that she owned the premises together with her husband. Since that time, to wit, July 23, 1890, she herself, or her husband and herself, have paid the taxes and the water rents on said premises to the City of New York. That said premises during all such time and prior thereto have been described on the map of the City of New

York used by the tax department as a lot of land twenty-five feet in front and rear by one hundred feet in depth on each side, and in accordance with the detailed metes and bounds description set out above. That during all these years and from the time that the petitioner and her husband acquired the premises as hereinbefore mentioned, there were erected on the said lot of land two substantial houses, one of which fronts on the street and is flush with the street or building line running back to a depth of about fifty-six feet, and the other of which is built on the rear of the lot. The front building covers the entire portion of that part of the Old Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road within the area of this lot of land.

Fourth-Your petitioner is informed and believes that some time prior to the year 1890 the Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road ran through the front of this lot of land to a depth of a considerable number of feet from the present street line of Hopkins Street as now laid out and maintained. Your petitioner is further informed and believes that the interest of the City of New York in the said Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road, so far as it effects your petitioner's lot of land, is a cloud upon the title to her lot of land, but that the City of New York has no further interest therein except such as might be properly termed a cloud upon title. She is informed that said road has long since been discontinued and closed, and of course knows from her own knowledge that it has been discontinued and closed prior to the year 1890, for since that time she has been in possession of the premises with the buildings thereon erected in their present state and situation.

Fifth Annexed hereto is a true survey of the said premises herein mentioned made by the Messerole City Surveying Company in the year 1916, showing the location and situation of both the front and rear buildings. This survey correctly shows the situation and position of these buildings since July 23, 1890, when your petitioner acquired title to said premises in fee.

Wherefore your petitioner prays that the City of New York, pursuant to the provisions of section 205 of the Greater New York Charter release and quit claim to your petitioner any interest that the City of New York may have in the said premises by reason of the Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road forming a part thereof and in so far as the said Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road effects the lot of land herein described.

Dated Brooklyn, N. Y., January 28, 1916.

State of New York, County of Kings, ss.:

ELIZABETH INGOLD, Petitioner.

Elizabeth Ingold, being duly sworn, deposes and says: that she is the petitioner named in the foregoing Petition; that she has read the foregoing Petition and knows the contents thereof, and that the same is true to her own knowledge except as to matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and that as to those matters she believes it to be true. ELIZABETH INGOLD.

Sworn to before me, this 28th day of Jan., 1916. LAURA H. RAHM, Notary Public, Kings Co. Certificate Filed in Queens Co. Certificate Filed, Register No. 7022. In connection therewith the Deputy and Acting Comptroller presented the fɔllowing report and offered the following resolution:

To the Honorable The Commissioners of the Sinking Fund:

Gentlemen-I am in receipt of a petition to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund from Elizabeth Ingold, in which she states that she is the owner of certain premises located on the northerly side of Hopkins Street, near Throop Avenue, Borough of Brooklyn, and requests a release of a certain portion thereof contained within the former lines of Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike, on the theory that the City's interest is merely a cloud upon her title.

I submitted this petition to the Corporation Counsel who, in a communication under date of November 9, 1916, states that the City's interest in the premises requested to be released is not more than a cloud thereon.

I therefore respectfully recommend that the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund authorize a release to Elizabeth Ingold, of No. 668 East 31st Street, Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, of the interest of the City in and to the following described premises:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the Borough of Brooklyn, City and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:

Beginning at a point in the northerly line of Hopkins Street, distant 200 feet westerly from the corner formed by the intersection of the northerly line of Hopkins Street with the westerly line of Throop Avenue; running thence northerly and parallel with Throop Avenue 24.5 feet to the northerly line of the old Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike; running thence southwesterly and

along the said northerly line of the old Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike 27.92 feet; running thence southerly and parallel with Throop Avenue 12.3 feet to the northerly line of Hopkins Street; running thence easterly and along the northerly line of Hopkins Street 25 feet to the point or place of beginning, -in consideration of the sum of $101, plus an additional charge of $12.50 for the preparation of the necessary papers; the release to contain the following terms and conditions:

That the grantee waive any and all claim for damages arising out of the closing of the street or avenue.

That the grantee is the owner of the land fronting on the section of the street or avenue to be conveyed.

The deed not to be delivered until the grantee has paid whatever taxes and assessments are liens against the premises to be conveyed. Respectfully,

ALBERT E. HADLOCK, Deputy and Acting Comptroller.

City of New York, Law Department, Office of the Corporation Counsel, New York, November 9, 1916.

Hon. WILLIAM A. PRENDERGAST, Comptroller:

Sir-I am in receipt of a communication dated April 3, 1916, signed by Deputy and Acting Comptroller Brough and reading as follows:

"I transmit herewith a petition from Elizabeth Ingold, requesting a release of the City's interest in certain premises located within the lines of Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike, Borough of Brooklyn. The petitioner requests a release of the City's interest in that portion of Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike, adjoining premises owned by her, on the theory that the City's interest is merely a cloud upon her title.

"If this be so, kindly so certify under the provisions of Section 205 of the Charter, so that I may request the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund to authorize the release requested."

