Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-03-21
TWO. CENTS.
THE POTOMAC FLATS.
The Appropriation for Its improvement and
the ProNiso.

the Proviso.
The river and hsrbor appropriation bill will
probably be reported to the House some time
during this day.
The bill will provide an appropriation Of
goo, 600 for the improvement of the Potomac
flats. The appropriation will be modified by
the following prosiso, however:
Provided, that no part Of said sum shall be
expended in the further prosecution of said
work until the suit now pending involving
title TO the river front shall have been tried in
the court of the first instance, and shall not
then be expended should the decision be ad-
verse TO the government"
The committee has incorporated this proyiso
In the bill for the purpose of bringing to imme-
diate trial and decision the suit which has been
entered by the kidwell heirs and others. laying
claim to lands on the river front which would
be reclaimed by the improvements proposed.
The suit has been pending since 1855 in the
Supreme Court of the District but has never
come to trial. Ii is stated that an impression
that the kidwell and other like claims we're no.
well founded. and also belief that the precau-
tions taken fully protected the governments
interests. induced Congress 10 make appropria-
tlons for the Improvement of tie flats in each
river and harbor bill reported for the past six
years.
/. The government has already ru. nearly
Sl,0O0000 into improvements of the fats. but
the present commIttee hesitstes to spend any
more money on property that 1t considers
may possibly fall out OF possession of the gov
ernment
At the Office of the United States district at
torney it is said that the delay in bringing this
case to trial has arisen from two cause.-the
immense amount of evidence which must be
collected, requiring researches in the early an
mails OF the government. and the present over
crowded condition of the Supreme Court
Of ovid has
nearly completed. and il is hoped 10 bring the
case to trial before July next.
AT any rate" continued Mr.. Edmunds. 'the
case. according to my latest information. Is
still pending and undecided: but it is fair and
just to say to the people of Washington and to
the committee and the Senate after n most
careful Investigation made by a committee of
the senate from beginning to end
and devoted TO that one question, 4
believe we were unanimously of the
opinion that the pretentions of these land
claimants were entirely unfounded. But the
fact that that was our opinion does not prove
that 1t will be the opinion of the court.
That is another thing. We were careful
In the beginning, two or three four years
ago, to provide that none of this money
should be spent in respect to that part
OF the river where this disputed
tract lies. except merely for deepening naviga-
ton, not for doing any good TO the value of the
land, and Ii we have had any similar provision
Ol tndt KIM or lllnltatlOn before 4 suggest to
my friend that 1t would be well to have 1t in
again"
Mr.. Edmunds in the course of the discussion
referred to bill passed py Congress which
made provision for protecting the govern
ments interest.
Mr.. Ransom later referred to this bill and
said: "1he bill, after providing that a suit
should be brought to settle this question
against all parties claiming adversely to the
United States. ana after providing fully to havr
all these titles settled and settled promptly,
contained this important provision: That If any
of these parties had any claim whatever which
| could be established In court, the same court
which determined their claim should settle the
| amount OF damages to which they were entitled
| and these damages were to be estimated as of
| the time when this improvement commenceda and
| not atterward. So, then, whatever may happen,
whatever may come to pass, the United States
would only have 10 pay what would be assessed
| as damages for real estate that everybody knew
was absolutely worthless before this improve
ment was made 1t Ii not improper further
more for me TO say to the Senator from Texas
(Mr. Reagan), especially he desired infor-
nation upon this subject, that il
has been the opinion of the Judi
ciary committee, il has been the opinion of the
Department of Justice, IT has been the opinion
OF the commissioner of public lands and il has
been the opinion and Judgment of every legal
| mind that has looked into this question that
these adverse pretentions to the rights of the
United States were absolutely without founda-
tion.
DISCUSSED IN THE FIFTY-FIRsT CONGRESS.
The records of debates i'm Congress show that
appropriations have been made, apparently
with full understanding of the state of the
controversy before the courts. and that il has
been understood that provision has been made
to protect the governments interests in case of
a possible establishment of a claim for the re-
claimed lands.
When the river and harbor bill was under
discussion in the Senate in August, 1880, the
questions now raised we're discussed and the
information on which Congress had acted was
set forth quite clearly. Mr.. Vest then
inquired what the status of the con-
troversy over title was. Mr.. Edmunds re-
piled that he Was under the impression
that the state of the legal controversy was just
what it had been the year before ana the year
before that-that is to say. it was making pro-
gress or was in state Of delay or repose in the
Supreme Court of the District or in the Su-
prene Court of the United States.