Perth Amboy evening news., 1923-04-30
TELL OF APPRAISAL AT
BRIDGE LAND PROBE
CONTINUED from page u

AOOnlAAAG0 AAO@
sal of the Donnell property at the re-
auest of A, B. Mcdowell. q member
Of the firm. Mr.. Alpern said he was
not told why the Donnell company
wanted the property appraised, but
told him he wanted tic get an idea
what it was worth. The witness said
he made an a-ppraisement on be-
half of the real estate department
| Of his bank upon the verbal request
of Mcdowell.
Aipern said he went over the Don
nell property with Mcdowell and
later went over 1t again with John }.
Quinn of the banks real estate de-
partment. On March S. 1921, the wit
ress said he sent to Mcdowell an
appraisal on the property fixing
1915, 900 as its value, considering
the going concern possibilities.
Later learning that the state was
charging interest on $75 per foot
whereas he originally had valued the
riparian rights at $40 per foot, Mr..
Alpern said, he made out a supple
mental appraisal which he sent to
the Donnell company on April 10,
1921, placing the value at $227,758.
Alpern admitted during the ques-
tioning by the attorney general that
in placing a $4,000 per acre APP
praisal on the property he was in
Guiding the good will which enters
into a going concern" The Donnell
land offered a business proposition,
the witness said, and the possibilities
of development were taken into con-
sideration by him as we'll as the ac-
tual land value.
The witness admitted that there
were no buildings on the land with
the exception of a locomotive shed
which he valued at $1,000. McCran
brought out the fact that the DON
nell company had not erected any
buildings whatsoever on the prop
erty indicating their intention to ex-
pand. In reply to a question as to
| whether there was any lumber on
the property, Alpern replied that
there were seven, eight OIL nine piles
He said he saw no teams of horses
at work there, neither did he see any
| employees about the land.
Asked how he reached the figures
| on the value of the dock C1S,500)
the witness said he communicated
with builders and secured this figure
as the cost of a dock which would
be similar to the n on the property,
Again explaining the difference in
his original and supplemental ap-
praisal. Alpern said his second ripar-
ian right estimate was $1S,75S which
was S9,758 higher than his original
figure.
In 1911. Mr.. Alpern said, the Pub
lie Service company bought six acres
of land for 100000. There were nc
buildings upon this. He declared I'M
der question by the attorney general
that this property was on the Kill
Won Kull and not ON the Raritan
river.
With reference to the sale of some
Sayre G. Fisher property near that of
the Donnell company. the witness
said he had heard that property
brought from $4,000 to $12,0 900 an
acre. He said he did not know who
brought that sale to his attention
and did not know that it had been
sold for less than $4,000 an acre, the
attorney general bringing the latter
fact to his attention.
Mr.. Alpern said that he did not
know at the time he made the ap-
praisai of the Donneii property that
property of the National Fireproof-
ing Company in the same locality
was available. He maintained that
this property, which is within soc
feet OF the Donnell tract, accord
ing to the attorney generals figures
IS not as valuable as the Donnel
property as it is i'll Woodbridge
township. The witness said he did
not know that the State of New