New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-11-29
ELEVATED ROAD DAMAGES.
THE FIRST AWARD ExCITEs CRITICISM

COMMISSIONER ARMSTRONG SHOWS THAT
THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO THE QUESTION.
The first decision by the Commission appointed TO
consider the damage done by the elevated roads to
property along the line has caused considerable com
ment and adverse criticism from some quarters. The
property I'm question Is owned by James Renwck and
consists Of four lots SO feet and inches front on
Forty -second-st., near Thlrdave. The Commission
awarded Rcnwick $4,000 future damages the past
damages Will have to be recovered in the courts.
Commissioner Armstrong said yesterday in regard TO
these claims:
This Commission cannot establish precedent of
law but they can establish a moral precedent, and
II IS obvious that If we had awarded the claim made
by the plaintiff of 100000 damages, we could not
consistently have awarded smaller amount TO any
other property y-owner in Third ave. whose property
subject to the same conditions. Well, now take
a piece Of paper and do some figuring for yourself.
There are about 900 twenty five foot lots fronting
on the three roads and II we should mako an award
of $500 front foot you can easily see what IL would
amount to. Eleven thousand lots, twenty five feet
front each make total of 275,000 front feet, and
that az $500 a foot claimed by Renwick, makes in
all s137 100000 Now you how important
matter this becomes. Mr.. Renwck receives 81 800
per year rental the hotel property which occupies
two Of the lots. Now, allowing 10 per cent of the
value Of the property for rental the valuation would
be $4,000 and allowing per cent 1t would be
500 900; and every Que knows that therc Is great
deal of this city that does not bring in
rental of per cent.
The apartment house Is I'm a bad sanitary con-
diton the plumbing being such the Board of Health
would not allow to be put in house nOw and I
wonder that it has been left in so bad condition
long
II IS not well known that the awards we make
are only for future damages; the past damages we
have no power to award We worked on the basis
that the railroad had cut down the rent in this
place, near could get at It, 5000 per year {:
and $4,000 invested at per cent would just pro-
duce that income
The rights OF the railroad very clearly de-
fined. They have the right by law to build their
structure I'm the street and to run trains It, but
they have right to throw clnders in the windows
Of peoples houses, TO shut of the light and air.
Just the same a has the right to walk along
the street, but he has right to spit into the win
dows along the way'
Talk has again been heard that the road would be
Obliged to return to 10 cent fares If these immense
damages paid. The probabilities that every
person who has property along the elevated roads
VIII eventually bring a suit TO recover damages
The awarded damages represent but little more than
half the cost TO the road for there lawyers 10
be paid and innumerablc other expenses connected
with defending so many lawsuits. The Commissioners
get $40 per hour each while they sit and $50 each
for every award: but this is less expensive than
taking the in court