Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1885-05-28
kilograms to The Star.
GENERAL BUTLER'S SUIT.
Proceedings in Baltimore To-day,
GERONIMO'S BAND DEFEATED
Mangled Victims of the Red Skins.
THE EMPEROR WILLIAMS ILLNESS.
THE GREAT FALLS DAM.
Gen. Buffers Suit i'm RaifimOre-WajOr
Lydecker'S Affidavit and Solicitor
General Goodies Argument.


Lydecker's Affidavit and Solicitor
General Goodies Argument.
Special Dispatch to THE EVENING STAR.
BALTIMORE May 2S-The application OF Gen.
Butler as counsel for the Great Falls Manufac-
turing company, for an injunction to restrain
the government from carrying on its extension
of the water works at Great Falls. came up i'm
the u. =. circuit court here to-day, Solicitor
General Goode and Mr.. John ). Blair appearing
for the government.
In behalf of the government an affidavit from
Major Lydecker was read setting forth that in
pursuance of the act of Congress for an increase
OF the water supply, and under direction Of the
Secretary of War, he Lydeckerl made a survey
and map of the land needed for government
use: that the survey was made with all accu-
racy required As a foundation for proving title
TO any land or water rights. and substantial
notice was given that the land indicated on the
map and the water rights appurtenant thereto
had been taken for the water-works purposes:
that he as representative of the United States,
entered into contract with Chittenien Bros.
to complete the dam To the level OF las feet To
the Virginia shore. Under the operations OF
this contract affiant has already paid 10 the
contractors for work on the dam SS. .I6T.7S. OF
which sum not less than $4,000 is for work
done in the so-caied Virginia channel Of the
Potomac, and there is further due 10 the con-
tractors retain fund OF S6,15o. which
finished. The most difficult part of
the work, involving the construction
Of about 100 feet of the dam covering the
deepest portion of the Virginia channel is now
in progress, and to that end the contractors
have expended at least 100000 in building
Golfer dams and other auxiliary structures all
OF which must be lost to them if they are pre-
vented from completing their work during the
present season, and they have only now placed
themselves in readiness for this work after
suspension of all operations during the past
winter and early spring months. The contrac-
tors have also a considerable force OF men en-
ployed on the dam, in the stone quarry, and in
the transportation of stone to the site of the
the DAM all of whom must he suddenly thrown
out OF employment if the work should be sum-
The afiiant further says that the continuation
Of the dam is a vital part of the project for in
creasing the water supply OF the city of Wash
1ngtOn, the total cost of which has aggregated
TO date the sum Of 81 ,055.225.
Major Lydecker further stated that il is not
proposed to take all the water of the Potomac,
but that only 1924 of the flow at low water is
TO be used for the Water works. The affiant,
however, has always considered that the United
States is entitled TO 80 per cent OF the rivers
flow dynamic power
Solicitor General Goode submitted nine
reasons why an Injunction should not issue.
He maintained that no irreparable injury
would be done by refusing the iniuncton; that
no money had been spent by the Great Falls
company: no mills had been built which were
dependent upon a continuous flow of water or
could be injured by diversion of the water.
1t does appear that if the work I'm progress be
stopped by injunction a large number of men
will be thrown out of employment; great loss
will be inflicted upon the contractors, and the
dams must necessarily be rebuilt next spring.
thus involving the useless expenditure of a
large sum of money by the government. The
courts, except for the most urgent reasons do not
issue injunctons. 1t is well settled that il the in
Junction be TO stop the erection OF costly works,
Ii should appear that the application has been
made as soon as the party became apprised of
sd ms figns % ana rne extent & oi the injury threat
in 1888, and the plaintiff has looked on and
tacitiy acquiesced in the construction of the
dam and the expenditure of large sums OF
money for eighteen months. Why was not this
litigation commenced earlier and not DELAYED
until the continued progress of the government
is
jury shall be inflicted from refusing the in
junction il can be fully compensated in
damages. 1t was here cited that the law author
izng the extension provides that any parties
injured in property may set forth their claims
and have them adjudicated in the Court of
Claims. The plaintiff had taken advantage of
that very remedy, and had sued i'm the Court of
Claims for the identical injury here complained
of, aud it is too late TO take exception To the
jurisdiction of that court. The act for the ex-
tension of the water works directed the Secre-
tary of War to extend the dam, and invested
by the exercise OF the national right of eminent
domain. 1t was also set forth that the proceed
ings prescribed by Congress for the condemna-
ton OF the property had been substantially
complied with; that after publication of the
notice of survey, ETC., the Secretary OF War was
authorized to take possession of the property;
that no appraiSement was necessary, because
ft would not be binding on the plaintiff, and
also because paiutitf claimed property not be-
longing 70 lt, ana also because the only remedy
provided by law for plaintiff was in the
Court of Claims. The Court of Claims
IN a judgment affirmed by the Supreme Court,
had held that the plaintiff had waived any
objection 1t might have been entitled to make,
based upon the want of formal proceedings i'm
taking the property, by electing to regard the
action of the government as "A taking of the prop
erty under its sovereign right of eminent do
main, and demanding just compensation for
the property. The plaintiff cannot now be per-
mltted 10 reopen n controversy already deter
mined in Its own favor. 1t cannot require the
government to iitgate again what has already
been judlcially settled. Gen. Goode also set
forth that suit OF plaintiff for $500 600 for
the identical property herein involved is now
pending in the Court of Claims and hence
plaintiff was estoppeG from bringing this suit in
another court, and declared that the Injunction
suit could not be maintained, because the plain
tiff has plain adequate and complete remedy
at law in the provisions of the act OF Congress
which permits parties injured in property To
file "A petition in the Court of Claims, set forth
the right or title, and the amount OF damages
claimed. and directing the court to hear and ad-
judicate such cases. Only in the absence, ii
was claimed, Of plain and adequate REM
edy ut law could equity be invoked.
Authorities were quoted to show that plain
tiff claim TO water rights accruug from the
ownership of the Touson tract were not well
founded. In conclusion il was declared that no
possible injury could result to the plaintiff
from the work which could not be compensated
in damages. On the other hand irreparible in
jury would follow the stoppage of pending work.
Injunctions did not issue To prevent a threat
ened wrong except where the danger is immi-
nent and the injury is irremediable in any
other form.