed by the Boasd Of Aldermen 20
examine the taz-0ools u the Twelfth. Aineieeu-A'
and Tycnu-secoui Wards. and 20 inyests'eo '--'
alleged excessive assessments on properly ID
those wards met az II q. N. yesterday N
the chamber of the Board Of Aldermen
Before the appointed for the session the room vas
hlod with property-Owners waiting 20 enter Pio'es's
against the increased assessments and others Aepl O
ing during the dav. As soon as She meeting A"u 'e'
called 10 order ule Hon. Rufus F. Andrewsstaed llat
be wished 60 appear counsel for large nulu'e VI
prUpcry-OVucrs. FOR The purpose OF correcting er'' III
c assessments and seeing what could be done 70 rem
edy the defects in Of taxation. Alderman
McCaerty then explained .le obi 20 OF The sesol.'l1
ASKED an owners Of property IN tbs Nineteenth "@'u
who had complaints 10 make % come forward.
The first comp 1l44ut was William Gir0d OF No ia
L0erty-st., who that appeared for Joln Iuer
son % enter protest against the increased assessment OF
his property 10 Thirty ehth and Thir'Tniuih7. MI.
Grod said that Mr. Anderson three lots on Ifty-
niuthst. and Fifth-ave numbered respectively on tha
taK-boo Block 30. 5i7 lots Nos. &C. A. and g. LOT 80
&c had been raised from s-0,C00 20 i45oco lou No.
AZ from $1,000 10 S2,Jjl and lot 10 - ron
$1,000 20 tI2.Jo making a total increase OF s.'.oo
Alderman McCafeIty a.cd what the character OF INC
lots ,yere 90 which M~ G.r0d replied that they were
and he denied the night Of the assessors % place
fancy" value on them. IA reply 10 O question by AL
deim4n Cooper NJ G4r1d said. 10 w0n.l ue llgu. log
me 10 state the va.ua hut hold that the increase 10
wholly uuiusudabio and not warranted by anyJa- e'-
rerion or value. Mr.. Anderson. lu whose benAA ap
pear has pad taxes for many years. and be has never
complained before. He deemed IT, however, % duty 10
himself and The publ, TO place the facts before your
Committee. know that situation should be maternal
consideration IN the valuation OF property lat prop
artv is rendered valuable Go tho owners only by he
actual 1oucls derived from 10 r,hu their reach
Ee stated further hat the assessment on three vacant
lots b-ou -uE t1 Lr Anderson, known as N''. 70 -
and % n Ffy-frlt-st. had been increased !"3i tAa
vacant loo ~. - had been raised from 5000
go $4,000. and the vacant lot 10. 5 from s.'b|
30 $1,000, or more than 100 per cent H.
c.a.lloi tllt tire speculative value Of lot
should DE made tae basis of regular ciy 24-ilon.
IT. ceu,cgd.d tlt vacant lJr Fi,a-l7e. ""s oi 10
moro intrinsic vI.1a than one Teutu-lve. speed
might give fancy price ior fancy SITUATION bat
llt should not be taken as a criterion of che actual
value Of the log. he then filed application % have
the valuation reduced .l each case.
Mrs Catherine z,ou. the owner Of tie house 1nf .o'
So 2l-7 Seconds .ave ueZ- stated that leg property
winch had only ie-t front. assessed 90 0i, w.e
Ile IU. adjoining, which had % ..ct 'front.' -'.-
t.r only $3.50. Ler application Wls also ued
-Ir. Abraham Mead, OF [u. W 'a-ti.'I tI.ld-s'
r-.ed that Joe owned ot old house at '-e n'l,l-
east rur-er ,f FIFTY lf--t and s.-..re. In 1851, 70
was assessed at $4,000. 1 1872. 20 $4,000 alt tls year
~ e 1a II rar.yto questions asked hy t-e Committee,
l. rI.D SAID uu the property o-y yielded
him about $1,000 annually, 4Hd THAT w..A lIe
IuC-eas- ~ tll valuation, insurance, taZ'.' &C..
le u-lr 4s Well maze ile city p-es-.t ol
-le rene. House S1 10 West Ft-~ t-t---t ha '-i wes
increased in valuation by the assessors s-0Ih LIS
numbered oa Size t.L-uOaEs. block SO. SO, Wl- a' ~
and l had also been raised ll a-s s7menr from 5000 I'D
$1,000. while other ots 20 the same block were -tit .s
tie assessors 90 ,ls.r 0d value.
sa1u.. Ross of $50. rs West T'.t-a--t--- appeared
l.r y. D1ur-.eole aat himself, s.I comp'al-- iI--
r~a9ert7 known as $50. @ West Ilt~-drsi-t, having
ONLY r- feet front was assessed AZ $1,000. wl- tae
-.r.u.--~ .d. ming E.t4 l- .ser5 inches tr'.. T.s
-..-e. 1t only $4,000. I-.lae. ODD o. 80. -- l..
