Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-01-31
What to Do About Those Tired Four
teenth Ward Assessors.
LOUD APPEALS FILED YESTERDAY.
A Sarcastic Little Screed From Charles
ponnelly's Pen.
PECULIAR CONDITION OF a BIG ESTATE


legal steps will be taken to bring the negli
gent assessors to time. From statement
made yesterday by Commissioner Boyle, it
| has been customary for the assessors of the
| Fourteenth ward to consume more time on
the assessment than in any other ward.
Three wears ago the report was not made
until 80 davs after the prescribed
time, January 15, and for the first time the
penalty was applied. Ward Assessors re-
ceive 50 per day. The penalty takes &c
cents off for each dav the books are kept out
| after January ID. The commissioners think
the assessors in the Fourteenth ward turned
their books in to avoid this penalty, but are
/ willing to go ahead with the assessment if
allowed the regular rate of 81 per day.
| What steps the city Board of Assessors will
take in the matter will not be decided until
the county officials have adopted plan of
action.
Some Interesting Objections.
Considering the large number of notices
of assessment that have been sent out in the
past few days there was small total of ap-
peals filed at the City Assessors Office yes
terday, but the statements made by the sp-
pellants in general were the most interest
| ing of any day since the filing of appeals
| began.
Charles Donnelly writes a sarcastic letter
| in his appeal on the 20x60 feet owned by
himself aud G. T. Rafferty, On Smithfeld
street, adjoining Hotel Duquesne The as
SCISSORS fixed value OF S50,000 on
The ground and $1,000 on the build
ing. Mr. Donnelly saws: This prop
erty is leased for $500 a year.
a r.. L.
! from the property on your valuations would
not be more than 81 per cent This is not
right If We cannot get at least B per
| cent for money we had better sell out.
| While the property has never been offered,
| if you are putting these valuations on for
the purpose of becoming the owners, I will
submit an offer of the valuation you have
| put on and see if we can't let you invest
| your money. The building cost s., 800 zen
years ago. The house and lot cost us S27, 800
and was considered a high price. If all the
property in the city was put at or near its
value as S3S, 900 for this, you would have
more money than you could use. This
property should not be increased in value,
as it has had its turn for the last three
years. Give some other person a turn for
the next three" This appeal Was not sworn
to, as the others are, and the filing clerks in
the Office say they do not know how it
got in.
Confronted with the City's Figures.
Isaac Craig's assessment on 42x60 feet, Nos.
426 and AS Smithfieid street. ut the corner of
Diamond alley, Is assessed Sill, 500 on ground
and 81, 500 on buildings. His appeal calls for
total valuation of Sl04 379. He says: 81
have been offered s., 800 per front foot, but it
was withdrawn because the proposed pur
chaser believes the city will take % feet of
to widen Diamond alley. When the Board
of Viewers made their award they assessed
my damages at the rate OF &, O4I per 'front.'
foot. You assess a. the rate of 1904 per
foot, so il seems to be worth So less per foot
when the city wants TO buy; l. that :a;r:''
Irwin Rednath is assessed $4,000 on 30Xl20
feet and S7. 500 on building on Diamond alley,
between the market house and Wood street.
His valuation is S35 0O for all. lie says that
is the highest price ever offered, and lie will
take that for il now.
John r. t'regg's assessed valuations and
aNrealS are es follows: Lot i5I%xS0 feet,
Wool and Diamond streets, S5s. $50, accepted.
Lot 20yS0 feet, Market street, between Fifth
and Liberty avenues, $4,000; appeal, So, 900.
Lot 20NG0. Smithfield street and berry
alley, S44, ,O00 appeal, $50 OoA. Lot 3oH60, Wood
alley, SIS, ,Oc0 appeal. $j0,G00 Lot 56xl20 Wiz
gin alley, above Sn.ithiieid street, $50 GC0;
appeal, SlS00a. Lot 55IG0 Wood. herween
Fifth avenue and Diamond street, So, 500;
appeal $500 Lot 30x75, Sixth avenue. he-
tween Wo2d and Liberty streets, $500 0; ap-
peal, $40 Lot Ax54, Liberty street, be-
tween Oak and Cherry alleys. S., $40: appeal,
S305l0. Lot 20X60 feet, Smithfietd street. be-
tween Sixth avenue and Virgin ailey, $40 900;
appeal. $4,000. Lot 20y60, Smithfleld street,
betweet Firth avenue and Virgin alley, $780,
600: appeal S36 090. Lot l9SS0 Wood street,
between Diamond alley and Fif.h avenue,
$54 l32: appeal. s3S.66 Lot 2lxS0, Market
street, between Fifth avenue and Liberty
street, SO 500: appeal, $50 600. Lot 1sx90 feet,
Wood street. between Sixth avenue and
Virgin aley, $50 l35: appeal, S39, 600.
