Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-05-07
;. AND O. CANAL CLAIMS
Taken Up in Potomac Flats Arguments
Today.
Mr.. Wilson Concludes for the kfdweIl
Heirs-Thc Canals Side Be-
gins This Afternoon.

Mr.. Nathaniel Wilson had not concluded
his argument on behalf Of those claiming
under the so-called Kidwell claim when the
Potomac flats case was adjourned yester-
day afternoon until this morning. When
he Dsumsd this morning Mr.. Wilson re-
ferred to the testimony on both sides in
| respect to the condition of the land COW
cred by the patent, and declared that at
best there was great conflict of opinion.
There could be. he asserted. no decision
based upon a mere preIlonderance of evil
dence one way or the other, for the United
States Supreme Court holds that a patent
such as the one in question cannot be set
aside and Cancelled except upon clear con-
elusive and convincing evidence. There be-
ing no such evidence submitted, he de-
clared, in support Of the governments con-
tentions, the court can, therefore, find no
authority for granting the prayer of the
United States. Mere suspicion of fraud,
however strong. he argued was not suf1i-
Gent to place ON the defendants tho burden
of proof. The burden of proof, he declared,
was just the other way.
Charges Of Fraud.
Explaining that he appeared on behalf
Of the heirs and children of DIR. Kidwell
Mr.. Wilson stated that the dead mans
family felt that he had been unjustly
charged with fraud, and were therefore
sincerely anxious that the deceased's I'M
questioned character should not be sullied
by such imputauons. 1t was not fair nor
right, thought Mr.. Wilson, that the gov
eminent should have waited for SO many
years. when DR.. Kidwell and his attorney
John Wilson. have passed away, to make
such grave charges. They were honora-
Bile men, as was the commissioner of the
general land office, the late Jos. S. Wilson,
and the court, declared Mr.. Wilson, could
not well attribute fraudulent practices to
such men because of mere suspicion or
where the testimony either side SO
strongly confiicted.
In concluding his argument. which he
did at II o'clock MIR. Wilson declared that
all the presumptions were in favor of the
claimants as against the charge of fraud
The officers of the government had. in
granting the Kidwell patent. observed all
the requirements of law, and, having full
jurisdiction in that matter, their act can
not now be inquired into Hence, asserted
Mr.. Wilson, the patent cannot now be set
| aside, and must, therefore, be sustained.
The Canals Claim.
Upon the conclusion of Mr.. Wilson's ar
gument-the closing one in the matter of
the Kidwell claimants-the court next took
up the claims of the trustees for the bond
holders of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal
Company who claim riparian rights from
18th to 18th street. Mr. Hugh l.. Bond, IT.,
of Baltimore, Md, opened the argument on
behalf of the trustees of the bondholders,
explaining that the canal company was in
corporated in Virginia in 1924, in Maryland
the next year, and by Congress the same
year. BY the acts of Incorporation, ex-
planned Mr.. Bond, the company was au-
thorfzed to construct a navigable canal,
and to acquire land in fee simple, and in
1898 the canal extended from the head
waters of the Potomac across the Allie
ghany mountains to navgabIe waters of
Ohio, and in the District from Rock creek
to the 18th street basin. The claims of the
company, stated Mr.. Bond, included squares
g. 50 and MS. and also reservation g. all
south of the line of the canal the COM
panys claims in squares 63 and 80 con-
hicttng with those of private owners
His clients, stated Mr.. Bond, claim the
right and title to all parts or parcels of
the land not covered by the waters of the
Potomac river used in the construction of
the canal or its works between the inter-
section of e and 9th streets, together with
all appurtenances and riparian rights to
the same. acquired as the absolute estate
and property of the company by grants or
deeds made to it, or by the exercise of it's
chartered rights of eminent domain.
The United States Supreme Court, said
Mr. Bond, has decided that there are in
the District such rights as riparian rights
and he then entered into an extensive legal
argument, quoting many authorities, in
support Of the claims of his clients