Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-04-22

nience, and 20 complete and extend the
grading OF the streets OF said city, caused the
north side of X street 10 he cut down, graded
and completed, and thereby caused the dam
age complained OF. and that, in the eNecu-
tion OF said work, the corporation made
their excavation In the street and al the dis
lance OF six or seven feet from the 'front.' line
age so a. aforesaid alleged by the plaintifI
II the jury shall believe the same was occa-
STONED by the acts OF the defendants, and not
otherwise, is d,uluuUa abs iiilrr.t. aud the
IlsintlI is not entitled TO recover ia this
action This instruction OF the Circuit
Court was, after fun argument by counsel,
sustained by the Sapceme Court OF tie
affirmed.
1t is 10 be regretted that the era firc o. the
streets should do any wrong 10 private owl-
erS; out u Is matter Of important consider
alton II the District j. cbmpe let 70 nav Tor
everything that il wrong IN the masses o.
damages, which Will soon make ~ unable 10
pay Tor anything That = right, There are
am aware, individual cases OF inconvenience
resulting from tie exercise Of the power 10
crates which appeal strongly To the sympa-
UltS. IL must be femcm bered. however
that every purchaser or n city lot knows, AZ
the time OF his purchase that the municipal
government NAV alter tbe grade OF the street,
and IN most cases the price Of the lot depends
greatly upon The probability OF a change in
grade. The only legislation find upon the
subject is an act passed by the late lcEisla-
tive assembly, approved June %, i,52, enti-
damages sustained by reason OF public Inn
provements or repairs This was a wise
ana proper act. IL was evidently intended
To apply 10 all damages caused by inaproya-
menIs, for which damages the District was
legally liable. But there is not IN luis act
any provision whatever for changing the es-
tsbllshed law There Is no phrase in this
law which will bear the construction that
losses falling under the head of ,ldaiaiul db-
Sql.r ~ lUTtU were 10 be entirely changed OF
their legal character. This statute claims
rnfDfh IA ala sr,f
policy which has prevailed ia this District
FOR more than eighty years.
To recapitulate:-Ther reasons against this
bill are as follows:
FirSi.-It is the entering wedge 10 allow.
ances OF untold amounts To be paid from lie
treasury of the District.
Second.-lour favoriDg OF il would be In
Violation OF the statute OF March IfLh, 1876.
which forbids under heavy penalties any
official OF the District TO aid or aDet in the
Increase OF its debt.
1hfrd-The claim is unjust in It's being not
for damages for actual trespass committed
upon property, but for a contribution of the
public 10 the proprietor 20 enable him 20
improve upon his property with reference 10
the present grade OF the avenue.
Fourth The principle Of the bill, the al
lowance OF consequential damages for the
exercise OF municipal right 10 grade streets,
is new in legislation.
Fiph-If the principle which regulates the
rights OF IrOprietors OF contiguous lots in re b.
laIion TO each other Is applied, the mum
Ing as such, has right to improve or grade
an avenue, OF which 10 owns the fee simple
without regard To the owner OF contiguous
property, SO long as no actual trespass is
committed upon such contiguous property.
Stdth.-Tbe English courts have uniformly
decided against the allowance OF cOuSequen-
tlal damages for grading avenues AMI streets
I'm cities.
ScreBfh.-The decisions OF the supreme
courts OF the states have been adverse u the
allowance OF consequential damages for
grading.
Righth The courts Of the District OF Co
lnmbia have uniformly decided against
them.
Ninth. The Supreme Court OF the United
states in cases arising In Washington and
Georgetown and carried up on appeal has
decided adversely 10 the allowance OF cOase-
quential damages arising from the grading
Of streets.
TeHth.-The principle OF law so declared
has never been changed by any statute law
of or for this District.
For these reasons 10 as my opinion that
Your answer 10 the Senate committee should
be uniavorable 10 bill No. J60 pending before
u.