...tl--f conn. 44ael that three lots 'r tT-.-t-.
t near tl, Elst -lrer. were assessed -- 5000 each,
as against $1,000 last year. Hu admitted -t-t 'e Dad
l1f- . a lots eurr fhe lost year, uuI tdat ta' '1i
mas r..re 4at conf ...l ui,- Hay asr. De.a oLren
ut E.. $40 East S.F-ltf-a -4la--t stated tuat she
owned tlrec ..t5 au Seventy F.-er' nfE-'t' between
F.r.,-ayr. aud Avenue A. ste had sod
Two recently fl- $500, and ths other
vs. now assessed 90 5000. Her taxes la7t year
amounted 90 r0-rte o. 90 rer cent, ,s i-
ysar at tfc reduced taz rata OK 80 Ucr cent -r 1-
.l--ae O.. nay ss-. though improvements .aTs .ael
made u-rl lor lr.r.-.~. Tls case, 'l. t.r.-....
stated va. fa.r example OF tbs fraud n -le .ea-ei
reduction ol tiZ.-ou.
Jrla .eyuud, ol SO. Us East T.t--.xt'-st. stated
t.. he ss taxes al -i-iL property a, tl. assessed
value of $1,000 st... o,.er houses ot l.s u tlg r.-,
which met l.i. 5000 a..I.. ar. osr assessed 10 $500.
Patrick Morgan .f Morgan d. Errth.rs, -.-i fIat -.
owned sx Aor-os. known ou rAe TAX books as bloc"
SO. 40. ward Sos. 10 90 T inclusive one
er .n9-ive. and s1y-f f.-st $40 1u daI s1nIye.,
as .. others 0l EfE-l.f-t. IIr s.-e.t al. avenue
|o.. Do said. v,.r --.l -f .. each. Il OIL. t-..l
Lot sr s1uuo making I'D a. $4,000 a-u-.. $4,000 ia.t
year go tat As amount Of taxes was Tclrr uller fe
reduced rate ol per cont tlau nna. tae t 20 rate
o. Bsru.u couI'.iul. tLat DDS property L1.s A'.
tfe ward SO. I'D v4s WI --ry s-t sl,51 Oy t-'
years r. .u-t.oa.
John ,Ierrvucli. mechanic. residing Of 40 1- East
Tiebrv-sa ac0uf-.t st ted THAT De- Bought small house
,aal comp .ur. u-rreUpHg tle a--esJrs Immediately
solomon Townsend c1lpla.1ei that His houss. N0. %
West F-tF-lr-t5t.' - is assessed 20 s1"j "-Ht '''
ls7I was S.Gooa Il. claimed That during th' lar -lT
years tIa County ~ Ne-f-k Ae pil 49, Jjy STATE
much OF nls assessment the Inequality OF vAiltlou
Dr ~ b. tfclIti.y oil yo. 6io Lextngtou-ave Informed
~ .-..tr-a..a-si between L.1u-t0u aud Thrlayes
"A eaf lO inches front each de bought them Jane
30 ast Tor .5o aud they arc DO" assessed AZ sV'' OF
vernon X stevenson said that he owned y lots On
Madison ave-, between tiig 'i'h -I4 tilLl -,Lll'
'f a tft assessment on Iursr lots lu t7I amounted
t s,- l Iu 1872 tha amount Was increased tI ejiuuJ
and this year 90 s7J01 u. SAID lA4t sJJJJ would Je
fair valuation OF di' the lots.
Jouu Irlm1e OF 30. $50 Ma3isJn.ave. sal shat his
property was assessed 30 s21uIJ while DIS nclshb1r'
we're assessed 40 SlsJ0 he Also stated that property
ia thar b0rlJud lad d-prrCItau house uu tJe
next corner which would not boz sold two years aEO Tor
$4,000. could De bought now for sJ1UI1.
Thomas D0ualue, Patrick kavaulgh, Patrick Welsh
aud John 0lurd property owners n seventy-iir-tst
f reu Frst-ave and Avenue A. appeared aud entered
complaints. Thcv all abOrng men, and have
ougn parts OF the Jones estate Their property IS as
s-rl ~ over 81 200 per lot, while I'VE Lotto belonging 70
the estate are assessed only loo each. Alderman
McCanerrv stated that in 1-65 tne property was al
taxed AS farming auds. Louis Moore stated that De
vas taxed on property in Fffy-third-st. follows In
l-tg sl72 40 1870 S14 l5-, $50 SO ana THIS yea
secs g making ls69 OF about two and
half times tine assessed value.
II A. Wesfbr1ok complained that the assessment on