Perth Amboy evening news. [volume] (Perth Amboy, N.J.) 1903-1959, 1910-05-10

value of such Improvements to be de-
termined by a sort of arbitration
board composed of three persons
In 1894 the city gave another doc
ument reciting the ninety-nine-yea
lease, covenant of renewal, etc, and
released the Perth Amboy Manufac-
turing Company from the right of
the city to take the property at any
of the ninety-nine-year terms. The
land after this year exchanged hands
several times and finally came down
to Hugh Ramsay and the Perth Ans
boy Shipbuilding Company, which
failed, and Of which Mr. Lyon is the
present receiver.
Mr. Lyon stated that the phrase
in the lease, "for use of the inhabl-
tants as they see fit, made the grant
very uncertain and thus tends to
lessen whatever interest, If any, the
city might have. He claimed the
trustees had right to do as they
did and doubted the Board of Pro-
prietors had the right to take back
the property, owing to their statute
of limitation.
Emil Frey, secretary of the FEEDER
] alton of Labor, the union organiza-
| tion that Is vigorously opposing the
sale of the property, next spoke He
asked few questions about the size
of the land, etc. He expressed his
doubts that the improvements to the
property would reach figure named
by Judge Lyon, as he understood the
city itself had assisted in filing In
the land He held that If the prop
erty could be secured in q legal way
at the expiration of the present
lease, which will be about twenty
years hence, 1t should do so.
Alderman Seaman then arose and
stated that he came to listen relative
to this old question. II can't see my
way clear In this matter IL we have
got any upland with this wet dock
the city may have claim, but other
wise / can't see that we have
Adam Eckert, an old resident of the
city, spoke and defended the labor
people. His contention was that the
| city has an interest there and should
| fightsfor ii. James S. Wight was on
hand and asked what object the city
4 4 if99aad ir ifftlg--she cloud over the
present title, what feeHsllge the city
would derive if ii helped to osSsse the
cloud, as Mr.. lyon had previously
called It? To this the Judge replied
the receiver Is in a position to give
some consideration and then the city
would receive forty or forty-five
, thousand dollars for taxes, etc. Mr..
Eckert arose several times during
the meeting and vigorously defend
ed whatever interest the city might
have. He referred to past hearings
| in the matter, when the city had to
engage outside counsel to look after
its interests and when the matter
was thrown out of the circuit court
and advices given that 1t be taken to
the court of equity or chancery
! A. j. Rossl asked IL the court OF
| chancery was going to decide as to
the title of the land or whether 1t is
| just to give an order to sell IT, He
was informed that IL an order was
given the city to sell the city had
an interest in the property In ques-
ton. At this point Alderman Calvin
said: II don't think the resolution
we passed was intended to sell the
land"
Martin Momberg expressed his
doubts as to the city having any In
terest at all in the land. James
Growney said that he would sell all
interest he had in the property for
81.
Alderman-at-Large Voorhees, CALI
ed for other speakers and near the
end of the meeting asked Samuel G.
Garretson to say something, mas
much as he always loved to spout.
he told of having seen the worthless
property laying there for years. He
doubted that 1t had been very valua-
bic to those who have occupied 1t.
He held that the city should dis
pose of the property and use the
money for developing property in
another section of the city, some-
thing like the old water works prop-
erty for instance.
The meeting closed with a few
remarks by Mr.. Voorhees,, in which
he stated the city's interests would
certainly be looked after and il it
was of advantage to keep the prop
erty, the city would do so.