Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-01-19


OF the meeting Of the House should be changed.
he further criticised the provision for the ap-
pointment of superintendent Of documents.
THE ROCK CREEK PARK.
Hearing Of Argument In the Case by the
Court in General Term.
On the slip Of paper pinned on the door
where the Court IN General Term sits was
written today 1.-THE Rock Creek Park case. "
This meant that the park case was set for hear
ing today, but the court was in the midst of
the argument of a case begun yesterday, so
the lawyers and others interested in the Rock
Creek Park case had to wait about the court
house for an hour and half with a feeling of
uncertainty as to when they would be called
into action. When the court met on the 18th in
slant to hear the arguments on a motion
to confirm the awards made to the
owners OF the land by the appraising
commission, postponement was asked and
granted, because Mr. Jere NJ. Wilson, repre-
senting one Of the principal property inter-
ests, was unable to remain in court, having
urgent engagements elsewhere The court as
signed the case for today. with the under
standing. to which Mr., Wilson was q party
that it should go on whether Mr.. Wilson were
able to be present or not As already shown
In The STAR, exceptions have been filed in be-
half Of many Of the property owners raising
about all the legal questions that were brought
up from time to time during the hearing be-
fore the appraising commission. and in addi-
ton. in the case Of the exceptions OF some of
the property owners, attacking the character Of
the testimony taken and questioning the judg-
ment OF the commission. There was hardly
any doubt, from tho indications, that Mr.. Will
son was ready to go on. The table where he
was to sit was loaded down with books
enough to make a very respectable law library.
1t Is expected that the argument will take two
days. and it may occupy more time than that.
NIB. JONES AFFIDAVIT.
When the court finally reached the case, Mr..
Cole, before the argument began, called atten-
ton to an affidavit filed in the case by Samuel
NJ. Jones and moved that il be stricken from
the files on the ground that it was improperly
in the case.
This affidavit, which has been printed in The
STAR, set forth substantially that Mr.. Seufferle,
one OF the appraising commissioners. had
stated to MIR. Jones that the commission had
set aside the testimony and exercised their own
judgment.
Mr.. Cole said that if the motion to strike out
was not granted it would be necessary to file an
affidavit in reply to it, or have the commits
sioner referred to called into court and ex-
amined: He thought this preliminary matter
which should be disposed OF first.
II WAS ueClUeu. however, TO nave Mr. conway
Robinson proceed first with the argument OF
the questions he had raised as the representa-
tive Of Mrs. Anna NJ. Carpenter.
MR. RoBINsoN's ARGUMENT.
His client laid claim to a fee in a part Of the
Military road and no question was raised AZ to
the legality of the proceedings or the constitu-
tionality of the law. He claimed that his client
should have been awarded the fee simple value
OF the land. not subject to any easement since
no one had come forward to claim or prove a
public or private easement.
Mr.. Cole said that under the directions of the
court the commission had made alternative
awards, and when Mrs. Carpenter applied for
her money, In case the court confirmed the
awards, the question would then come up
whether she was entitled to the larger award,
made on the assumption that there was no
easement claimed, or the smaller award, made
subject to any right of easement.
Mr.. Robinson insisted that there was no road
there; that it was Mrs. Carpenters property
and the court could not confirm an award thai
described this land as road. 1t was claimed
in the testimony offered in behalf of Mrs. Car
penter that the so-called Military road was laid
out for military purposes by the military au.
thor:ties. and the owners had not been com.
pensated.
Mr.. Robinson continued his argument afte,
the half-hour recess for lunch.
MR.. LAMBERT BEGINS.
Mr.. Robinson finished his argument at
o'clock and Mr.. Lambert began. Mr.. Lamber,
suggested that Mr.. Cole, if he insisted on hi.
motion to strike out Mr.. Jones affidavit should
argue that motion first, as the government had
the initiative on that question.
Mr.. Cole said he did not care to take that
privilege.
Mr.. Lambert said that he would like to know
before he argued the question on what ground
the government based its motion.
Mr.. Cole said the ground was that one could
not impeach the verdict of juror or of an ap.
pralser by any declaration he has made as &c
the grounds on which he may have based his
judgment.
MIR. Lambert argued that this general rule
applying to juries did not apply to commits
sions Of this character.
Mr.. Perry stated that the government haG
ready an affidavit by Mr.. Seufferle to file il
answer to that Of Mr.. JONES' but they believed
that Mr.. Jones' affidavit was in the case inn
properly, and hence moved first to strike it from
the record.
Mr.. Lambert finished his argument on thu
affidavit question ct 2:30.
CHIEF JUSTICE BlNaHAMs REMARKS.
Chief Justice Bingham stated that the cour-
would permit the government to file its couute,
affidavit and then hold the question in abey
ance as to whether the aftidavits should be con
sidered.
Mr.. Cole said the government would file IL,
affidavit tomorrow, and the court then ad
journed.