The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-02-21
EXERCISE OF DOMAIN.
The City Council Considers the
Proposed Statute.
JUDGE M'o,LvRA's OBJECTION.
Donworth's Bill Read and Ratthed by
the Council-Local Improvement
Districts Approved.

Donworth's Bill Read and Ratified by
the Council-Local Improvements
Districts Approved.
Mayor Ronald yesterday called special
meeting of the city council to be held last
night for the purpose of considering pro-
posed state legisatian affecting cities OF
the first class, President Sweeney pre-
sided, and there were present Aldermen
Miller, Daulton. Jordan, Carrie, Ingram,
Stocks, Cram, Kloeber; Delegates Crich-
ton, Coryell, Calligan, Cook. Brace, Lyon.
Corporation Counsel Donworth was
called upon to explain what measures
were proposed. He took up the bill relat-
ing to eminent domain. Although Judge
McGiivra's name was not mentioned, 1t
became evident that his opposition to the
special assessment system was the lmme-
date cause of the meeting. Mr.. Dom
worth explained that the bill as
agreed upon by the three cities
provided that although special improve
ment districts might be created and prop
erty condemned, it could only be done by
the court of three appraisers. Even this
could not apply to parks or such IS general
improvements, but only to streets, bouie-
wards and sewers. The district system
would 60 through in spite Of all opposl-
ton. because the other cities are in need
of improvements which could not be made
by bonds or taxation. Every $4,000 spent
by this city meant an additional mill OF
taxation. If it were not for some such
system the city council will be prevented
from ordering many improvements which
are much desired by people willing to pay
for them. In any case. the benefits shall
not be held to exceed the damages.
Judge McGllvra, who had arrived dur
ing the speech, was invited to address the
council. He advocated the simple extern
sion to cities of the law of eminent do
main as exercised by corporations other
than municipal. This will be met by sem
ate bill 81, which has already passed that
body, and the system has been found to
work we'll with corporations generally.
Mr.. Donwcrth had caimed-and the su-
preme court has sustained him-that
authorities assessing damages may take
into consideration benefit to be derived.
Judge McGilvra objected, however to
that sort of arrangement by which mans
property shall be taken with the explana-
ton that his other property is to
be benefited. Mr.. McGiivra admitted
that three appraisers were to be appointed,
but the property owner would have no
voice in their selection; they would be APP
pointed by the court at the instance of the
city. He maintained that parks were for
the benefit of the entire city and should
be paid for by the city at large. The sys-
TEN of local assessment districts is
vicious one, and too often led to Jobbery
and corruption. He feared that if the
proposed bill were carried into effect it
would lead to considerable litigation. The
plan had been adopted in some states and
severely condemned in others. He doubted
if any state could override the constitu-
tionai provision of the United States that
no property can be taken without COM
pensation.
Mr.. Donworth replied that an amend
ment had already been agreed to exclud-
ing parks. ETC., from the system of i'm
provement districts, but there still remains
the question whether the city will adopt
the principle of districts. If il is not
adopted the council will be deprived of all
power to make an improvement except
from the general fund. The bill does not
prevent the city paying for Improvements
out OF the general fund if it thinks it more
just.
Mr.. Lee J. Pitner said he had been in
Chicago for twenty years and the law of
Illinois, from which the proposed bill is
mainly taken, had been regarded rs a very
equitable measure. 1t enabled the city to
condemn through tracts of land and assess
damages and benefits to property owners.
TneYooA Of or hoivn do
ton it was the means o! making many
property owners rich. Where parks were
established not only was the adjoining
land benefited, but the revenue of the city
was increased. As rule 1t would be found
that property owhers donated land for
boulevards on account Of the benefit that
would follow.
Mr.. McGilvra thought it was time for a
settled plan to be adopted; the power of
eminent domain was a very extraordinary
power, and should be exercised with very
great care. 1t should not be placed in the
power Of any government to exercise it
without great safeguards. From every
point he regarded tue special district sys-
tenn as vicious. There was too great dis
position to go to expense and to run into
debt. There was proposition for a
boulevard and park system embrace
ing 100 miles square at the enormous
cost of $40, 600, go. Where did this scheme
spring from? Real estate men
look at expenses very differently
from taxpayers, who had to
foot the bills. This thing is dangerous:
the legislature should never permit such
an opportunity for confiscation. He
should not desist his opposition until he
was overborne by preponderance of
opinion; but he asked the council to give
careful consideration before indorsing the
proposed measure.
DR.. kloeber said the council had felt
keenly the want of that power which this
bill would confer. Many improvements
had been retarded because of the city's
impotence in this respect. With the ex-
perience of the past before them, he
thought there would not be a dissenting
voice TO the proposition that cities shall
have the power OF eminent domain.
Judge Mcillvra said his objection was