Undertaken IL. Samson, assessed s35 lc0 on
27xl00 feet. on sixth avenve above Cherry al
ley. His appeal is for S25 600, and he says he
has been offered corner lots on Sixth avenue
at LOCO per foot within the past week.
W. q. Lindsay's sOx60 feet on smithfield
alley is valued at 00l His valuation is
-sS34 600, which he says, sis more tran it
would bring at forced sale. the basis on
which all valuations for taxable purposes
Should be made.
THE Post property on Wood street is as
sessed at $1,000 on the s51s0 feet lot, and
$1,000 Oh building. Owners valuation is
$75 900 but they will stand $4,000.
Other Third Ward appeals Flied Yesterday
Other Third ward appeals follows:
l. y. Taylor, s0x6o feet, Wood street and
Virgin alley, S5j.cc0 on lot and 4,000 Oh build
ing: appeal, Si0,003. Rev. ID. Gregg l9XS1 feet,
Wood street. b"Fween Fifth avenue and
Virgin alley, $4,000 appeal, $SS, 600. JaIpison
& Alexander. 44X20 feet, Seventh avenue,
between Grant street and Cherry alley.
$50 coo: no appeal. j. J. Netters heirs 5. xGO
foer, Cherry alley, above Liberty street,
$S2,I42: appeal, $l30co. c. Matherry. 1Sx9j
alley and Sixth avenue $40 aOj;
appeal SIS, $50. Charles Devlin, i9xS6 ieet,
Liberty street. between Oak and Cherry
alievs, $34 700: appeal. $1,000. L. +. Kteber,
I9xs0 feet, Wood street, near Virgin alley,
$5i 800: appeal, SS5, l5C NJ. f. Mckee. lSx90
feet Wood street. between Virgin alley and
Sixth avenue, 1899: appeal, $685. 80.
James B. Scott, as trustee for tue David Z.
Park estate. Second ward, accepts an ASSESS
ment of ST., 900 on Sox60 feet, Third avenue,
below Snnthtieid street, but asks a cut from
S:4 500 to S2i, 600 on 23x30 feet between Smith
field street and Cherry alley, and FROM S3l 500
to $2l 900 on 20x?0 feet, at the corner OF Third
avenue and Cherry alley.
The first appeal that came from the
Twelfth WARD WAS marked 80. X" being
that OF Mr.. O'Connor. assessed at s. G40 on
l2xlO0 feet on Penn avenue, below Twenty
first street.
W. X. Allertsou offers a premium of 800 to
anyone who VIII find him Il purchaser nj the
assessors figures. He is assessed at SC. 900 on
4sxl20 feet on Twentieth street.; appea! - 600;
SIS, $50 On 4SXlC0 feet on Penn avenne: appea;
IS, coo With buildings his total assessment
Is SiS.560 and his appeal is for sl6 100 valha-
tion.
Thomas Spelman is assessed s4,Os0 ON
a4N 100 feet on Penn avenue below Twenty
fourth street, and 81 600 on buildings, but lie
says lie Will sell for 81 300 on account of the
noise iii Monroes boiler works in the rear
Hugh Chambers, 24Nl30 feet, Penn avenue
near Twenty-eighth street, is assessed 81 $50;
appeal, a 900. W. T. shannon, 2ixI0O ieet.
Snallman near Twenty-eighth street, IS $50:
appeal, S24c0. James Lewis 24xlA Small
man near Twenty-ffth street. $500; appeal,
$780, Mrs. N. German, a0x60 SmalimaIi
near THenty-nlntb street, 81. 120 appeal,
200 John Kane, A9xl0o feet, Penn avenue
and Twentieth street. s., 10: appeal. Sc. 100.
ReDecca Seibert 70xs2 feet, Twantv-fifth and
Sulailman streets, 81 SO: appeal, 81. .5Gl
fF, w. o,G l.