The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1890-12-17
TAX BONBSHELL.
Matthiessen & Wiechers'
.Sppeal Tells a Terrible
Astory of Discrimi-
- SYSTEM.
| NO CONSISTENCY.
Adjacent Properties Whose
Valuations Are Thousands
Z Of Dollars Apart.
OFFICIALS PANIC STRICKEN.
No Matter How the Appeal Re-
suits. 1t Knocks a Hole in
the Rotten Ring Budget.


The appeal Of the Matthiessen &
wiechers' Sugar Refining Company
NJ t the enormous assessment laid on
the. the New Charter combination
has or, ed profound sensation in po-
litical and official circles. IL came at an
unexpected moment, when the Fraud
Mayor and the Tax Commissioners were
hugging themselves with tine idea that
the tax levy was to remain compara-
lively free from criticism. All the other
tax appeals were comparatively unim-
portant. Neither were they very nu-
merous. Last years experience had dis
couraged the citizens, and this year they
Just grit their teeth and paid without
subjecting themselves to the humiliation
Of bootless protest
But the calm was deceptive. The great
:. firm which controls the vast sugar plant
>.n this city was determined not to be the
, victim OF Mr.. Cieveland's fake finance
: system. - soon as it learned OF the out
fageous raid that had been made on IL, 1t
employed counsel and prepared not only
ITO assert its own rights, but to punish the
official plunderers by thorough showing
! Aup of their methods.
~ And so at the Monday meeting of the
Commissioners of Appeal" as the Tax
COMMISSIONERS aIc SttECdSLlCttli1 Cdiltu Ou
y certain occasions, Lawyer Allen l.. Nc
s)ermott appeared with a brief which
\ rade the whole city government tremble
: tits boots, for IL showed deliberate de-
~ to plunder rich corporation In order
lupport The extravagance and waste of
" Davis-Hogencamp-Cleveland New
phrter Ring
But it was not only the inevitable pub
tify. they feared The proceeding has
4 /.hotEsr important effect. II the Tax
4 Commissioners stultiry themselves by
cntting $500, 900 off the assessment they
have levied. they knock another hole In
the fake budget of this year, already fall
ing to pieces with very rottenness. But
If they refuse to do so, then the matter
goes to the courts for q couple of years or
: SO, and the hole in the budget grows TOO
big for any ordinary patchwork. So they
arc in a pretty dilemma.
A STARTLING C0APARISON.
The figures presented by Allen L. Nc
Dermott iu his appeal for reduction show
an amazing state OF things. In the first
place here is an array or figures showing
how the assessments have been piled up
on Mathiessen & Wiecher's property
Previous to the year 1889 the assessment
on the Sugar Honse property had been,
for real estate. SAT 200; for personal prop
erty, $lG0, 900: total, S6U7, 200
In 1889, after the New Charter came
into effect. these valuations were in
creased TO these figures. real estate,
s5l3 500; personal property. S3l2, 900; total.
S25, 800; increase, S21s, 800.
This was a pretty stiff raise, but the
company stood 1t.
This year the valuations have again
made a jump. Here they are:-Real
estafe. S74300J; personal, S32O, coo; total,
81, ,063 600; increase over last year. s237 500;
Increase over old valuation, S455, 800.
In other words almost half a million
dollars increase was piled on the valua-
tion of this one firm in two years. Its tax
this year on the valuation as assessed
would be SIS, ,O63. 90
ADJACENT LANDS COMPARED.
Mr. McDermotts brief, after presenting
the above figures, proceeds to contrast
the relations set on parcels OF property
owned by the company with the figures
set on real estate owned by other corpor-
ations aud firms.
In block 33 on the City Map, the
petitioners hold strip of land about
eight lots in area fronting on Green
street and the Morris Canal basin. In
1883 this property was assessed at $50, 900;
in 1889, at $4,000. and in 1890 at
SO, 900, or at the rate of 81, 500 per lot.
There is erected on this property
cooper's shop, plain four story frame
building, well built in substantial man
ner The building is not lathed, plHs-
tered, or divided up into rooms. each
! floor being practically one room. The lots
are owned by the Cory estate, from which
Liic sugar &9ub thC
sugar firm owns the building. 1t could
be replaced for about $4,000. The firm
claims a valuation of $4,000 upon this
property is an injustice 1t recites the
nations fixed upon other peoples
property in the same block as follows:-
Colgate & Co, assessed for ten lots,
$4,000. On quite a large portion of this
property there is erected one story
frame building.
Thomas l. Haley, two lots. Essex and
Green streets, $4,000. They own 1000
square feet, whereon is erected q three
story brick building; assessed at the rate
of s.. 500 a lot
Mrs. Reilly owns lot in the same
block on Essex street. with a three-story
frame building erected thereon; assessed
for 81, 500 lot.
Henry Glynn and Peter Byrue own re-
spectively lots Nos IS and IS. each con-
tanning 1900 square feet, on which there
are erected two three story brick houses,
assessed at s., 0c0 per lot.
James Devlln Is assessed for lots Nos. 9
and III Essex street, with frame TO undry
building, at 5000 per lot
G. Heidi & Sons, lots Nos. and Essex
street, with four story frame building,
cooper's shop of same character and
value as that owned by the petitioner, as
Eessed at s., 800 lot
Matthew Blassius. lot No. Essex
street, with three story frame building,
assessed at s. 500 per lot
Thomas Haley, lots A. Il and G Essex
street, with four story brick building,
g. 500 a lot.
Thomas e. Haley. plots ID. F, G and H.
on Hudson. street, assessed at s., 800 and
5000 Three-sIory brick buildings.
All real estate in che block referred to
is assessed at Si43.0 900 for 80 full lots. The
sugar firm is assessed 800. 900 for eight of
them.
ANOTHER CASE.
The valuation of the plots Nos. l60 and
eco, of block g. Washington and Mason
streets has been raised from $50 600 10
$4,000 II belongs to the Lehigh Valley
r. r. Co but is leased by the sugar firm
which pays the taxes as part OF the rent.
The buildings are worth 5000.
Block No. 81 OF plot A was sold at pub