Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-07-05

fact accordant with the views Of Commits
sioners Douglass and Rossell at the time.
The act Of Congress Of August q. 1888.
was intended to remedy the growing evil
of Independent subdivisions in the terri
tory beyond the boundary, pending the
formulation and adoption Of some general
scheme Of street extension. Under this
act the Commissioners are fully empow-
cred to establish certain streets and ave-
nues by Withholding their authority for
any subdivision that does not conform to
the general plan of the city Of Washing
ton The act is imperative in requiring that
any streets and avenues beyond the boun-
dairy shall be In exact alignment with
those Of Washington.
The Straight Extension.
From 1888 to 1888 the feeling on the
part of the Commissioners was so strong
ly in favor of the direct extension Of Con-
necticut avenue that the syndicate known
as the California syndicate, which desired
to continue Connecticut avenue beyond
Rock creek to the District line. were re-
CURED to so continue in direct line, max
ing very heavy grades at great cost in
order 10 do SO. This act on their part and
the establishment for several miles beyond
Rock creek of Connecticut avenue extend
ed made it absolutely necessary for the
present Commissioners, in any scheme of
extension under the law of 1898, to carry
the avenue in tha stra' ght line that had
tHuS Deeu established ana TO thus prop
erly connect the two separated portions.
That such was the view taken is further
made obvious from the fact that up to the
time when Mr.. Parker resigned some fif-
teen months ago the Commissioners alb
solutely refused to grant the subdivision.
OF any property that interfered with such
extension.
when once the line of Connecticut ave-
nue. had been established and the cuttisg
begun beyond the creek the hill known as
the Phelps tract, which rose at the head of
Connecticut avenue and boundary, was pur-
chased by a syndicate with view of SUBJ
division. 1t was the key to the whole ques-
tion and its subdivision, under any prac
ticable scheme, necessarily involved ma
terially grading and cutting down. Mr..
Winner. as part owner and agent for the
syndicate, endeavored in vain for several
years to obtain the approval of the present
subdivision. which, thstanding, was
finally granted February 81, 1894.
The Public Hearing.
During 1892. and particularly 1893, the
question of the extension of Connecticut
avenue beyond the boundary. one way or
ehe other, was much discussed, partly in
connection with this desired division of the
Phelps property and eliminated in public
hearing granted by the Commissioners on
July II, 1893. At that meeting. at which
there was a large attendance and at which
all three of the Commissioners-Mess
Ross, Powell and Parker-were present, the
straight extension. Even some of those
who would be most benefited by the bend
frankly admitted the cogency of the argu-
ments.
"By far the ablest and most convincing
statement was made by Col. Truesdell,
who reiterated, and, to my mind effect
Tally demonstrated that, according to the
act of 1893 the Commissioners had no
other course at that time TO pursue. He
took this position from the law in the
case, from conviction and patriotic mo-
tives, and from his interest in the future
beauty and welfare of that section of the
District. because, as a matter of fact, the
bend would have most accorded with his
own fiji ancial welfare, and here let me
remark. as no hollow compliment to Col.
Truesdel. that there was no man present
at that meeting, either among the private
citizens or the Commissioners, more thor
oushly familiar with the street extension
act of 1893, or with ali the circumstances
and history of the discussion. Mr.. Winner
was the chief opponent of the straight
extension, having prepared an elaborate
and written statement. He was also, let
me remark, consistent with all his pre-
vious action. in that the direct extension
would destroy his own home and in that
he was DESTROYS of the subdivision Of the
Phelps property, which was deemed by
majority of the stockholders most adyan-
tageoIS to its owners. He had also, with
the greatest confidence. assumed that the
straight extension would never become an
actually, and had, and since has, thrown
every possible obstacle in the way, by the
sale of lots and the encouragement of
building in this direct line.
An Unnecessary Crook.
Under all these circumstances, after En-
Gineer Commissioner Rosseu and Commits
sioner Douglass had so uniformly acted in
furtherance of the straight extension after
the Rock Creek railroad people had ex-
tended the avenue straight for miles be-
yond Rock creek, and thus established the
plan; with the law of 1898 plainly requir-
Ing conformity to that plan; with the con-
sensus of opinion. expressed at the
meeting of July IL, 1893, yet fresh in mind,
and with full knowledge that their act was
In conflict with the views of retiring Com
missioner Parker and incoming Commits
sioner Truesdell-the approval of the
Winner subdivision of the Phelps tract, at
the time and in the manner it was ap-
proved, 81 ems to me to have been little
less than crime against the District. 1t
established an unnecessary crook in a
magnificent seven-mile avenue; 1t set at
defiance the majority views of citizens; it
made travesty OF the meeting of July,
lS13, and 1t set an embargo, in this par
ticular case, on the action of the commits
sion to which the whole plan was to go
for final approval or modification!
THAT the action above referred to was
taken end the curve sanctioned in the hon
est conviction that it was the wisest for
economical and other reasons will not be
doubted Ey any who knows the high Der
scnal Worth and integrity of Major Powell
and his associates in the act and I have
no sympathy with those who would as
perse the character OF the present Com
missoners by intimatirg that personal or
selfish interests have Influenced them in
any way whatever. The action was how
ever. none the less a grave error of judg-
ment, and 1t would seem that it's far
reaching consequences could not have been
properly appreciated.
Appeal to the Final Commission.
'It was. according to some of the best
judges, absolutely illegal, unGer the cir
cumstances, but is irrevocable, so far as
the present Commissio hers are concerned,
in that it involved coetaneous and subse-
quent vested rights which they cannot con-
sistently interfere with. The late decision
of the Court of Appeals in the case of
Delaware avenue gives an added finalty to
all they do. Yet this protest is made in the
hope that the commission, of which you
are a member, and which was constituted
final arbter in this street extension scheme.
may, nevertheless, find the power to change
the plan. If, in their judgment, such change
should be deemed best.
For il there is any one thing more pro-