The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1890-12-18

A complete summary of Judge Nc
Dermotps brief down to block 65 was
given yesterday. Below we produce a
umma ry of the rest OF the brief.
BLOCK 66.
The petitioners own lot No. ~ in this
block. aud as it is assessed at the same
rate as the adjoining property they make
no complaint. although the valuation has
been raised $500 above that Of 1883.
BLOCK 90.
The whole block, plots A. b and G.
This property was valued in 1888 at $780,
coo, IN 1889 as si65, ,0O0. and in 1890 at $780,
600. 1t has total arc Of 233.300 square
feet, or about ninety lots, which makes
the assessment about So GOO per lot
During the past year there has been ex-
pended upon this property for new build
ings on Warren street about the sum of
$50. 600, and about $4,000 more is to be
expended. These buildings were COM
menced in the early part OF the present
placed upon them since June l.
and after the tax levy was
made up. In this connection
the petitioners call attention to the fact
that their buildings always cost them
greater sum TO erect than II they were
constructed In the ordinary method under
contract, because by reason OF the exigen-
cies of their business they are compelled
to build practically by days work.
On this block No. 81. IS erected
an old factory. the least valuable
part of the sugar reiineries. The
street are old aud will have to be re-
placed iu few years. They are not
adapted for modern reflueries, as the
great bulk of that work is done in the re-
fineries on Block 81. This property is To-
Gated along Broadway. and is used more
storing raw sugar. 1t Is submitted that
the value of tins property for taxing pur-
poses should not exceed 100000. The
following interesting comparison is then,
made:-
OTHER PEOPLES PROPERTY.
Block No. 129 is located on the westerly
side OF Warren street. adjoining the Nor
ris Canal and Broadway. 1t is as valu-
able for manufacturing purposes as the
property OF the petitioners in Block No.
96. They even have the advantage of
more water. In this block w. NJ. Force
owns II 300 square feet, valued vt $4,000.
The Jersey City Steel Company owns
n 800 square feet, valued at s33 600, and
90, 600 square feet, valued at $40. 900, making
total of 24i 800 square feet, or about IS
lots valued at S10S000. or 81 200 per lot, as
against the valuation of 5000 per lot
placed upon your petitioners property in
the adjoining block. The buildings upon
Block No. 129 are not equal 10 those upon
the petitioners property, but the dfscrep-
ancy is nowhere near as great as the val
uation would indicate.
The Morris Canal and Banking Com
pany owns in Block No. lis. Hudson and
E-sex streets, six and forty five one hun
dredth acres, or about ITO city lots 'front.'
ing on the Norris Canal cove and Hudson
River; this is the most valuable water
front in Jersey City, yet they are only as
sessed sl60, 900, or at the rate of Sl,45O per
city lot.
BLOCK NO. 90.
This property is the most valuable part
OF the sugar companv's plant. The
petitioners own in this block, lots No. 2.
4. o and 8 Washington street, Nos. 80, 81,
50, 55 and 81 Essex street. Nos. So 81,
67, or % lots in all. covering $500 0
square feet. This prope rty was assessed
in 1883 for realty. 100000. for personally
Sl50,O00; in 1889, for realty. $4,000; for
personality 100000; in 1890 for realty,
900; for personality, s300, 600. The
increased from $4,000 per lot to not
quite $4,000 lot. or, IL the personally is
to be included. to the sum of s2S 900 per
lot. No buildings have been erected
upon the premises during the
year, except certain bnildiags on
course of erection. This building was
commenced in February, 1890, and up to
June, 1890, about S20.0J0 had been ex-
pended. and it is estimated that about
$4,000 more may be needed thereon. The
petitioner submits that this is the highest
valued property for the purpose of taxa
tion in Jersey City, although away from
the central portion of the town.
The valuation of this property, it is
claimed, should be cut down at least
100000 on the realty and to S150, 900 on
the personally. The personally consists
almost entirely of machinery. which,
while it may cost large sums of money,
soon becomes antiQuateu and out OF mar
ket. The petitioners say they would be
unable TO realize at any time upon il the
amount which has been taxed against it
The petitioners assume that some portion
of the tax upon personal property has
been imposed upon raw sugar in process
of manufacture. While it is true that
they have at certain seasons of the year
large amounts of raw sugar on hand
awaiting manufacture. 1t is constantly
coming and going, affording work aud
occupation for many hundred men.
OTHER PROPERTY.
Lot No. 59 in block No. 81, is also
owned by the petitioners. but it is as
sessed separately. This lot was purchased
from the city about three years ago for
S2,00O There was then an old engine |
house erected upon it, which has since |
tumbled down. This property has been as
sessed at 50, 900.
benjamin Edge owns lots Nos. 6l, 63 |
and is, adjoining, in the same block, on |
each OI WHICH tutI6 IL 6T6CLSQ a lOuE-
story brick apartment house double |
tenement) valued at 81. 900 each. AT this |
rate the petitioners claim they should pay |
upon their lot at valuation of not over |
81 $50 They would be very well salts |
fled if that plot were reduced. however, |
to 81, 800. In this regard they call atten- |
tIon to the valuations placed on the prop |
erty owners of the adjoining property.
Block 9s, pounded by Essex, Washing |
ton, Norris and Warren streets. is solldlY |
built up with first class buildings, with |
the exception of the Pottery on Warren |
street. The total valuation placed for |
real and personal property upon this |
block amounts to Sl49 500, or an average |
of 81, $40 Ter lot as against S2S, 900 per lot !
upon the main factory property of the |
petitioner.
Block No. 66, bounded by Morris, Essex, |
Green aud Washington street, which is |
also solidly built up with brick apart |
ment houses is valued for real and per-
sonal property at $i67. 000 or about S, GOO |
as against S2S GOO per lot of the petitioner. |
As sample of the property in block |
No. 96 they call attention to lots Nos. 81, |
63 and IS, owned by O'Donnell. whereon |
there is erected one fine four-story brick |
building covering the whole plot This |
building is valued at SIS, 900, or S, 900 per |
lot, as against Sl4, 600 per lot of the prop |
erty OF the petitioners.
A HUGE SHARE OF THE BURDEN.
In the First district of Jersey City, en- |
bracing al it does. the heart or the city, |
the total ualnafi0n for raa afa ia fixad /