Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-08-22
Hearing in the Injunction Case
Brought by the Tingles.
WHY THE PLAN SHOULD NOT Be FILED
Argument Made by the Attorney
for the CompIainants.
THE DISTRICTS REPLY

Judge McComas today heard arguments
in support of and against the rule 20
show cause why the District Commission
ers should not be enjoired from filing with
The surveyor the first section of the map
for the proposed extension of streets and
highways in the District of Columbia. The
rule was recently made by Judge Cole, on
motion of A. x. and E. j. Tingle, who set
forth that the present street extension
plan results in taking nearly all of the
four and a half acres belonging to them
Tor use as streets and a small triangular
park, leaving their house partly on por-
ton OF the property Eot so used and part
ly in the highway. The ground left for
the use of the complainarts. it is claimed,
comprises narrow strips of land, and the
grading of the streets through will be very
heavy
Mr.. William A. Meloy represented the
Tingles. while Attorney fer the District S.
T. Thomas ana his assistant, Mr.. Andrew
IL. DuVall, appeared for the Commissioners
Mr.. Meloy opened the proceedings today
by explaining to the court that the mat
ter at issue depended upon the consttu-
tionality of an act of Congress passed
March =, 1928, and then read the original
and amended bills of the complainants
which have heretofore been published in
substance in The Star. Mr.. Meloy also
read the act referred to. after which Mr.
missionerS, printed in full in last Mondays
Star.
Mr.. Meloy's Argument
In opening his argument, Mr.. Meloy
characterized the case in dispute as one of
great gravity. He went on to speak of
Washington as the center of free insti-
buttons, as Jerusalem was the center of
religion when Judge McComas INTERRUPTED
to say:
Il understand that speculation in corner
lots is now going on in Jerusalem
Mr.. Thomas added that there is also
considerable strife over the building of
railroads there. and Mr.. Duvail remarked
mat II is not near SO dangerous to journey
from Jericho to Jerusalem NOWADAYS as
1t was several centuries ago.
Resuming, Mr.. Meloy declared that his
clients are not obstructionSts in any sense
of the word. but they make objection to
map prepared to conform exactly to the
mathematical lines and theoretical ideas
OF certain engineers. They propose to
take away the greater portion of our prop
erty, leaving our dwelling sticking up
III tne ar ana on the verge of preciDice
winch the commissioners are going to dig"
The attorney, continuing argued that
the Hing of the map is the taking and ap-
propriating of the property of the Tingles
IL IS not the taxing OF the sand stone and
gravel, 1t was maintained. but the taking
OF that which is of interest to the owner
ana without which the land is of no value
"hen the government takes away the yaiue
OF property and places inCumbrances on it,
from that moment it has appropriated the
property. The value of property was de-
ciared to be the right Of building thereon
Tor the owners use the right of enjoyiug
was stated, the law providing that the
property of person shall not be taken
away without due process of law may be
violated without airy physical taking OF The
property That which destroys the value
or any OF its attributes, said Mr.. AIeloy
takes away property.
Nv neither or not this land shall ever he
used as proposed. whether or not it shall
ever he paid for. lies entirely in the hands
of the Commissioners; it will lie at their
disposal if the map is filed. Thereafter
the hands of the owners are tied" declared
AR. Meloy; 1T is set down that private
property shall not be taken without com
pensation, but in this case there is taking
without compensation"
His Closing Remarks.
After recess of one hour Mr. Meloy read
from authorities to show that it is uncon-
stitutional to deprive a person of the ordi-
nary use of his property, and that an owner
should not be left in state of uncertainty
regarding his rights.
by the filing of this map" said Mr..
Meloy, in conclusion the Commissioners
do take from that moment an integral part
of our property. There is no provision in
the law for payment, although that taking
away is instaater with the filing of the map.
They should take some other mode from
this, which is manifastly gross, for the
development OF the city
Mr.. Thomas, Tor the Commissioners, fol-
lowed Mr.. Melvy.
He contended that the mere filing of the
map will work no injury to the complain
ants and does not amount to taking of
the property within the meaning of the
Constitution. Mr.. Thomas read from sew
eral authorities. and next declared that
all property may be needed for public use
and it is always subject to the dominion
of the state. He thoroughly agreed with
Mr.. Meloy as to the latter's definition of
property but claimed that such has
nothing to do with the case.
The government cannot enter this land
until it is paid for, and until that is done
the owners may do as they please with the
property.
Il submit that there is nothing in the
case concluded Mr.. Thomas. The only
point-the constitutionality of the law
has been decided IN former decisions
The filing of the map does not hurt the
They may go ahead and
build. lay out lawns or gardens or do any
thing they esire. 1 think the rule against
the Commissioners should be dismissed"
Mr.. Duyall made a statement supple
menting that of Mr.. Thomas.
Attacked His New SOn-in-Law.
NASHVILLE, Tenn, August 22-At
last night. J. I. Iite a car