Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-03-29


derived from his own experience in the Smith
sOnian grounds few years ago. After walk
ing, as he supposed, across the park he came
out at the same place lie went in.
Mir. saul said the plan was not such as would
have been adopted to-day. Mr.. Downing had
made his plans according 10 the surroundings
at the time.
Prof. c. V. Riley said the beauty of road
was its utility, its dirPctness to some object
The value Of serpentine roads was that they
made limited areas look larger.
DAMAGES FOR SrEsEEE IMPROVE
faESIS.
Are the Claims Without Law and s-nu-
sNRli
To the Editor Of THE EvFNTNei STAR:
communication appeared in several of the
city papers about week ago. over the sigma
lures of the commissioners Of the District of
Columbia" embracingthe following broad state
ment:
MANY people are trying to establish claims
against the District because in the march Of i'm
provementS the grade of streets has been
changed. These claims, unsustained by law and
unusual in other cities, are being pressed by
men of influence, and threaten to involve the
District in Il large Increase of debt"
Entertaining the highest respectfor the Com
missionerS as men of prObity and character and
not questioning the honesty of their opinions |
AMI, nevertheless compelled to say that, in nv
Judgment, it was at least unjust to publish the
decided and unqualified opinion embodied i'm the
above extract, because it tends to prejudice the
just demands of others. while in point of fact
neither OF the propositions of the learned Com
miSsiOners is true
1st. The claims for damages on account of
street improvements are not .'unusudL" They
have been allowed in many of the cities of the
unl0n-nota6ly in Boston and Baltimore In
the latter city, as late as 1880 among many
others, claims for sixty thousand dollars dam
.allf Ayurnd md
property OccasiOned by public improvements
between Hillen and Law streets, it being
shown that no benefit had accrued to the adj
Joining owners The same doctrine has obtained
In pennsylvania. In that state the power to
assess the expense Of repairing streets on the
adjoining owners alone has been denied by the
supreme court. Judge Sharswood is reported
as saying "Reparing streets is as much a part
OF the ordinary duties of the municipality for
the general good as cleaning. watching and
lighting. 1t would lead to mOnstrous Injustice
and inequality should such expenses be only
provided for by local assessments Notwitii-
standing this clear and just principle, there is
scarcely piece OF property in Washington
where special improvements have been made
that has not been specially assessed TO paw for
such improvements, and that with little or no
regard to the effect of such sO-called improve
ment upon the particular property. In no in
stance was the inquiry made whether the prop
erty was Injured or benefited. In some cases
houses have been left many feet above the
grade, rendering long rows of steps and many
feet OF brick or other underpinning necessary
TO prevent the abandonment of the property
In other cases the grade has fallen so far below
the original level as to drain the water into the
houses And these are called improvements to
make which such owners were freely taxed The
taxes so levied went into the public treasury,
and have been devoted to public uses And now
Wien the parties aggrieyed petition Congress
Tor relief, they are eravey told by the honorable
Commissioners that their claims ARE unusual
and are ''unSustained by law"
I'd That they are not unusual" and are sus-
tanned by law. will further appear from the fol-
lowing considerations: The legislature of the
District OF Columbia, in 1872 passed special act
providing Tor the examination and auditing of
exactly similar claims. thus recognizing their
justice anu their nOn-excrptional character.
Congress also made similar provision By the
appointment of board OF audit in 1874 More
than 1000 damage claims were audited by this
board, and fully three-ffths of these were paid
The former Commissioners, predecessors of
thepresent gentlemen, in their report of Noyem-
Der 20, 1880. use the following unmistakable
language. They say: "A large number of claims
Tor damages to real estate growing out of inn
proyements made by the late board of public
works, and their successors. which were never
brought before the board of audit, or never
acted on by that tribunal. are being pressed on
the attention of the Commissioners. No doubt
many OF them are meritOrions, but the Commits
sioners are advised that they have no power I'M
der existing law to deal with this subject They
therefore respectfully commend it to the atten-
ton of Congress-
IT is to be regretted that in the face of these
facts the present Commissioners OF the District
OF Columbia have placed themselves squareIy
on the record in opposition to law and public
opinion. They are now. however. advocating a
bill In Congress for sewerage Improvement
ana recommend the appropriation OF $500 900
for that purpose. $50. 900 of which they propose
the District shall refund in five years. This is
OH md 6nrrht
proya. But the people will be taxed to pay
this S35O0OJ Now should it possibly turn
out that any property under which the new or
extended sewers may pass shall be dQnGqed or
ruuied would the Commissioners contend that
no compensation should be made the owners in
SUCH case: The constitution of the United
States, ana oil every state. provides that private
property shall not be taken for public uses
Without Just compensation" What is the diff
Terence between running a road or street
through my land and occupying the surface
which would entitle me to damages and run
ming such street so near. or at such Il grade as
10 render ii impossible to use the properry
without heavy expenditure of time and money?
Ana why should not the damage done in the
last cas-, be paid IL well as the first! Sooner or
later this, doubtless, will be done. The public
have observed with evident satisfaction that
Notwithstanding the opposition of the Commits
sioners as presented in their letter of March TO-
1854, to the House committee of the District In
the matter OF Mrs Patterson, the House of Rep
resentatives passed the bill giving damages to
that lady for injury 10 her property by large
majority. In the Course of the debate on this
subject Hon. Nj. Wilson, of West Virginia and
member of the District committees gentle
man OF clear head and high character, and q
good lawyer wIthal-remarked: THE rule of the
common law Prospecting damages) has been
changed by statute in many of the states. be-
cause 1t Is not cOeXtensiye with Justice and
equity. and gin those states the courts have
held that whenever damage is inflicted ON pri-
Vate property IN the progress of Just such i'm
proyemcnts as were made here in the CITY of
Washington the public, who receive the bene-
ut, must pay for these damages"
As gerlnane to this subject ! NAV also quote
some remarks OF Senator AldriCh on the Carroll
ball Replying to a question. he said: "The SEN
htor is mistaken in supposing hat Congress has
ever declared by legislative action, OF by lack Of
legislative action. any such policy as that they
would not allow claims tor damages on account
OF changes of streets by the government of the
United States"
In the same discussion Carroll bilD Senator
Hoar, referring to a former debate, observed
- Ii seemed to me then. and it seems to me now
that this matter ought to be dealt with by a gen
eral law"
From all that has been said il appears that the
honorable Commissioners are alone in their
opinion that Claims for damages by reason of
:" street improvements are unusual and unsus-
tanned by law" and may it not be hoped that
they will reconsider that opinion and unite in