The Evening critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1881-1885, 1881-10-26
THE EVENING CRITIC.
THE MARKET TROUBLES.
Meeting of Dealers mt shea's Hal
Last NiCht.
ESTABLISHED AUGUST, 1908

onthS HILL was occupied iaSU evening Dy
the stall-owners in the Washington Market
for tho purpose of hearing report from
committee appointed to prepare a statement
Of their side Of the case, which was to be
submitted to the public. Mr.. John r. Kelly
presided, with Mr.. w. +. Hunt as secretary.
The following report of the committee was
first considered, and at the conclusion of its
reading was unanimously adopted:
To the Public.
The Washington Market Company vs.. The
People.
II is due TO the public that the facts con-
corning the pending attempt of the Wash
ington market company to resell the stalls
and stands in said market over the heads
of their respective occupants be accurately
and distinctly stated, in order that en-
lightened public opinion may determine
the issue between the company and
the Stockholders, and decide which
Is in the right. This course is rem
dered not only desirable, but necessary by
reason Of the published statements of GER
tain officers of the company, wherein mo
pains or expense" are spared to present their
views, without reference to the incontro-
vertible and impregnable truths upon
which the Stockholders have uniformly
= relied to sustain them in resisting the UNI
lawful and uncomfortable exactions of
this corporation Let it be known and
understood at the outset that the STALL
holders in this market, as in all other
public markets, must regulate the prices
of the articles they sell In exact proportion
to tho burdens imposed upon them, and
right here is the point where the people are
directly concerned.
Prior to 1870 the old Center Market,
which occupied the site of the present WASH
ington Market, was public market under
the control of the city, and the rents of
stalls therein were reasonable and proper.
There was no contest between the STALL
holders and the city government. The ono
paid that which was fair and equitable and
the other received it in full satisfaction.
The Stockholders and their patrons the peo-
pie, were alike benefited by the arrange
ment, and no complaint was uttered by any
one.
Very many of the present occupants Of
stalls in the Washington Market had estab-
lishcd their business in the old market and
acquired the good will thereof, which was
infinitely of more value than the mere stall
at which they severally stood.
The business thus established, in many
instances running through series Of years,
was, by the act Of Congress incorporating
the Washington Market Company MAY 20,
1870, subOrdinated to the power and au-
thority conferred upon that company, UNI
der the limitations of the act referred to.
And it is because of the disregard of those
limitations of law that the stockholders op-
pose the right of the company to do what
it proposes to do and to subject them and
their patrons to the arbitrary rapacity of
an unlicensed and unbridled corporation.
The points are these:
First-Thc market company, by its char
ter, is limited to a sale of the right to &C.
cupy the several stalls for one or more
years, subject to the payment of an an
nual rent, the amount of which to be fixed
by the mayor and common council of the
city of Washington and the directors of
said company"
This never has been complied with by the
company. The rents were fixed in 1872 by
the company alone, and marked approved by
II. d. Cooke, then governor of the District,
and one of the original incorporators Of the
company. This was in plain violation of
the law, and, Notwithstanding the pub
lished statements of officers and directors of
the company, has never been sustained by
the courts, the extent of the decision being
that the Stockholders were bound to pay the
rate of rent they agreed with the company
to pay The rate thus unlawfully pre-
scribed by the company ranges from S1.75
per square foot of stallroom to $3.50 per
square foot per annum, or nearly the full
Vaiue OI tHc lduu chCu year III IcIlt dlOHc.
The land granted to the company by Con-
gress for ninety-nine years was worth be-
tween 100000 and 100000. The charter
required the company to pay into the Dis
trict treasury $4,000 per annum for the
privileges conferred upon it, which sum was
to be devoted to the support of the poor
of the District, and besides this the
property of the company was to be taxed
like all other private property.
The rents above mentioned were pre-
scribed in reference to these burthens, but
for the past eight years tho company has
paid to the District only $4,000 per an
mum for both franchise, rental and taxes, q
clear saving of over $4,000 per annum,
which they have collected from the STALL
holders, and withheld, Notwithstanding the
law under which they hold the property.
Thoy now propose to resell the stalls under
the same unlawful rate ofrental.
SecOnd-The charter requires that the
minimum rate of bids for the several stalls
shall be approved by the mayor and alder
men of the city. This of course cannot be
literally complied with any more than the
rent can be fixed by the mayor and common
council, since all those offices have been
abolished; but the manifest design Of the
lawmakers was that the public, through
its representatives, should participate in
establishing the rate of stall rental and the
minimum rate of bids for tho right to oc.
cupy the STALLS and until further lcglsla-
ton vesting in the company alone the right
to regulate these matters they cannot law
fully assume to tax the public through the
Stockholders at their own will and pleas
ure.
Third-The company has advertised To
sell the stalls at minimum rate of bids
and subject to rental established by them
selves, in utter disregard of the limitations
of the law of their corporate existence. To
this tho Stockholders object.
Fourth-The company proposes to sell the
stalls in classes, giving to the highest bid
der the first choice, and so on. This will
practically prevent the Stockholders from
repurchasing their own stalls, because il
will be impossible for any one to know
which stall the highest bidder will choose
This is in violation of the law, which pro
vides merely for sale of the stalls, and not
the choice of stalls in certain classes hence
the Stockholders object.
Fifth-The capital stock of the company
is fixed by law at 81 100000. Only 10 pei
cent, or 100000 has been paid in. The
buildings did not cost over 100000 Thu
sale in 1872 of the right to occupy the stalls
realized $50, 900 at least Tho annual rent
for the past nine years have amounted t.
100000 per annum, or total of 5000, 900 In
gross on an investment of 100000 in mint
years. Assuming that only one-half of thu
rayanuaq of thp rom nauv xyara nrnft n ha