The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-07-19
UPHOLDS STATE.
Board of Taxation Decides
New Jerseys Riparian
Claim Is Good.
IN KING APPEAL CASE
Contention That New York
Owns Land Under Water
Overruled.

Major Carl Lentz and Mr.. Charles c.
Black, members of the State Board of
Taxation, after a conference in Mr..
Blacks office in this city yesterday on be-
half of the State Board rendered a de-
cision this morning which directly up
holds, as far as a ruling of that body
can, the States policy concerning the con-
troll of riparian lands. The findings were
announced in the case of the King estate
against the Town of Weehawken, and
coming as it did so soon after Secretary
Roots communication intimating federal
governmental control of the land under
water along the New Jersey shore of New
York Bay, the decision has been awaited
with interest.
More than forty acres of land were
involved in the proceedings, the original
King tract having been partitioned into
seven parcels. Each of these had been as
sessed by the Weehawken authorities at
$40 600, and the owners of six of the seven
parcels appealed to the State Board from
the assessments. Thus property valua-
ton of $4,000 was in review before the
State Board.
In four of the cases the owners have
riparian leases from the State, while in
the OlnGf lWO l4O grant lbetS bCCA epPAAS0
for. Despite this discrepancy the tax as
SCISSORS had assessed all six tracts alike,
though comparatively little of the prop
erty is upland and it is generally admitted
that it's chief value lies in the water front
it has.
Wheeler G. Peckham, of New York, and
Abel l. Smith, of Hoboken, as counsel for
the appellants, set up the claim that the
local assessors had no right to assess ri
parian leases and it was further contend
ed that even the State had no right to
lands under the waters which divide New
York and New Jersey. This latter point
was raised by former Judge Peckham be-
fore the United States authorities took
the position, seemingly, that it could have
all the New Jersey water front it wanted
without saying "by your leave" Mr..
Peckham's argument was that by virtue
of a series of treaties and agreement,
New York was given Jurisdiction over the
under water lands extending to the New
Jersey shore.
Much testimony was taken before the
lawyers argued the cases before the State
Board in Trenton, Tuesday. as told in
"The Jersey City News At that time
counsel for the appellants, in treating of
the right to assess riparian leases, took
the ground that the holder of such
lease bore the same relation to the State
as the lessee of a house does to the owner
that is, that in neither instance should
the lessee be taxed for the property.
Commissioners Lentz and Black met in
the latter's office here today to decide the
appeals. The contention that the State
did not control the riparian lands and
that leases could not be taxed were set
aside The board held as to riparian
leases, that they differed materially from
ordinary leases in that the State actually
conveyed certain of its rights to lease
holders by permitting the latter to secure
complete grants at any time upon the
payment of the sum fixed.
The board held, however, that in the
two cases where riparian leases had not
been secured, the local assessors had
erred in putting as large q value on that
property as on the adjoining, which in
cluded the leases. At the same time, it
was ruled that the property was given an
enhanced value by virtue of its location
over what it would otherwise be worth, if
the owners were not in a position to Sc
cure riparian leases upon application.
In effect this ruling upholds the conten-
ton that the State has valuable rights in
land under water.
Aside from the legal questions involved,
the board reduced all of the assessments.
The valuation of the four tracts which
included diparian leases We're reduced
from $4,000 to $4,000 and the other two
to $4,000.