Hon. EDWARD M. GROUT, Comptroller:

December 21, 1903.

SIR-Adolph I. Rudolph, Abraham Bernhard, Albert Halpern and Philip Margolin, in a verified petition under date of December 19, 1903, state that they are the owners in fee and tenants in common of two parcels of land lying in the Twenty-sixth Ward of the Borough of Brooklyn, County of Kings, City and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:

Parcel A.

Beginning at a point on the northerly side of Newport avenue distant 100 feet westerly from the corner formed by the intersection of the northerly side of Newport avenue and the westerly side of Osborn street; running thence northerly and parallel with Osborn street 150 feet; thence westerly and parallel with Newport avenue 100 feet; thence sontherly and along the easterly side of Thatford avenue to the easterly side of Hunterfly road; thence again southerly and along the easterly side of Hunterfly road to the northerly side of Newport avenue; thence easterly and along the northerly side of Newport avenue to the point or place of beginning, being that portion on the map hereunto annexed and made part of this petition which is marked in red ink.

Parcel B.

Beginning at the corner formed by the intersection of the southerly side of Newport avenue and the westerly side of Osborn street; running thence southerly and along the westerly side of Osborn street 400 feet, more or less, to the easterly side of Hunterfly road; thence northerly and along the easterly side of Hunterfly road to the point of intersection of the easterly side of Hunterfly road and the southerly side of Newport avenue; thence easterly and along the southerly side of Newport avenue to the corner of the block, the point or place of beginning, being also marked in red ink on said map.

That the petitioners are informed and believe that all of the land comprised in said Hunterfly road adjoining and abutting the said lands of these petitioners is vested in The City of New York; that the petitioners are desirous of acquiring title to all such portions of said Hunterfly road as the same may be granted to them by The City of New York, without prejudice to any adjoining and abutting owners of the land lying and adjoining said Hunterfly road on the west thereof; that the petition is made in good faith and for the purpose of purchasing from The City of New York said portion of the Old Hunter fly road adjoining their property, and that they are willing to pay any sum or sums which may be required of them by a fair and reasonable valuation of the same.

It appears from an examination of the facts as set forth in said petition that this application is in all respects similar to many that were granted by the former City of Brooklyn under a resolution of the Common Council of said city, and since consolidation by The City of New York under a resolution of the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, for a nominal consideration.

A release of the City's interest in a portion of the Old Hunterfly road was made to Gilbert S. Thatford (see minutes Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, July 17, 1901, page 311) and to John H. Vanderveer Company (see minutes Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, May 2, 1902, page 397).

I would therefore recommend that this application be sent to the Corporation Counsel for his opinion as to whether the City's interest in the premises is material or a mere cloud upon the title of a private owner. If he shall certify that the City's interest is not material, the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, pursuant to section 205 of the amended Greater New York Charter, may properly authorize a release or quit-claim for a nominal consideration to the petitioners, Adolph I. Rudolph, Abraham Bernhard, Albert Halpern and Philip Margolin, of all the right, title and interest of The City of New York to that portion of the Old Hunterfly road lying within the area of the block bounded by Thatford avenue, Newport avenue, Osborn street and Riverdale avenue, adjoining Parcel A, shown on the diagram hereto annexed, and all the right, title and interest of The City of New York of, in and to the easterly half of the Old Hunterfly road within the area of the block bounded by Thatford avenue, Osborn street, Newport avenue and Lot avenue, adjoining the property on the west marked Parcel B on the diagram hereto annexed. That the petitioners shall produce evidence that all the taxes, assessments and water rates due and unpaid against the easterly half of the road herein described shall have been paid before receiving such release from the City.

I would also recommend that the interest of the City be appraised at the nominal sum of $1 and that the expense of such release, examination, etc., be fixed at $100, to be paid by said petitioners before the delivery of such release.

Respectfully submitted,

MORTIMER J. BROWN,

Appraiser of Real Estate in Charge of Bureau.

Resolved, That pursuant to the provisions of section 205 of the Amended Greater New York Charter, the Commissions of the Sinking Fund, by unanimous vote, hereby authorize a release or quit claim to Adolph I. Rudolph, Abraham Bernhard, Albert Helpern and Philip Margolin, of all the right, title and interest of The City of New York to that portion of the old Hunterfly road lying within the area of the block bounded by Thatford avenue, Newport avenue, Osborn street and Riverdale avenue, and all the right, title and interest of The City of New York of, in and to the easterly half of the old Hunterfly road, within the area of the block bounded by Thatford avenue, Osborn street, Newport avenue and Lot avenue, Borough of Brooklyn;

-the Corporation Counsel having certified to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, under date of January 18, 1904, that whatever interest the City may have in the property is a mere cloud upon the title of the owners;

Resolved, That the interest of The City of New York in and to the same be and is hereby appraised at the nominal sum of one dollar ($1) and the expense of such release, examination, etc., be and is hereby fixed at one hundred dollars ($100), to be paid by the petitioners, and evidence produced showing that all the taxes, assessments and water rates due and unpaid against the easterly half of the road herein described have been paid before the delivery of such release.

Which resolution was unanimously adopted.

The following petition was received from Mary U Hofman for a release or quit dam of premies Nos. 5 and Chambers street, Borough of Manhattan

In the Matter

of

The Application of Mary Ushoefer Hofman

regard to Nos 3 and 7 Chambers street.

