The Sunday tatler and Jersey City express. (Jersey City, N.J.) 1883-1886, 1885-08-09
TIE RAILROAD SUIT.


The great contest that the Central New
Jersey Railroad is having with the State
Board of Assessors progresses smoothly
and rapidly, and while there are some
chances that it will not be prepared for
argument for the November term of the
Supreme Court, it will have been, beyond
peradventure, progressed well up to that
| point at that time Nearly four months
have elapsed since Expert Harrison COM
menced his testimony, and while the Gem
trail Is on its side of the case, the State has
| not yet rested--and consequently there has
been no rebuttal offered as yet-nor has
| the bitter fight which is looked forward to
/ by people III the State with eager interest,
on the terminal lands yet been touched
upon. At the opening of the States case
| it was stipulated between the parties that
| the basis of the railroad company's testi-
mony-the Assessors tax book and records
should be admitted in evidence with the
same force and effect as though all the
assessors whose valuations were used had
been produced in person with their origi-
nal books, papers and records-the State
reserving the right to call each assessor in
cross examination, should it SO desire, as if
he had been sworn direct. It looks very
much, now, as if Judge Hoffman will sub
poena every one of these assessors, and, as
a starter ex Assemblyman and ex~Assessor
James G. Clarke, of the Sixth district Of
this city, has been subpoenaed to appear
for cross examination tomorrow morning
at Long Branch.
The witnesses produced by the Central,
so far, to controvert Harrison's testimony,
are Messrs. George Holmes, assistant
Chief Engineer of the road, William Ped
die. Charles w. Benjamin, of this city, who
estimated in Essex County, j. M. G..
Marsh, of Westfeld, and Civil Engineer
Clark, of the New Jersey Central Rail
road.
The most interesting testimony, proba-
bly,, for the last two or three weeks, has
been that of Mr.. Clark. It is claimed by
the Central that large tracts of its right of
way were donated to the Company. Mr..
Clark has been in the employ of the Com-
pany for upwards of twenty years, and he
testifes that he does not know of any con-
siderable quantity of land donated to the
Company, although he says that there is a
tradition that such was the case Mr..
Clark also stated that he considered the
value of the land in the right of way of
railroad was worth from three to five times
the value of adjacent lands-including land
damages and fences On his redirect exam
ination, on Friday, Chancellor Williamson
brought up the old subject of paralleling
the railroad. The Chancellor drifted along
from one question to another, until he
brought out from the witness that the idea
of bailding railroad parallel to the Gen.
trail was not very feasible one. 1t would
be very difficult, the witness said, under
lead of counsel, to secure night Of way
100 feet wide on either side of the Central
In reply to Judge Hoffman's questions, on
recross, the witness stated that the unfeas-
Utility and impracticability of paralleling
the Central lay in the fact that it would
cost too enormous o sum to construct
SIT could be constructed?" sob, yes"
said the witness, but the cost would be
SO great that such thing would be out of
the question. This was point in favor of
the position of the State as showing the
value of the railroad. The witness essen
TALLY admitted that the Central had
practical monopoly through the section of
country through which it runs. It supports
the States case, and is in direct conflict to
Kaercher's theory, which is that parallel
road to the Central could be constructed
for very much below Harrison's figures.