The petition transmitted alleges that the petitioner, Elizabeth Ingold, with her husband, Erhard Ingold, now deceased, is and has been since July 23, 1890, the owner of the premises known as No. 177 Hopkins Street in the Borough of Brooklyn; that during all that time she and her husband have paid the taxes and water rents levied on said premises and the premises have been shown on the Tax Maps of the Borough of Brooklyn as a lot 25 feet in front by 100 feet in depth; that during all that time there have been erected on the premises two houses, one on the front thereof built to the building line of the lot, and the other on the rear; that a portion of the said premises was formerly part of the bed of Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road, an old road which was discontinued and closed long prior to the year 1890, and that the aforesaid building erected on the front of the petitioner's premises covers the part of said premises of which the old road was part; that the interest of The City of New York in the said premises is only a cloud upon the title of the petitioner. The petition is verified by the oath of the petitioner and requests a release and quitclaim of the interest of The City of New York in the portion of the premises formerly forming part of the said old road.

Annexed to the petition is a survey showing the premises and the buildings and fences thereon as well as the portion of said premises which formed part of the said old road.

The Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road is an old Dutch road. It was decided in Caminez vs. Goodman (119 App. Div., 484) by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Second Department, that the title to this road was in The City of New York.

That title, however, has been divested by the title acquired by the adverse possession of the petitioner and her predecessors in title. That adverse possession is established by the statements contained in the verified petition, all of which have been confirmed by an investigation made by this office. The Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike Road has been discontinued and closed for more than fifty years.

I am therefore of opinion, and advise you that the petitioner has acquired title by adverse possession to the premises requested to be released and that the City's interest therein is not more than a cloud on her title.

I return the petition transmitted with the communication of the Deputy and Acting Comptroller. Respectfully yours,

LOUIS H. HAHLO, Acting Corporation Counsel.

Whereas, Elizabeth Ingold in a petition addressed to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund requests a release of the City's interest in a strip of land located on the northerly side of Hopkins Street_ near Throop Avenue, Borough of Brooklyn, contained within the former lines of Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike and

1

Whereas, The Corporation Counsel in a communication dated November 9, 1916, states that the petitioner has acquired title by adverse possession to the premises requested to be released and that the City's interest therein is not more than a cloud on her title.

Resolved, That the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund hereby determine that the land described as follows is not needed for any public use.

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the Borough of Brooklyn, City and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:

Beginning at a point in the northerly line of Hopkins Street, distant 200 feet westerly from the corner formed by the intersection of the northerly line of Hopkins Street with the westerly line of Throop Avenue; running thence northerly and parallel with Throop Avenue 24.5 feet to the northerly line of the old Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike; running thence southwesterly and along the said northerly line of the old Bushwick and Newtown Turnpike 27.9% feet; running thence southerly and parallel with Throop Avenue 12.3 feet to the northerly line of Hopkins Street; running thence easterly and along the northerly line of Hopkins Street 25 feet to the point or place of beginning; -and be it further

Resolved, That pursuant to the provisions of section 205 of the Greater New York Charter as amended, the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund hereby authorize a release to Elizabeth Ingold of 668 East 31st Street, Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, of the interest of the City of New York in and to the property hereinabove in this resolution bounded and described in consideration of the sum of one hundred and one dollars ($101), plus an additional charge of twelve dollars and fifty cents ($12.50), for the preparation of the necessary papers. The release to contain the following terms and conditions:

That the grantee waive any and all claim for damages arising out of the closing of the street or avenue.

That the grantee is the owner of the land fronting on the section of the street or avenue to be conveyed.

The deed not to be delivered until the grantee has paid whatever taxes and assessments are liens against the premises to be conveyed.

The report was accepted and the resolution unanimously adopted.

Petition of Frank E. Cornell for a Release of the City's Interest in a Portion of Flatbush Turnpike in the Borough of Brooklyn.

The following petition was received:

To the Honorable Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners of The City of New York: The petition of Frank E. Cornell, who resides at No. 185 Amity Street, in the Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, respectfully shows:

I. That your petitioner is the owner of the land and premises in the Borough of Brooklyn aforesaid, which are more particularly described as follows:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the Borough of Brooklyn of the City of New York, County of Kings and State of New York, bounded and described as follows, to wit: Beginning at a point on the southerly side of Dean Street, distant 275 feet easterly from the corner formed by the intersection of the southerly side of Dean Street with the easterly side of Sixth Avenue (formerly Pearsall Street), running thence southerly, parallel with Sixth Avenue, 120 feet more or less to a point 100 feet northerly from Bergen Street; thence easterly, parallel with Dean Street, thirty feet 3 inches; thence northerly, parallel with Sixth Avenue, 120 feet more or less to the southerly side of Dean Street; and thence westerly along the southerly side of Dean Street, 30 feet 3 inches to the point or place of beginning. Together with all the right, title and interest of the parties of the first part of, in and to the street lying in front of and adjoining said premises, to the centre line thereof. II. That your petitioner derived his title to said premises as follows: The said property was conveyed to Mary Cornell, paternal grandmother of your petitioner, by Albert Daggett Sheriff of the County of Kings, by deed dated August 25, 1876, and recorded July 15, 1885, in the office of the Register of Kings County, in Liber 1619 of Conveyances, page 178.

