The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-03-30
TAXPAYERS PLEAS.
State Board of Taxation
Hears Appeals from
Local Assess
ments.
RAILROAD CASES GO TO TRENTON
Slight Gain for the City in the
Mornings Work k-cases
Decided.

state Tax Commissioners Charles e.
Black. Albert H. Slape and Henry J..
West sat in the Assembly Chamber of
the City Hall this morning to hear ap-
peals from local assessments. There was
one Commissioner absent, Major Carl
Lentz. That worthy was too busy lob
bying in Trenton to attend to his duties,
for which he is paid a nice fat sum per
year.
Before diving into Jersey City cases the
Commissioners heard the complaint of
George Cantrell against assessments in
Ridgwood Township, Bergen county. He
is taxed at $4,000 and asked for a reduce
tion OF $1,000 He didn't get it. The
Jersey City cases were called, and Tax
Commissioners James c. Clarke and r.
| Lahey and Tax Clerk Connolly, assisted
by Corporation Counsel Blair, were on
hand to defend their figures.
Among the big cases called and to
| which response of ready was heard are:
The Lehigh Valley Railroad Central
Railroad, and Lafayette Railroad. A
point was raised at this stage by Com
missioner Black, who stated that where
the State Board and local board claimed
jurisdiction property the matter
should be left to the statute providing
for such cases.
Draw Judgment said Commissioner
Black to counsel for the railroads, that
by the consent of the city's attorneys
these cases are withdrawn and referred
to the Supreme Court"
This was done and the railroad cases
were stricken off the list with the con-
sent of the city. The dismissal of these
f71f
list.
Tax Commissioner James C. Clark said
in explanation to this reement:-'The
city will not lose anything by the de-
cision today, because we have never been
receiving any taxes from it. The State
Board of Assessors has always assessed
it, and the city has been carrying it along
as dead wood Now the property is con-
ceded to the State Board of Assessors,
where it belongs
Then the list was gone through and the
first case called. This was that of DR.:
Benjamin against the city in an appeal
from assessment on land at the foot of
Barrow street, south of the canal. The
property was under water and was taxed
at $4,000. The doctor asked that the
| assessment be reduced to $1,000. The Mar
tin Act Commission, he Said reduced it
to $500. AS to the value of the property
he could say nothing. The land was abso-
lutely of no use, because it was under
water. Besides there was no access to
the plot. unless by trespassing on the
adjacent lands. The case was held over
until the Kellogg case or land adjoining
the doctors was determined:
The appeal of w. G. Heppenheimer as
receiver of Lewis Pallbury Bros, was
Withdrawn.
The old car stable on Grand street, for
| merly used by the Jersey City and Ber-
gen Railroad, was assessed at S14 800. The
company insisted that taxes had been
paid to the State Board Judge Blair
contended that the Board had no juris-
diction, and Commissioner Black advised
the agent for the road to appeal to the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to
assign two justices under the Assessors
Act of 1884 to determine the value. The
case was withdrawn.
| Company kicked against the tax of $4,000
| on a house and lot on Communipaw
avenue, formerly owned and occupied by
DR.. J. Koonz. The house, had been re-
moved and the company thought the as
| sessment should be $1,000 The Commits
sioners thought differently and dismissed
The Lehigh Valley Terminal Railroad
asked for reductions on assessments on
| lots 40B, and 40D, on block 2l45. The first
lot was assessed at $50. 600 and the latter
| $4,000. The company asked to have $14,-
| 600 assessment on each. Counsel for the
company asked for reduction on the Kel-
! the counsel couldn't say what the value
! of the land was. The assessment was too
high. and that was all.
| Mr.. James c. Clarke, local assessor, ex-
planned the city's assessment on the
property which had been made by Mr..
+. H. Love, who was absent, The. value
question would amount to 100000. After
Board announced it would reduce the
ures of the plot were those of the State
| Board of Assessors. Commissioners
Clarke and Judge Blair agreed to the re-
| City taxpayers to know that the. two
| plots were before taxed by the State,
now they have come into the .city's jur-
'ca Contractor tor Henry Byrne Complained
| that he was assessed too much on a batch
of lots on Wayne street, which the as
| them reduced to $500, but he naively said
he wouldn't sell them at that price.
Since Commissioner Love made the as
| sessment the appeal was laid over until
| that gentleman was present
house on it marked 2, block 569. The
taxed tos s $isoo.s 4 He % asked for oo reduction m n
| to $500 on the lot with house on it. The
/ petition was dismissed, Commissioner
Joining lots we We're I'll the same and no no ap-
| peal was made.
/ Nicholas Vreeland's case was taken
s5 and No. 81 Grand street at s., 900 each.
i His executors think that is took steep,
and asked for reduction. The build
/ ings on the lots, Mr. Childers,. called by
Lawyer c. Hartshorne, said was not
| babitable and not capable of repairs.
/ The lots, he said were worth $1,000 each,
| and the building was worth nothing. Six
1 thousand dollars was q fair price. Mr..
Trust Company, agent for the 81 property,
gave similar testimony The Board re-
4 duced the assessment to 5000.
The assessment of the Ingwersen Build
ing, No. AZ Montgomery street, came up.
1t has the easement for a new building,
and was reduced some time ago from
$2S, 900 to $25. 900. The assessment ordered
The case Of Diedrich Buck was BY re-
guest Of Justice H. J. Potts, to be heard
Samuel Reed objected to his $4,000 as
He @ asked that f Hefgen be
duced to $1,000. The property brought
| $50 at public auction, and on the 7(
per cent basis the assessment should be
reduced. The local board originally as
sessed it at $11.000, and Mr.. Reed ap-
pealed to the Commissioners Of Appeal
satisfactory to Mr.. Reed. The Board
gave no decision in this case.
i Mrs Jennie Gregory, who owns the
house at No. 1862 Halliday street on which
1 there was an assessment of $780, asked
for. a reduction. The Board refused tc
/ make it.
The result Of this mornings hearing
was that all the railroad cases were re-.
j ferred to the Supreme Court under the
Z! Assessors act Of 1884.
The act. explained COMMISSIONS
I Black provides for the settlement oi
4 property about which the local assessors
4 are u conflict with the State B oard The
i right Of the Supreme Court It'd Intervene
IN such cases was only recently affirmed