The Press., 1907-07-10

4
Collins and Brooks, for Ware proba
bly, Downey gnd Smith.
Il (CommunIcated)
Newburgh, N. Y.
Editor The Press:-
| Dear Sir: 81 ask the use of you
columns to publish the facts about the
efforts that have been made to acquire
rights of way from the Middle River
Mfg. 90. and Eastern Connecticut
Realty Co., for the entry into Stafford
Springs Of the Stafford Springs Street
Railway 90. The representatives OF
the above companies have hitherto
kept silent on this subject. but in
view of the misleading statements that
have been frequently made about their
attitude toward the taking of this
land, they feel that it is proper to
now make known the actual facts.
On the 23d of August, 1906, J. W.
Ryder, who had two days previously
telegraphed in the name of the real
estate department. of the N. Y, N. H.
s. 81. r. r. Co., called upon me and
asked for a price on the land in
question. He presented q blue print
which did not make very clear to me
the land his company wished to take,
and informed him that then had
no authority to make a price on the
land. asked him, however, in the
presence of witnesses, to make an
offer for the land, and later asked him
to furnish me with q copy of the blue
print of the desired right of way. A
few days later. on September 4th,
wrote him for q copy of the blue
print, which was not then, and has
never been furnished. On Septemb Der
9th Mr.. Ryder called on me again
and presented papers, giving his COM
pany Immediately the desired right
of way, the price for the land to be
determined afterwards. I was I'M
able to execute the papers because of
lack of authority. On September
14th, one week after his last visit, l
wrote Mr.. Ryder that the owners of
the property believed that the damage
which would be done by the railway
company would amount to SIS, 900.
In this letter cited the following
damages that would result from the
proposed taking Of land by the rail-
way company:
/. Land suitable for 20 desirable
buildings lots would be rendered
worthless for building purposes.
2. The building of the railroad
between the house occupied by Mr..
Lee and the adjoining boarding house
would prevent the laying out of a
street through the property from Main
street northerly to Center street.
3. The injury to the house occu-
pied by Mr.. Lee would be practically
equal to the value of that property.
A. The injury to the boarding
house would be practically equal to
the value of that property.
3. The injury to the tenements
west of the boarding house would be
considerable, because no approach
could then be had to the rear of those
tenements, which is practically the
sole approach now to those tenements.
6. There would be considerable
injury to the appearance of the prop
erty of the Middle River Mfg. Co..
caused by the grading and filling
necessary for the railroads purposes.
In concluding my letter of September
14th wrote as follows:
81 beg to say that personally am
not unwilling to see the trolley road
built as you have laid it out, provided
your company properly recognizes the
injury that is being done to the
property. You may believe that
there is considerable element of sem
timent in placing the value above in
dictated for the property, but as it is
not for me to pass upon that question
I can merely say that will do what
ever reasonably can to insure steps
that will effect sale of the property
to your company"
The above letter was not answered
by Mr.. Ryder or his company until
October 18th, more than two months
later. Mr.. Ryder then wrote as fol-
lows:
In reply would say that, relying
upon your promise to arbitrate, we
have decided that arbitration would
be the most satisfactory method of
settlement. But in order to have
the title absolutely clear, it will
doubtless be best that the arbitrators
should be appointed by the court. !"
After receipt of the last mentioned
letter, so unexpectedly threatening
litigation, the matter was allowed to
rest until early in last Janaury, when
the railway company instituted pro-
ceedings in the superior court for the
appointment of appraisers. At that
time the right of way in question was
heavily covered with ice and snow,
and the owners of the property be.
lieved that the action of the railway
company in seeking commission tc
fix the damages at that time of year
was unjust. Accordingly, opposition
was made in the courts to the applica.
tion Of the railway company. and this
opposition was continued in one form
or another until the questions in.
volved were decided in the supreme
court of errors last month. Before
this latter decision was known, how
ever, q letter was addressed to the
commissioner of real estate of the N.
Y, N. 81. 6 II. R. R. Co., under date
of May 22d, stating that the owners
of this land had never stood inn
movably for $751; damages, anG
that they had never been averse tt
such negotiations as had been carried
on with other land owners in Stafford
where differences at first developed