The said Mary Cornell died intestate on February 14, 1885, seized of said premises, leaving her surviving Stephen H. Cornell, her husband, and paternal grandfather of your petitioner, and three children, her only heirs at law, to wit: a son, Samuel W. Cornell (father of your petitioner), and two daughters, namely, Julia A. Cornell and Mary E. Cornell, aunts of your petitioner. Letters of administration upon

the estate of said Mary Cornell were granted by the Surrogate's Court of Kings County on March 14, 1885, Liber 46, page 107.

Stephen H. Cornell, who by the death of his wife, Mary Cornell, as aforesaid, had an estate of curtesy in said premises, died January 2, 1886. See Letters of Administration, Kings County Surrogate's Court, March 15, 1886, Liber 49, page 55.

Julia A. Cornell, above named, died intestate on March 8, 1899, seized of an undivided one-third of said premises, leaving as her only heirs at law Samuel W. Cornell, her brother, and Mary E. Cornell, her sister, to whom her share of said premises descended. See Letters of Administration, Queens County Surrogate's Office, Liber Y, page 220.

Mary E. Cornell, above named, died seized of an undivided one-half of said premises on May 20, 1910. She left a last will and testament dated April 5, 1910, and admitted to probate by the Surrogate's Court of Kings County on June 4, 1910, and recorded in said Surrogate's office in Liber 427 of Wills, page 454, whereby she devised her half of said premises to Samuel W. Cornell, petitioner's father, for life, and on his death devised the same to Henry A. Cornell (petitioner's brother), his heirs and assigns forever.

Samuel W. Cornell, father of petitioner, thus became the owner of an undivided one-half of said premises in fee simple absolute, and possessed of an estate for life in the other undivided one-half, the fee of which was vested in Henry A. Cornell, petitioner's brother.

Samuel W. Cornell, petitioner's father, died seized in fee of an undivided onehalf of said premises, on August 25, 1913, leaving him surviving his widow, Margaretta T. Cornell, and the following children, his only heirs at law, to wit: Frank E. Cornell, petitioner; Florence M. Witzel, Henry A. Cornell, Stephen H. Cornell and Vincent W. Cornell.

The said Samuel W. Cornell left a last will and testament dated July 22, 1913, and admitted to probate by the Surrogate's Court of Kings County, October 15, 1913, Liber 469 of Wills, page 201, whereby he devised his undivided one-half of said premises, which are in his will designated as 516 Dean Street, Brooklyn, to your petitioner, Frank E. Cornell. That by said will Vincent W. Cornell and Henry A. Cornell were appointed executors thereof, and they duly qualified and letters testamentary were duly granted to them.

In order to effectually confirm the title of your petitioner to the one-half of said premises devised to him as aforesaid the following instruments were made, executed, delivered and recorded.

Release of Dower by Margaretta T. Cornell, widow of Samuel W. Cornell, deceased, to your petitioner, dated July 6, 1914, and recorded in Kings County Register's Office on July 7, 1914, in Liber 3494 of Deeds, page 527.

Deed by Vincent W. Cornell and Henry A. Cornell, as executors of the last will and testament of Samuel W. Cornell, deceased, to your petitioner, dated July 1, 1914. and recorded in said Register's Office on July 7, 1914, in Liber 3494, page 524, of Deeds.

Deed by Florence M. Witzel, Stephen H. Cornell and Anna M., his wife, Vincent W. Cornell and Edna G., his wife, to your petitioner, dated October 7, 1915, and recorded in said Register's office on October 20, 1915, Liber 3553, page 491.

Your petitioner, Frank E. Cornell, and his brother, Henry A. Cornell, being thus the owners of the premises aforesaid by a deed executed by them and Annie F. Cornell, wife of said Henry A. Cornell, dated October 16, 1915, and recorded in said Register's office on October 19, 1915, Liber 3572, page 335, conveyed the said premises to Harry A. Crosby.

On the 18th day of October, 1915, by deed bearing date on that day and recorded in said Register's Office on October 21, 1915, in Liber 3577, page 308, of Conveyances, the said Harry A. Crosby and Mary C. Crosby, his wife, conveyed the said premises to Frank E. Cornell, your petitioner, who ever since has been the sole owner thereof in fee simple absolute, as he verily believes.

III. That during the thirty-nine years and upwards that said premises have been owned by your petitioner and his ancestors and predecessors in title as herein set forth, they have been in the quiet, peaceable and undisturbed possesion thereof; that the said premises during all that period have been built upon and had a house and appurtenant structures thereon, and have been enclosed by substantial fences and iron railings; that your petitioner and his predecessors in title have received the rents and income from said premises during that period and have paid to The City of New York and its predecessor, The City of Brooklyn, the regular annual taxes and other municipal charges levied and imposed upon said premises by said The City of New York, and its predecessor, The City of Brooklyn. That during all the