Morning journal and courier., 1885-12-14
PROPERTY VALUATION.
Dr Cremin On The Assessorss Meth. ods and Assessor Dunn in Parttcu. lar

Dr. Cremin On The Assessors Meth
 ods and Assessor Dunn in Particu- lar.
 NEW HAVEN, Dec. 12.
 To the Editor of the JOURNAL COURIER. The matter mentioned herein is not exact ly of personal interest-it has bearing upon the equities in the case of every taxpaying citizen. Thomas K. Dunn, member of the board of assessors, in intimating that my con troversy with him regarding the methods of the board of assessors has a personal charac- ter cannot distract the intelligent reader from the important fact which has evoked his mis-statement, that he and have "perso- nal relations" I have none, neither do wish to have any. I made certain pertinent and proper enquiries of MT. Dunn with the view of learning why the assessors had fixed the valuation upon his property much lower, considering it's actual worth and pro- ductive character, than upon my single dwell ing house. My enquiries were made to him. he being member of the board of assess ors, and supposedly competent to answer proper questions civilly. The points at is sue should not be clouded or befogged, as Mir Dunn made them appear in the Palladi- um of this date Saturday morning. wherein he endeavored to carry an impression that there was a personal controversy, either with himself or the assessors. There is no personal squabble. I simply in my interview with this assessor brought forward the assessment upon his different pieces of property uo show the gross injustice done to me by listing my property at S1O, 900, very nearly it's actual cost, while his brick block, Nos. 192 and 194 Wallace street, 50x1O0 feet, with small tenement house occupied by two families on the corner of Wallace and Locust streets, was listed at S3, 300, certainly less than one-third of it's actual value. I call his attention as an as- sessor, and not as citizen indulging in quarrel to his house No. 583 East street, 30x117 feet, occupied by a saloon over which on the front of the building is placed sign:
 ''T. K. DUNN,"
 the building also having four or five tene- ments, listed at only $1 ,150, which, accord ing to judges of real estate, is about one- quarter of it's actual value. My figures are taken from the grand list.
 1 think it due to the taxpayers and all we'll wishers of square dealing on the part of our town officials that light should be thrown upon just such case as this, for there may be other assessments equally wrong. It is my business now to expose this one specimen of what appears to me queer WOTh
 There is another singular thing worth noting. In the year 1883 the house and land owned by me, on the corner of Olive and St. John streets, was entered on the list as measuring 137x110 feet, whereas the meas uremenJ in previous and subsequent lists has been 134x112 feet, as in my deed. How errors like these are officially made might we'll be subject of inquiry in some way with power to back the inv estigation. The same property in 1SS4-5 is put in with the measurements as in my deed. Up to 1883 my property was listed at $7,875. In July, 1884, came into and the long measurement was This was in the year when the listing was raised from $7,875 to $1O,000. After the discovery of the smaller measure nent, the figures of the taxable property were unchanged in the list and none of the assess DTS explain how their measurements were so faulty Its cost to me taxpayer was made the same as when my property measur- l ed more.
 I have taken up much space to set straight | 3 matter which leaves to Assessor Dunn or | his brother officials an opportunity to tell the | truth, if they deem it expedient. If the | public attention is hereby called to the meth l ods of the assessors no harm will have been | done. M. A. CREAIN, M. D.,
 129 Olive street