Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1870-11-17
The Frnee nth ssrees Iujuuetion.

u the mayor ior the corporation TO the bill fileS
| by Messrs Corcoran and Riggs and Mrs Scot
\ of the grade OF 18th street. 1870
THE ANswKR OF THE CITY
1 says thai an ordinance Of the Aldermen an
Councils passed. and was approved on the 24tt
l of September, 1870, requiring the Mayor n
| cause the carriageway of 18th street to be paved
\ with material known az the "SchArtU nave
l m.hI; thAt afterwards another ordinance wa
passed requiring the Superintendent of Street,
l 10 make the grade OF 18th street, between G
4 street north and Pennsylv ania avenue uniform
| With, and TO conform TO the established gr adt
4 Ior the Improvement OF PenRsyl yania avenue
tnat said ordiD ance was passed regularly by said
1 boards on or abont the lst day Of q october 1870
| but was not ready for the signature OF the
/ MayoL until some time thereafter, and the said
| by the Mayor until the 10th day Of November
/ 1'IO, and that he afterwards dated such appro-
val the 18th day of November, 1879. end that tue
pre- sidents OF III Councils signed the ordinance
| about the time OF the Mayors signature III ..
the ordinance providing for the grading OF 18th
street was passed by the boards, as the defend
| ants are informed and believe. at the special
| request and solicitation OF the plaintiff Corco-
ran.
TIE NEW GRADE DKPRNDgn
The defendants deny that the cutting on I5Lh
street will injure the foundations of the bu.
ings. They adDsi. Sha: the work was not adyer-
tlstd and that bids we're not invited and that
no ofher appropriation than that found In the
ordinances above mentioned has been made TO
meet the expenses of the work, and ssert that
no such proceedings were required by law liz this
case, and that in this Improvement they we're
lmpr acticable and unnecessary. They alieye
the truth 10 be, that, in order to put down toe
Scharf pavement, il was necessary to excavate
18Th street TO the depth Of about ten inches;
AT the persons who contra cted to put DOWN
said pavement had employed competent. per
ron to make the said excavation Of ten inches;
mat, In order 70 conform to the grade of Penn
Their excavation, which, at Is deepest point
would be but four feet two and 6 half inches:
az u street there is no excavation, and ut PENN
sylvania avenue il is very shallow; hat the per-
inches offered Ito save the ANNOYANCE OF two
sets OF workmen, horses and carts OF the sam
street, 10 continue the excavation of said street
iU nu san corporation nnsl the grade should be
cents per cubic yard: this being as low as the
ofdinafy rates TOT such labor was accepted by
the superintendent of Streets and the Mayor,
and the Work vas begun accordingly.
THE CHARGES OF FRAUD DENIED.
Ibey deny that the work was begun before
any ordinance was passed authorizing the same
, naey oeny that the law requires the appoint
meht Oh an assistant commissioner to superin-
ENC this work, but aver that an assistant COM
missioner mn had been appointed f6r the paving o.
I; me street: The defendants further say that it
y Wholly untrue that the work is b. % done in
,rauu OF me rights OF the plaintiffs; and they
further say il is utterly unfounded in fact that
saia woLk ,s being dene in pursuance of cor
Iupt anc fraudulent combination between the
deiendants and other persons, as Is alleged in
said bill: The defendants say that said charges
OF fraud, and fraudulent c9m oinasion, con-
grossly false and wicked. The Defendant fur.
