The Press., 1907-07-10


parently considered it undeserving O
notice, and it was not reported by hir
to the owners of the property as Al
offer.
The real attitude of Mr.. Spock ma.
be fairly judged from his refusal t
negotiate because we had employee
attorneys, when his only relation t.
the subject was that of acting in tn
capacity of attorney for the othe
side. The employment of attorney
by the owners of the land became
necessary when the railway company
insisted upon proceedings for apprais
ment in mid-winter, which proceed
ings were at all times unnecessary ant
need never have been resorted to.
The above letter of Mr.. Spock wal
answered on May 9th. This answer
dealt chiefly with the subject-mattel
of Mr.. Spock's letter, but our willing
ness to negotiate was shown by the
conclusion of the letter, which was al
follows:
"There never was time when the
owners of those properties would not
have readily negotiated sale if fairly
approached.
In the early part of last month the
decision of the supreme court of errors
became known, and Immediately
thereafter the following explicit letter
was sent to the railway company:
Newburgh, N. Y, June IL, 1907.
Commissioner of Real Estate,
N. Y, N. H. & HI. r. r. Co.,
New Haven, Conn.
Dear r:-Referring to the subject
of my letter of the 22d ult. to you
concerning the rights sought by the
Stafford Springs Street Railway com.
pany over the land of the Eastern
Connecticut Realty company and the
Middle River Mfg. Co., beg to say
that the owners of that land have
learned that the supreme court has
found no error in the finding of the
superior court concerning the steps
for appraising such right of way.
In view of the continued reports OF
statements by representatives of the
Street Railway company that the own
ers of the land above referred to are
the sole cause of the delay in the en-
trance of the railway into Stafford
Springs; and in view of statements
in the local public press that the de-
lay is now operating against the pub
lie interest of Stafford Springs, beg
to say that am authorize by the
owners of the said land to notify you
of their readiness to meet immediate-
ly your representatives to adjust the
differences concerning these rights OF
way. L believe that the owners of
the land will do every reasonable
thing to reach such an adjustment
speedily, and that the further delays
that might otherwise arise may thus
be avoided.
My understanding is that any such
adjustment of the value of land, being
apart from subjects of litigation, be-
longs properly to your department
hence have not addressed Mr.. Spock.
to whom you handed my letter of the
22d ult. Yours truly, 49,.
J. M. Sheehan.'
No answer has been received to the
above letter of June 18th, although
about a month has elapsed since il
was written. It has been easily
learned, however, in the meantime,
that the railway company has beer
busy in efforts to find witnesses in
Stafford whom they could induce te
testify before the appraisers to 9
small value for the damages in
question. The object of this com
munication is not to similarly conduct
campaign, but to disclose the true
history of these transactions, now
nearly year old. There has never
been time when the railway com
pany could not have acquired the right
of way in question if they had useG
the same methods they employed will
other land owners. No negotiation
of any kind have ever been attempted
by the railway company after the
letter of September 14th, in which thu
price $500 was suggested. On the
contrary, they have avoided the invi.
tations to negotiate, which the above
correspondence shows we have several
times extended, as we'll as neglected
to make the offer which Mr.. Ryder
was asked on two different occasions
in presence of witnesses, to do. II
other instances in which prices deem
ed unreasonable by the railway com
pany were at first named by othe
owners, the company made furthe
approach to the parties and negotiated
with them until a mutually acceptable
price was agreed upon. In face o
their failure to thus negotiate TO
this land, repeated statements hav'
been made by the representatives O
the company that they could not &C
quire the land except at an exorbitan
value. These statements have BEEF
made to persons whom the railwa,
company have asked to appear befor
the appraisers to testify to values
We have been represented as praoticin
"hold-up" on the railway compan
and on the borough. The Who'll
trend of the correspondence cite
above shows such is not the case. aTh
owners of the land have always bee
ready to make fair sale. Why di
not the railway company respond t
our direct written invitations to adjus
the existing differences? Little tim
would have been involved in the at
tempt, and if a failure the commissio
could still be resorted to.
Yours truly, j. M. Sheehan.
Stafford.
Miss Elvira TODD is visiting i
Tariffville.
Mrs Mary lombard of Hartford /