Perth Amboy evening news., 1924-12-04
7 R |AL MUST
END TOMORROW.
Judge Daily Declares Night
Sessions Will Be Held
to That End
SLOAN TAKES THE STAND
Isaac Alpern, Roy Minton, M.
Irving Demarest and
Others Heard
SLOAN TAKES THE STAND

/ NEW BRUNSWICK, Dec. A.
Circuit Court Judge Peter +. DAILY,
presiding over the appeal taken by
the state in w. J. Donnell Lumber
Company condemnation award an
nounced yesterday that 1t Is his de-
sire that the case Will be brought to
a close tomorrow. even IL 1t Is neces-
sary to hold sessions tonight and to-
morrow night. The srial started on
Monday and the iuuge said that the
jurors have been asked to devote the
whole week to the case and this loss
OF time to some Is irreparable.
The defendant lumber concern fin
Iished its case at $3.50 o'clock yester-
day afternoon. Immediately after
which the state presented its wit
nesses to show that the award of
S1o5.O00 made by a condemnation
commission named to fix fair price
on the three and one-half acres of
Donnell land taken at Perth Amboy
as an approach to the new state
bridge across the Raritan river. was
exhorbitant. The state places a
value of about $30.0 on the land
being used by 1t for the bridge ap-
proach.
Major William G. Sloan, state
highway engineer, called by the Dom
nell interests as q witness, was asked
to explain why the state had paid
the National Fireprofing Company
$65,000 for the part of their proper
ty needed for the bridge approach.
The major explained that. of this
amount only s10.4O0 represented the
price paid for land. the remainder
covering the cost OF kilns. stacks
and buildings which had to be torn
down to make room for the ap-
proach.
Roy H. Minton, superintendent of
the General Ceramics Company, of
| Metuchen. testified as to the price of
kiln replacement, his figures being
slightly higher than those Of Major
| Sloan.
Isaac Alpern. of Perth Amboy. de-
clared that he estimated all of the
Donnell property to be worth $227,-
73S in April. 1921. this amount rep
resenting the value to the company.
A large percentage of this figure. he
said, represented the going concern
| value.
| NJ. Irving Demarest and George
R. Delaney testified as to the price
of other waterfront property in Perth
Amboy. speaking OF the Merritt dock
property in particular.
Thomas Evans, vice president of
| the Donnell concern, testified to the
advantages of the waterfront proper
! ty for the company's business. He
| denied that the real estate auctloneer
Joseph P. Day, of New York, had
| been asked to sell the waterfront
property.
At the conclusion of the lumber
concerns case, Attorney General
| Katzenbach declared that he had
proof that the waterfront site had
been practically abandoned in 1920
| by the Donnell concern and little or
nc activity was found on that prop
erty from then until 1923 when the
state acquired the property. The
attorney general declared the Dom
| nell concern had no right to presume
that the state was going to buy the
land and should have used 1t up until
the time 1t was taken over.
Judge DAILY told the jurors he
wanted 1t distinctly understood by
them that in their decision as to a
fair price on the property taken by
the state they are to consider the
land value only and not endeavor to
! figure the damage to the lumber con-
GERMS business.
A. Lee Grover, secretary to the
highway board, told of the action
taken by the commission in January
of this year in reaching a decision
to build road from Smith street to
the Donnell properties. the road con-
| Meeting the two parcels by means of
| passage under the bridge.
Angelo Piver, resident engineer on
the bridge construction work, testi-
fed that he found no lumber on the
Donnell property when he started
work laying out the bridge lines. He
also said there was no timber bulk
head there. He told of the work
which the state will do to make the
Donnell tracts accessible and connect
them.
s. S. Thompson of Red Bank testi-
fed as to the value of the dock
Clarence w. Hudson, designing en-
gineer on the bridge, during his testi-
mony was questioned as to why an
earth fill was used on the east side
of the bridge and a concrete retain
ing wall was built on the west side.
He said that 1t was an act of econ
omy inasmuch as the concrete wall
made it unnecessary to take addi-
tional land on the west side. On the
other side. he said, 1t was more eco
nomical to utilize the land to build
up a natural earth embankment. If
concrete retaining wall were built
on the east side OF the bridge, he
said, II would require heavy con-
crete piles and be more expensive.