New-York tribune., 1896-12-12
SUGAR TRUST WEAKENS.
TT MEETS THE FIGURES OF THE BRIDGE
COMMISSION ON REAL ESTATE

LAND FOR THE BROOKLYN TOWER WILL BE s~--D
FOR $3.50 ooo. WHICH is REGARDED AS BIG
pRIcE-soME COMPARATIVE FIGURES
The Sugar Trust has agreed to accept the oner
made by the East River Bridge Commisso" io'
Lot 1. Block A. in the Thirteenth Ward' DrooA-
,vn. This offer is $35O.OOO. and was maze as 'he
result of an investigation by commune
on Appraisement Secretary r. b' Ihuroei' "a
the Commission. yesterday received lroii' 'o''''
f. Searles secretary of the American sugar Nc
Aning COMPANY an offer To dispose or the realty
for the price named. oo ooo
This is drop Of S15OOOO from the Soo"'Voo
for which the Trust has been holding out ->o'
satisfied with that. the Trust insisted that hie-
,roof s,oraeeroom should be built beneath the
Bridge structure and leased TO II TOT 'we"'s -o"'
wears at an annual rental Of $4,000 The Com
mission maintained that IL nao 10 "o''' "
build such q structure.
Tho nronertv. which will probably be sold for
the first footing OF the East River Bridge In
Brooklyn is a strip 200 feet wide and about ooo
fae+ long 1t lies between North Firth ana
North sixth sts and runs from Kent-ave apout
go feet out into the East River. on the part Vi
the land that lies above water there is no"
story brick structure
The Commission will probably act op the oner
at its meeting to be held next Wednesday,
.I consider the price fair one said Com
missioner Henry Batterman TO Tribune re-
porter II Judge this because OF sale that was
made Of a piece Of property on the water 1roh'
about q year ago. 1t is situated near the navy
Yard and was sold 10 the Mollenhauers. IL is
narrower Than the property at South Sixth-st
and the water Is not so deep. The price pao
was S32J. 900. and think the land We need is
worth So, 900 more"
In proof Of the fact that S350.00O is gener-
GUS price for the Commission to pay for TINS
land Il is not necessary to point further thah
TO the protest made in 1901 by the Sugar Trust
10 the assessment valuation placed upon lts
property by the Board of Assessors. IL was the
old story Of the wonderful difference between
the idea a man holds as to the value OF MS
property when the assessor comes around ana
The idea he holds when he is talking to a pur-
chaser
In 1891 the Board of Assessors. believing
that the Sugar Trust was paying an lnadeq"a'e
amount toward the support of the city govern
ment raised the valuation on all the irus'
nroperties. This movement Indignantly re-
sented by the Sugar people, and their attorneys
Parsons. Shepard & Ogden. filed writ OF certi-
orari on August II of that year, asking 'he
Court to cut down the valuations Johh r
Clarke was APPOINTED referee. and Mr.. Ogden
who conducted the case. presented LoWeii NJ
Palmer and Samuel T. Maddox. now supreme
Court Justice as expert witnesses to prove 'ha'
the Board of Assessors was greatly oVeresu
mating the value of the Trusts realty hoiuiis'
The Trust at that time did not own the piece
Of property which the Bridge Commission IL
now trying to buy but it owned the property
called the Fathers Block" which is just nor'h
of the block which is now being negotiateo ioi
The properties are Of the same size ana 'he
..roo value except that the Fathers Block
has upon it large refinery bulldine, Willie ''e
b,ock that is now being considered has only
.-s.orv storage she'd a fair estimate may
Ha had of the value of the block now in dispute
nv the estimate which the Trust then nlaue pi, %
the value Of the adJoinins sssassed at S1530,,O
This latter block has been assessed al SS5330 000
IN 1890 and the Assessors raised II 10 S.,sUI
a. 1901 Messrs. Palmer and Maddox testiieu
that at the outside hat tne tbe assessment Of
Si5S 600 should not be increased as the Piop "
ertv had not increased in value ourins ;n0 ;nh
go FINALLY there was an agreement Dy WhiSn
sha.eferee recommended and the Court cut '''e
valuation to SltOVoo .h ad;o;ring nrop-
When the assessors valued the auJonins Ja pn thav
-tv which is needed for Bridge purposes my
49, this $40 600 as a basis and piaceo Ndu-
stion OF S93 900 it, and these Valuations aon Oh Il
the two blocks have not peen cnahseu tior UiocL
-. % roar since then AS the Fathers BLOCK;
h;oh W 10 block No IL of the Thirteenth Waru,
had an expensive building on It, s'o,ooo "o9Iu 1n
seem to be proportionately lalr aS ~, t .auo
~ No IA If the 20 per cent basis TOT Valua, ,
ION he taken into consideration it viii be found
that in 1891 the Trust considered BLOCK no; "a
70 he worth not more than Sll3.3n. rms "oui9
Rave betn their logical valuation OF the iaho
above water but while they pay no taxes on 'y hv
land under water there is general system ny
which that is supposed to be worth as inuSh n
again as the land above water Suotracdng hne one
vsima Of the improvements on the land ABOVE
.sr a. will he seen that about S2l5OoD would
fairy represent the idea then held by the Trust
os IN the value of the land
It's ,, ~ .a' .ra q ereat many holders Of Brooklyn
raai estate who would he glad TO learn that IL
had increased in value 40 per cent In the last hVe
years. -, l., r,,,,;ar ,,,ith
Assessor b. w. Wilson. who Is famiiiar WIN M
the values Of property In that part OF 'he ci'S'
said to a Tribune reporter yesteroas c,,ror
"In nv opinion the property whicn the sugar
Trust is offering 10 sell to the city Is worth anouI
5000 600 l should consider S3OOOoO big price
FOR a. and S35OOOO think Is exorbtant. l 90 90
not think there has been much increase IN tne
value of property in that part OF the city since
1901"