.neI say tnat the work vas begun on the eth of
November. 1870, and that the compla.nants well
, Knew tne work had been so begun. and that
thcy unreasocably delayed their opposition
tnere,o until the work had been nearly CON-
plefed, and until large sums Of money had been
expended and burdensome obligations ,umed
ey the defendants and the contractor who un-
oertook to make said excavation; that thew win
All suner great loss ii the said improyem 5nt is
Low stopped by order of the court. They rep
18th stI Get, and say that the buiidipgs of Cor
eoIan ana scott on the lets described IN the bill
are old and unsightly in said locality, and are
the 70 see city They conclude BY denying
ING mat they have ample remedy in court Of
TIE AFFIDAVIT OF aR. ". q. HUNTING TON
: appt nded TO the answer, ard is to the effect
Ii at he had a conversation with Mr. Corcorsn
Ano ne MI. C.) said that he wished the corpo,
,auon would improve the street with the Scharf
pavement, and make the street of uniform
grace with the avenue; and asked him HO to
90 70 The Councils and get an ordinance pressed
i0f the work, and he accordingly werfoIto the
COUNCILS and secured the passage of the ordi-
M ashIe, MAKING use OF the conversation with
bills. VI 'ne
AN AFFIDAVIT OF M. FORSYTH,
Sui ef,1'erdent OF Streets, &c, is to the effect
mat the exeay alton is rot dangerous; tn il
,loes y OF injure the foundations; that the cor.
'ract WIS siren to Mr.. Ns1denburg be cause he
s: : he cont ACTOR for the removal Of 10 inches
OF the street Tor the paving comp7uy, and his
u ,ees were reasonable, and had il been owen
% aIoteer party there would nave bcci the
J0tner OF two tets OF csr :. Mr.. Vande nbu,g h's
,tl dayit eoIroLO-ates That VI SIR. Forsyth
The Gaze was continu; unr'l tc day, to give
he plaintiff council time to examine the an
,weT and the affidayiis Gled.
IC-DAY's Proc EEDISGa.
,efo me ' dirgument IN the cAe was commenced
Ar. Merrick, for pet iioners stat Il tIIath h
lad e. used to tsue subpoena du.es ti:vm on
ne mayor ior the petition ior the work, and a
lad Jest informed him hat be had M ,de - srcl,
he etition. 80
Mr. Totem, COOPERATION Attorney. re-.
Mr.. Merrick sa's'
jorcor~- us mad an AFFIDAVIT from Mr..
-.n which that gentlem"u deemed due 70
himself to make after he had hear d OF the am
deyit of MIR. Huntington.
Mr.. Totem objected to the reading OF MS
after sftidavit, ss against rule.
Judge Macarthur said that sush an Ali law [
might be received to explain the at1iJlyits liled
win the answer
MIR. Totten read the rule, AID contended II at
a counter affidavit cannot : received n such
case as this.
Judge Macarthur said that counter erilayit
could he received "a explanatory only.
Mr. herTc tnen read
THE AFFIDAVIT OF Mr.. w. W. CORCORAg,
N which LIE states that be all a, has been willing
hat the street should be graded and paved Ia
conformity with the o. iIJlished grade or Penn.
sylvaria avenue, as IL existed in Sep -emoer
lest, when he and Others Petitioned for the
street 10 be paved, and at the time of signing
the petition the grade of Pennsylvania avenue
had rot IL any wise been altered: and he be-
lieyes that the commissioners for paving the
Avenue at that time had no intention OF Chang
ing the grade Of the Avenue at the intersection;
hat II the grade OF 18th street h been cut
down Nv o feet it wonld have ronformed TO the
established grade of Pennsylvania avenue; thai
said 18th street had been cut down TO depth Of
more than four feet before any change ives
made il the rsde Of Pennsylvania avenue; that
such cutting down was lot solicited by him; that
cutting down 18th street to the depth OF four
feet Will necessitate the grading snd excavation
OF street; that the grading and excavation
was made without his knowledge, and, being at
he time sick, he was unable to give his imme
diate attention TO such matters. he states that
II Is true be had a conversation with Mr.. Hunt
ington, but sit IS not true that this afiant re-
quested said Huntington, or authorized him in
any manner whatsoever, to procure the passage
OF any ordnance for the grading of said 18th
street, or in any way to influence the action of
the Councils in the premises; that this affant
never thought or dreamed OF request
ing said Huntington to procure the pa
SAGE OF any such ordinance; and that
said Huntington did procure the pas
sage OF the ordinance authorizing the