The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-11-09
INTERESTING POINT.
Attorney Thayer En-
lightens theCity
Fathers.
WHO OWNS BLACKSTONE CANAL ?
Abutters Along Present
Harding Street Have
Paid Taxes On 1t.
Who OWNS BLACKSTONE CANAL ?

In the hearings given by the city
council committee on claims in COM
mon council chamber last evening an
interesting point showed forth in the
petition Of the Crompton, Knowles
loom works for compensation for land
taken and damage to property by the
laying out of Harding street. 1t is
whether the abutters do or do not own
to the middle of the canal through
which flows Millbrook and the sewage
of the city at that point.
The eyes of the committeeman open
ed with amaZement when Charles M.
Thayer, counsel for the petitioners,
mentioned the possibility Of such
ownership. However, for his clients, he
laid claim only to the middle of the
sewer wall But there are other petit
TONERS, abutters on that sewer, and
may be they will claim to the center
of the sewer arch which is the founda-
tion of the new street If such own
ership can be proved the city council
will have to materially amend its
awards.
Mr.. Thayer, sustained by officers of
the corporation, showed that since the
sewer Was dICHSu Il years d6O LItC as
SCISSORS of Worcester have compelled
the company to pay taxes on the land
to the middle of the arch. He main
tanned that the city secured only a
basement in the land while his client
obtained from the original owners a
quitclaim deed and is thus entitled to
a fee in the land.
There were four hearings last evening
and the session was short. Mr. Thayer
appeared for Mary e. Jiscomb, admin
istratrix of the estate of n. S. Liscomb
for an abatement of heavy assess
ment for street betterments on Insti-
tute road. His statement which he
could not substantiate on account OF
the absence of the only living witness
to the incident illustrates the foolhard-
mess of making an agreement with
members of a city council whose sue
cessprs may not keep faith through
lack of knowledge of such agreement
Mr.. Thayer said Mr.. Liscomb gave the
land for the laying out of the street on
condition he would not be subsequently
assessed. But he was.
The first hearing was on the petit
ton of the Crompton- Knowles loom
works for damages to property and for
land taken in laying out Harding
street from Harrison south to Green
street The city council has awarded
about S1100 to the company which the
| latter does not think adequate for the
damage done. Mr.. Thayer showed q
| damage of $500 in actual cost without
| considering at all the price of the land
| On the $685. feet taken he placed an es-
| innate of So cents a foot, He claims a
| five foot strip also, making about 250C
| square feet on which he placed an esti-
mate of 50 cents foot.
| Mr.. Thayer said he and the city
solicitor differed on certain points per-
tanning to the legal aspect of the case,
| Of which he would not speak at that
time. He confined himself to q recital
| of facts of the case. The city in ex-
tending Harding street south from
Harrison to Green street took a strip
| of land seven feet wide, the entire
area being 1886 feet, according to the
| figures of the city. The claimants
think a greater amount was taken
| The city has awarded about S1lO0 for
| the damage done. The contention Is
| that in the first place the amount Is
not a reasonable sum for the land. In
the second place they had to remove
buildings which were valuable for stor-
age purposes, to say nothing of the
value of the buildings themselves. 1t
was necessary to put up a fence, and
the change brought it so close to exist
| ing buildings that, instead of one gate
three had to be cut through, which
means three gate tenders to maintain
He showed the plans of the site be-
| fore the buildings were removed. The
value Of one shed in itself, regardless
| of its value to the works, is $3.50. An
other shed taken is valued at $3.50
Twenty feet were cut off the setting
| up building. the estimated worth OF
which cut is $500. 1t was necessary to
build a new fence. 1t cost $401 50 to
clear the buildings preparatory to theiI
removal. When the fence was COM
pleted the expense to the claimants
was 1901 OF. He told how the claim
ants are disconnected and put to ex-
pense by being obliged since then tC
store goods at the South Worcester
Junction works.
Mr.. Thayer claimed for the Cromp-
ton Knowles loom works ownership OF
a portion of the land through which
the street runs. He said in 1868 the
| Fox heirs, who owned the land, gave
the city a right to run through it a
sewer George Crompton acquired what
| rights the Fox heirs had by Quit
claim deed, which was transferred tC
the Crompton associates and later tc
the Crompton- Knowles works.
| He said since the sewer was arched
over, ~ years ago, the works have beer
taxed to the centre of the sewer. He
| NA+~
| for land taken to the centre Of the
sewer wall. The land taken. the seven
| foot strip, he estimated to be worth 81
cents foot and the strip to the centre
of the sewer wall, five feet wide, at 81
cents a foot.
! David F. O'Connell appeared for
Mary A. Shannon and Mary Mellen
who own land on the new street Oh
posite that of the Crompton- Knowles
| loom works plant, Mr.. O'Connell made
no argument, as the land had been
surveyed in the interest of his clients
only yesterday and he had not received
| the reports. He said he would send
them to the committee
| Jane Ayers Page, so Alvarado ave-
nue., petitioned for abatement of a
! street betterment assessment of S24 81
| Emma NJ. Robinson, 70 Alvarado ave
nue., had similar petition, the amount
! of her assessment being SIT .16. Each
alleged as her reason for asking was
| similar treatment with other abutters
l'who received an abatement.
| Mary r. Liscomb, administrators of
the estate of N. s. Liscomb, petitioned
for an abatement Of the street better
ment Of more than $1,000 assessed
against. the estate on account of Law
!