To the Honorable the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund of The City of New York: Your petitioner, Mary Ulshoeffer Hoffman, respectfully shows and alleges: First-That your petitioner resides in The City of New York and is the owner in fee simple of the premises known as Nos. 5 and 7 Chambers street, in said City, and together bounded as Ellows: "Southerly in front by Chambers street; easterly by property row or late of William Alburtis; northerly by property now or late also of William Alburtis and westerly by property late of John Field Containing together on Chambers street fifty-three (53) feet five and one-half (55) inches; on the easterly side, sixty-five (65) fect three 31 inches; on the northerly side, seven (7) feet eight (8) inches, and on the westerly side, thirty-five (35) feet five (5) inches, be the said several dimensions more or less. Being the same premises which were conveyed to John David Wolfe by Philo T. Ruggles, Master-in-Chancery, by deed dated March 5, 1846, and recorded March 23, 1845, in the office of the Register of the County of New York in Liber 478 of Conveyances at page 7."

That said premises are also parts of Lots Nos. 3 and 8 on a map of the lands of the Corporation of New York, made by Stephen Ludlam, City Surveyor, and filed in the Comptroller's office.

Second-That the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of The City of New York conveyed Lot No. 3 on said map, with a frontage on Chambers street of thirtyeight (38) feet eight (8, inches, all of which frontage is comprised within the above described premises belonging to your petitioner, to Elbert Anderson, Jr., by deed dated January 28, 1813, and recorded in the office of the Register of the County of New York, in Liber 105 of Conveyances, page 468, on May 5, 1814

That said deed contained the following proviso or condition: "Provided always and these presents are upon this express condition, that whenever the said party of the second part, his heirs or assigns, shall erect any building upon the southerly end of the said lot of ground hereby granted, he or they shall erect and build such building upon the southerly extremity of the said lot and upon the line of Chambers street as the same street now runs; and further, that if the said party of the second part, his heirs or assigns, shall erect any building upon the said southerly end of the said lot contrary to this proviso or condition, that then and in such case these presents and the estate hereby granted shall cease, determine and be of no effect, and the said parties of the first part or their successors may thereupon enter upon the said premises hereby granted and have and possess the same again as of their first and former estate, anything herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding.”

That Lot No. 8 on said map was subsequently conveyed to the same grantee, Elbert Anderson, Jr., by the same grantors, the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty

of The City of New York, by deed dated September 7, 1818, and recorded in said Register's office in Liber 143 of Conveyances, page 289, on May 13, 1820, but containing no such proviso or condition as that contained in said last-mentioned deed of Lot No. 3 and above recited. That fourteen (14) feet nine and one-half (9) inches of the frontage of your petitioner's property above described was comprised within the said Lot No. 8.

Third-Your petitioner further shows that on a recent proposed sale of said premises Nos. 5 and 7 Chambers street, belonging to your petitioner, the title of your petitioner was objected to and was claimed by the proposed purchaser to be unmarketable by reason of said proviso or condition above set forth. That whilst your petitioner is advised and believes to the contrary, namely, that said proviso or condition does not any longer so restrict or encumber the title as to render it unmarketable, to obtain an authoritative decision on that question from the Court of Appeals would necessitate a long and expensive litigation. That your petitioner is irformed and believes that the buildings originally erected upon the southerly end of said premises were placed and still stand upon the southerly extremity thereof and upon the line of Chambers street, as it then ran and still runs, and your petitioner is advised and believes that said proviso or condition has therefore been fully complied with and observed and is now exhausted and of no further force or effect, but that if not, there remains in the City at most only the bare possibility of a reverter on the breach of a condition subsequent, which there is every reason to believe will never occur and from which, if it ever did occur, and the consequent forfeiture and divesting of your petitioner's estate, a court of equity would relieve your petitioner. That the City's interest in said premises and real estate, if any, is therefore only such as to be a mere cloud upon the title of your petitioner.

Wherefore your petitioner prays you, the Honorable the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund of The City of New York, to remove the said cloud upon your petitioner's title and to release unto her, your petitioner, her heirs and assigns, any interest remaining in the City by reason of said proviso or condition contained in said above recited deed, and all right, title and interest of the City in and to said premises in acordance with the provisions of section 205 of the Greater New York Charter and the powers thereby given.

And your petitioner will ever pray, etc.

STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF NEW YORK, ss.:

MARY U. HOFFMAN.

Mary Ulshoeffer Hoffman, the petitioner above named, being duly sworn, deposes and says that she has read the foregoing petition by her subscribed and knows the contents thereof, and that the same is true to her own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to those matters she believes it to be true.

Sworn to before me this 25th day of November, 1903.

CHAS. E. SCOTT,

Notary Public (220), N. Y. Co.

MARY U. HOFFMAN.

Lots marked 1 and 2 were sold and conveyed to Elbert Anderson, Jr.

No. 1. By deed dated January 28, 18:3. for consideration of $1,815, the premises were conveyed, subject to the restriction of building on the southern extremity of the lot (shaded).

No. 2. Deed dated September 7, 18:8, for consideration of $1.575, without any provision or condition as to building.

These two lots were subsequently subdivided and buildings erected thereon, as

The restriction as to building on the southerly end of the plot, Lot No. 1, appears to be entirely unnecessary and uncalled for, and may at the present time be properly remitted and the premises released therefrom.

J. I. C.

December 23, 1903.

In connection therewith, the Comptroller presented the following report of the Appraiser of Real Estate of the Department of Finance, with opinion of the Corporation Counsel, and offered the following resolution: