Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-09-25
AGAINST THE SITE
Hearing Today on the Location Of
the Garbage Furnace.
SOUTH CAPITOL STREETS PROTEST.
Lawyers Argue on the Subject Of
Nuisances.
THE DISPOSAL OF REFUSE

Promptly at o'clock this morning the
public hearing given by the Commissioners
| to the citizens of South Capitol street and
their legal Representatives for the purpose
I of giving utterance to their protest against
the location of garbage crematory in
Their neighborhood was called.
| All of the Commissioners were present,
together with their attorney. Messrs.
| Davidge and Totten for the South Capitol
| street citizens and Mr.. Henry E. Davis
representing the garbage contractor. were
| also on hand, together with a number of
| interested citizens.
Col Encch Totten, after briefly stating
the object of the hearing, said the subject
! of garbage and garbage disposal was an
| important one. The citizens of that sec
| ton had had enough bad smells to contend
| with, and while he was not able to express
| to the Commissioners the advance of
| science with relation to foul odors, and
| could not tell how far the deterioration of
| bad odors had gone, he knew that the
| citizens down there had no desire to eX-
pertinent with them. The proposition was
| to erect an establishment fer the collection
| Of dead animals and refuse from the houses
| of citizens all over the city. The wagons
| which collect this refuse come together at
! n street and then have to traverse South
| Capitol street. These carts emit foul
| odor and if there is any way to deodorize
| them and their contents he did not know
| of 1t. Garbage wagons, he said, faint the
| atmosphere and send forth noXious odors.
| 1t is better to nave the garbage carried
| somewhere else than concentrate 1t all at
| the foot of South Capitol street The citi-
zers down in that vicinity own their little
| homes and are entitled to as much protec-
| ton as their more favored brothers in
| other sections of the city. If this garbage
| furnace can be established there, why not
| erect it elsewhere? There are vacant lots
all ever the city. There are sites back of
| the State Department and contiguous to
| the new Corcora-t Art Gallery. He called
| attention to that section CT the building
| RI gulations which prevented the erection
| OF establishments of this character.
Mr.. Davis Argues.
Mr.. Henry E. Davis followed. There was
very little to be said on the subject. The
situation is very simple one. 1t is a pub
| lie matter. The law has provided for the
| cremation of garbage That presupposes
| the erection Of a place to do the work
somewhere on the face of the earth and
not in balloon. 1t is just as bad to cart
garbage two miles as 1t is to cart it one
mile. 1t has to be done somewhere.
Col. Totten suggested here that it be
| taken outside of the District.
That Mr.. Davis said could not be DONE
The question Of cost enters into 1t, and it
was out of the question to take the gar
| bage to New York. Then, again, the con-
tractor was required to dispose of 1t ac-
| cordiug to the terms of the appropriation
| act in the District of Columbia. If he were
| forced to take the garbage outside of the
| ice. The regulations, which had been cited,
were not intended to govern the Commits
sioners in the discharge of their public
duty. No court will entoin a potential
nuisance. The courts always declare the
nuisance must exist before they will take
rotice of 1t. The furnace which the con-
| tractor proposed to erect was absolutely
| free from odor. Such furnace is being
operated In Philadelphia, and ne was in
formed by a resident who lives within two
| miles of it that he had never detected any
bad odors arising therefrom. If the Gre
matory which is sought to be established is
| a nuisance the remedy is at hand, and the
petitioners can go irto court. The gar
hage has to he carted through the city, and
| must be disposed Of The contractor has
the right to try the system until it is
demonstrated that it is nuisance.
Called n Nuisance.
In answer to Mr.. Davis argument that
the law respecting individual nuisances
had no application whatever to the aggre-
gate Of nuisances proposed to be establish
ed, and secondly the Commissioners will
not act upon what is styled potential
nuisance. Mr.. Davidge said: Now both
| these propositions 1 most unqualifedly de-
| ny, and l hope to satisfy You that the law
| of this land is quite as applicable. and
more applicable to government business
| like yours than to the individual. In the
| next place. while it is true that courts
| have held that they will not interfere until
| it has been demonstrated that the estao-
| lishment will prove 4 nuisance, in point of
| fact there are yet innumerabie cases
| where the very nature of the business to
| he carried on Is pronounced by the law
Der Sc a nuisance. And on very many
| casions the law says We cannot trust to
| the care and prudence of individuals. But
| this thing in all probability will prove
nuisance, and hence the law denounces it
as Sucl.
The law of this land has denounced this
very thing as nuisance per Sc. 1t is not
| for you to wait and find out how it may
| be conducted in the present condition of
science, for the law assumes that certain
| businesses in their very nature ought not
| to receive countenance or support. But or
| the other hand are proper subjects of pro-
Scripion. Let us just look at what is be-
| fore you. l understand there is an appli-
cation filed, or an application will be filed,
for permit to construct an establishment
intended for this purpose, and this pur-
pose only. 1t is not building or house
that may be used for other purposes, but
| it is to construct building adapted to the
special work of incinerating this matter to
be drawn from all parts of the city. In
| other words, it is proposed to sacrifice that
corner Of the city for the benefit, we will
say for the purposes of argument, of all
| other parts of the city. One portion of the
what Is the nuisance, if it be a nuisance,
you are to countenance in this matter? 1t
| is not to allow another man to put up a
slaughter house or establishment for the
| manufacture of soap. 1t is not that. But
you are called upon to give your counten-
| ance and support to the work of gathering
| up throughout a populous city and its SUBJ
| urbs whatever is most offensive and dis
| gushing, and aggregating and consolidating
that mass of stencil here at this partiou lar
| place. That is the work to which you are
asked to give your consent. l have no hesi-
fancy in saying that in my humble judg-
ment you have no authority to authorize
| 1t. When l was applied to in this matter
| it was for my professional services in court
and SO was Col. Toften, but We thought it
proper respect to you. gentlemen, before
going into court to give you the benefit of
our views.
Beyond Their Jurisdiction.
This is a matter beyond your jurisdic-
ton, and will endeavcr to show that your
| master and my msster-that is, the law of
| the land-has done this. Now. from the
very beginning the argument of Mr.. Davis
| here has been heard in all courts and in all
places You never knew Of a business de-