Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1892-09-30
INCREASES MADE.
QUITE 4 NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNERS
WAC SENT IN PETITIONS
Are Getting an Increase in the Valuation Instead Of
Reduction Thirty-fYs Additional
Petitions Filed Yesterday.

The number Of petitions for the cor
rectlon OF assessments received at the
City Hall yesterday was about the same
as on the preceding day-namely, thirty
FIVE. There were moresfrom the Eighth
ward than from any Of the others,
which is in keeping with the record for
several days past.
The subcommittee OF the Board did
not finish up work in the Fourth ward
Wednesday, as was expected. and all
day yesterday was spent in that ward,
by the entire membership of the Board
who were on duty, the last piece OF
property being examined about tve
O'Clock. A good many citizens in that
portion of the city, as in others, Will
find that the valuation made by the AS
SCISSORS, and which was objected to, has
been increased by the Board. One hall
of the committee, out Of twenty-one
pieces Of property examined yesterday,
Increased twelve, reduced but three,
and left the other six stand as returned
by the Assessors. What the other SUBJ
committee did could not be learned, but
the results. will probably very nearly
tally.
This morning the sub-committees Will
go to work in the Fifth ward.
Following are the new petitions, hled
yesterday:
FIRST WARD.
Louis Riedel, 1891, 1900; 1892, $2,4OO;
erroneous and unjust.
VIM. Pursell. No 513 Market street;
g, 800; fair value would be 81, 600.
A. Stauyer, No GAL Main street. 1891,
g, 100; 1892, $1,000; too high.
Alphonsus Singer, No. 5l3 National
road, 1891, $3.50; 1892, 500.
Ed Refer, north 20 feet lot No. s,
Zanes addition; 1891, $500; 1892, $500;
same, part lots Nos. 81 and IS McLure's
addition, $1,000; too much.
SECOND WARD.
Jas. McFadden, No. 1905 McCulloch
street, 1891, 81, 100; 1892, 1880; third OF lot
No. 5, 1891, 500; 1892, 81, 600.
Joachim Fender, $1,000; 1891, $500;
5000 would be fair.
James A. Leasure, lot No. IS, ShriveTs
addition, 1891, g, 500; 1892, 1880. West
half lot No. %, same, 1891, 81, 140; 1892. 3d.
400. Should have been a reduction instead
of an increase.
Rachel Martin, No. 173 Sixteenth street;
1891, $4,000; 1892, 81 900; increase too
much.
Elizabeth Hastings, 1892, S2,6S5; reduce
to s., 100.
John Cummins, No. 231s Main street;
1891, &, 400; 1892, So, 100.
Henry Hahne, north half lot No. 5. No.
1924 Eoff street; 1891, 1000: 1892, 81 ,6OO:
Nj. Coughlen, lots Nos. So and SO, No.
3l15 McCulloch street; 1891, 100; 1892,
81 500; 1881 is fair"
James Vance, No. 261O Market street;
1891, s., 400; 1892, s2,1oO; "sl, 400 would be
enough"
J.F. PAUL, lots Nos. 1853 and 49, o. A.
Zane's addition; improvements, $500;
should be assessed to Democratic Club.
EIGHTH.
Louis Bishoff, lot No. A and one-half
lot No. a., La Grange; 1891, $1,000; 1892,
$500. ENTIRELY too high"
Louisa Vockl, lot No. 4, square No. 20,
Ritchie'S additions 1871, 6l,oOU; 1921 "
500; entirely too great an Increase
John Boescher, estate, lot No. l6 and
south half No. Is, square No. 3; 1891, 81
$50; 1892. $500.
Trool Tolele No. 1926 Jacob street.
81, 800; 1900 would be fair"
John Milten, lots Nos. SO and 90 in La
Grange; 1891, 81, 700; 1892, $4,000; "$2, 100
would be sufficient"
Andrew Mauer, No. 400 Jacob street;
1891, 81, 100; 1892, 81, 900.
Mary Vaas, lot No. 10, Sprigg's addition;
1891. 81, 800; 1892, 81, GOO
John G. Mcnamara, No. Bill McCulloch
street.; 50, 700; fair value would be $4,000.
Henry Pope, lot No n, square No. Is;
1891, 81, 200; 1892; 81, $50.
John Owen, south BALI lot No. l, square
No. IS, Riches addition; 81, 800; out OF pro-
portion TO the value of the property.
H. Nj. Thacher, No. 1881 Jacob street I;
1901 cfn0. 1909 4o00