Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-05-19
. THE ROCK CREEK PARK.

Restraining Order Issued-Property Own.
ers Contrasting the Law.
Mr.. R. Ross Perry, the lawyer member Of the
Rock Creek Park commission, has his hands full
just now between the legal steps required to be
taken by the commission in order to secure the
land for the park and the legal proceeding
begun by some Of the property owners to stop the
commission. The petition prepared by the
commission asking the condemnation Of the
land was completed today.
1t is a printed document of fifty-two pages II
bore today the signatures of the members OF
the commission and only wanted that Of the
Attorney General as the legal representative OF
the United States. 1t is expected that this sig
nature will be added to the paper tomorrow OF
next day.
Then the commission will appear through its
representative in the Court in General Term,
file the petition and ask that an order be made
requiring the respondents to appear and
answer.
A RESTRAINING ORDER.
Late yesterday afternoon q bill was filed
against the Rock Greek Park commission by
William Watson, owner Of one of the tracts OF
land within the park limits, asking that the
commission, their officers, agents and special
policemen, may be restrained from
in any manner, interfering with OF
disturbing the petitioner in the poe-
session, use and enjoyment Of his land and in
the exercise Of his rights Of property therein
that all further measures for the Condemnation
of his land may be forbidden. and the act OF
Congress establishing the park and all the pro-
ceedings hereunder may be declared unconsti.
tuti0nal, null and void.
Judge Hagner set the case for hearing next
Tuesday and issued a temporary restraining
order.
Mr.. Perry said today to STAR reporter that
it was misapprehension to suppose that Judge
Hagner's order in any way interfered with the
proceedings of the commission. 1t applied. he
said, only to the policemen and other officers
of the commission on the ground and prevented
them from going on Mr.. Watson's prop
erty. The condemnation proceedings will 20 on.
MIR. Perry went into the Equity Court this
morning and called Judg, Hagner's attention
to the possible construction that might be mt
on Mr.. Watson's bill and the order issued upon
it, to the effect that the commission was
restrained from going on with the legal steps
they are preparing to take under the direction
of law. Judge Hagner sent for MIR. Lambert,
Mr.. Watson's attorney, and it was agreed that
this was not the purpose or meaning of the
order.
WHAT MR.. WATSON SAYS.
Mr.. Watson in his bill states that the COM
mission entered on his land without rendering
Posniche shSioAot ou4 Wituout ulb kuOWleOge
and consent when making the surveys, and
have forcibly prevented him from cult
waiting his ground. He states the act
provided for a tract not exceeding 1000
acres and appropriated 81, 2O0, 900 and the
defendants have selected not less than / $50
acres, including the very best and most yaIu-
able villa sites and the richest and most pro-
ductive farms and large deposits of granite.
He states that the amount appropriated falls
far short Of furnishing just compensation
for the land; that he has been offered
$3.50 per acre, which rate he states was
arbitrarily fixed by the commission and is a
price much less than he paid for it in Feb
ruary, 1880, and is much below its true market
value. He claims that the act is wholly inop-
erative to divest him of title, because it trans
cends the limitations imposed upon the right
of eminent domain under the acts of MARYLAND
Of 17sS and 1871 and Of Congress of July 10,
1890, &c.
The bill also attacks the constitutionality of
the law, alleging that the act constitutes the
President Of the United States an agent for
divesting the land owners title, and SO gives
him judicial function not warranted by the
Constitution"
Mr.. Perry said today that he was doubtful
whether it would be necessary for the commits
sion to answer the bill, as when the petition
prepared by the commission is filed It would
bring the whole subject before the Court in
General Term, where the constitutional points
and other questions raised would be consid-
cred.