The Jersey City news., 1902-12-12

tug boats no longer use the foot Of Essex
street rs . headquarters.
John Dolan complained that an assess
men of $500 on No. 152 Seventh street
was excessive. The assessment was
$1,000 IN 1901 and $500 in 1000.
Patrick Kenny was assessed $500 on
house No 1873 Thirteeath street and
$1,000 on the adjoining lot He applied
for reduction of 81 900 on the building
and $500 on the lot
VALUES HAVE DEPRECATED.
George Kuntz, who owns No. II New
ark avenue, thought that he was entitled
to have $1,000 chopped off an assessed
valuation of $500 by reason of de-
probation in value of property on that
block.
Councilman Andrew Hopper, of Ho-
boken, objected to an assessment of
$1,000 on No. 645 Henderson street in
view of the fact that he only paids
$1,000 for the property at an auction
sale. He asked for reduction of 81 ,000
Mary Kavanagh, of No. 1S4 York
street, didn't think that $2,100 was a
fair assessment for property which had
been assessed at 81, 700 for four years.
Alexander Robertson asked that 5000
be taken off an assessment of $1,000 on
No. lS4 Fourteenth street, which he
valued at $1,000.
Andrew SPOTS said that $1,000 was
sufficiently high for an assessment on
Nos. 23S-240 Seventh street. The Tax
Board valued it at $4,000. Mr.. SPOTS
said he couldn't get $4,000 for the prop
erty.
A, NJ. Henry asked the Board to re-
duce an assessment of $500 on No. $50
Jersey avenue
Patrick H. McQuaid bought No. 235
Tenth street for $500 on July %, 1900.
The assessment was $500. Mr.. Nc
Quad said that SLIGO would be fair
figure.
The estate of William McCann is
willing to sell No 230 Bay street for
$500 The property is assessed at
$1,000.
James McSpirit asked for reduction
of $500 on a $1,000 assessment on No.
124 Wayne street, which was assessed
hast year at $500. He purchased the
property in 1889 for $4,000.
Dennis Murphy was assessed $1,000
on No. 332 Fifth street, the same price
he paid for it. He was of the opinion
that S700 was enough.
FAIR VALUE.
John McGratll, of No. 273 Monmouth
street, thought $4,000 was fair value"
for the property which was assessed at
Sc, 500.
f. f. Morris, trustee, couldn't quite
understand why lot at No. s307 Thir-
teenth street should be assessed at $500
when there was no way of reaching the
which is under water
T. Brown appealed for a reduction of
81 900 on a $1,000 assessment ON No. 212
Wayne street.
wilhefmina Rein asked for $500 off |
on an assessed valuation of $1,000 on
No. 341 Fourth street.
Undertaken John #. Mcdonald of No.
SIS Newark avenue, didn't think he
should be compelled to pay taxes on a
valuation of $4,000 when he bought the
at an auction sale at $5,250.
Catharine Stark. of No. 80 Cambridge
avenue, requested decrease of $500 in
an 81 800 assessment.
Ellen johnson Of No. so Sanford
place, petitioned for reduction of $500 |
on valuation of 81, 300.
Jacob Diehl, the Republican Freeholder
from the Eighth ward, kicked because he
had been assessed $500 ON lot at No. |
SO Giles avenue, on which he is building
a house. He was assessed for the fodn-
dation. He asked that the valuation be
fixed at 5000. He. also requested that
the Tax Boards figures, $3.50 each, on
two vacant lots in Bentley avenue, be
cut down to $3.50. He said he could get
5000 each for them. Mr.. Diehl objected
to $3.50 each on two lots in James avenue
for which he paid $75 apiece.
Barnett w. Brown didn't see the JUS
tice of placing a value of $3.50 ON a lot
in Tonnele avenue, which he purchased
for $3.50 in monthly installments of So
He said he could have bought it for $500
cash. He had an idea that $50 was
about the right figure.
The assessment on Mr.. Robert Davis's
property ON Clifton place was reduced
from 81 400 tos$1, 900, the same as last
year. No reductions were made on the
assessment of $3S,O00 on the Arlington
flats, at York and Warren streets, and
on Hartnett's drug store, in the same
block. The assessmnts on all the New
ark avenue properties were confirmed