Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-12-05
S TREET ExTEN SION
Some Objections to the Present Law Pointed
-......a. e., Out.
The United States Should Not Saddle
rs y the Whole, Cost on the Peo-
pie Of the District.
To the Editor of The Evening Star:


The idea of extending the streets of Wash
H. gton to the District line in conformity
with the beautiful plan of the city is APP
proved by every one. Nobody wishes to see
the greater Washington composed of ir-
regular and zigzag additions. No more
houses must be built in the way of extern
sions. h
1t is very doubtful however, whether the
act of March 2, 1893, providing for street
extensions, embodies the best plan. To en-
ter judgment of condemnation against a
mans land before an appropriation is made
to pay for it seems unjust if not unconsti-
tutionaL 1t is almost equivalent to confis-
cation in the case of person who is oblig-
ed to sell. or borrow money on a clouded
title. The result will be endless litigation
and fat picking for the lawyers, but vexa-
ton If not ruin for taxpayers.
Another bad feature of the street extern
sion law Is the assessment of alleged benefits
against property, which many lawyers re-
gard as unconstitutional. The community
is entitled to have many roads or streets
as may be necessary, established at the
is taken for highway any other public
purpose the Constitution of the United
states guarantees Just compensation
ana congress cannot offset the benefits of
opening a road which he is entitled to any
how, and which is established for the use Of
the entire community, and Should be paid
LOT by general and not special taxation.
=, In providing this highway for the use of
the general public one individual NAV re-
celve greater benefits than another. but
IL is impolitic and impracticable to attemDt
10 estlmate them and make a special as
sessment against the property Every res
1dent OF the District of Columbia will he
benehted to some extent by street extern
slons, but 1t would be just as absurd to try
10 charge up the correct amount against
any particular person as it would be to
assess the wages of firemen against build
ing which they might save from destruc-
lion, or 10 charge a merchant the salary
OF the Policeman who RECEIVERS his stolen
goods The location of the new post office
Will help business in its vicinity, but it
would be absurd for the government to
undertake to assess such incidental and
uncertain benefits against property on the
opposite squares. Administrative reforms
constitute benefits which are real but can
NOT &c assessed. The closing OF certain
notorious resorts might be a good thing
Tor property owners, but the value cannot
be estimated in dollars and cents and as
sesseo. In spite of the care exercised by
offcials) the most absurd and slaring in
equalities in ordinary assessments exist
now How much greater would be the
difficulty for an inexperienced jury to as
sess against property the vague and uncer-
tam Dement'S of opening an adjacent street
Inc greatest objection to the present law
Is the provision saddling the entire cost of
street extension en- the District CT Column
Tia, thereby repUdiating the partnership
contract existing between the United
States and the local government The gem
eral government owns and controls the
streets of the city proper, and there is
every reason for continuing the owner
ship to the District line. If the benefits of
street extension are to be assessed against
the property owners, Uncle Sam who owns
n ore than half she property, should paw
ms snare, espe cially as the other property
owners have no voice in the matter
Ii all tie cost is to be thrown upon the tax
payers OF the District of Columbia it would
te Tar better to repeal the act of 1893 in
toto. The act of August %. 1SSS, forbids
the reco riding of any Subdivisions not in
conformity with the general plan of the
city, and we could wait until Congress sees
hit to extend c; CHI street by special act as
necessity may arise Under the old law no
building permit would be issued for a
structure to be placed in the line of ex-
tension of any city street.
The map of the first section provides for
widening Maple avenue Ct street,, LIE Droit
Park. This StreetiS paved and handsomely
improved on both sides. The cost of widen
ing 1t would be enormous, and there is not
the slightest necessity for it, The law
should be changed so as to prevent the
widening of a paved street built up on both
sides, unless by special act of Congress.
Unless the Objectionable features of the
law can be eliminated, the highway act of
1893 should be repealed.
THOMAS W. GILMER.