Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-10-19
THE HIGHWAY CASES
Supreme Court Today Asked to Give
Their Early Consideration.
STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY COUNSEL
District Commissioners Point Out
the Evils Of Delay.
ACTION OF THE COURT

| In the Supreme Court Of the United States
| today a motion was made that the court
advance the District of Columbia highway
extension cases on the docket, and set them
| GOWN Tor oral argument at an early day.
These are cases No. 633 and 634. The mo-
ton was made by Mr.. A. s. Worthington,
attorney for the Commissioners. and Mr.
| w. L. Cole, attorney for the appellees.
! The solicitor general on behalf Of the
| United States concurred in the motion
The papers were submitted, and the court
will take the motion under consideration
In the papers that were submitted to the
court In support of the motion to advance
1t Is stated: These are cross appeals in a
case arising under an act of Congress, en-
| Titled An act to provide a permanent sys-
tenn OF highways in that part Of the Dis
trict OF Columbia lying outside of cities.
approved March 2. 1893 CT Stat. $500. "Af-
| ter quoting from the act in question the
| following comment is made:
The condemnation proceedings as to the
| subdivision involved in this case were the
| first that were had under the statute in
| question. Certain questions as to the con-
stitutfona1ity of the act of March 2, 1893.
| and Of several parts thereof. arose. and
| have been passed upon by Mr. Justice Cox,
| holding the special term of the Supreme
Court Of the District, and by the Court Of
Appeals of the District. The case is now
brought here in order that all these ques-
| tons may be finally determined by this
court for the government of the court be-
low In this case. and in all future proceed
| ings under the act.
Some Of these questions are:
First. Whether section IL of the act is
| unconstitutional in provi ling that where q
| Fart only Of a parcel of land Is condemned
| there shall be deducted from the value of
M RI q LnY hn frv
| which 1t Is taken may be to the owner of
the tract by enhancing the value of the part
not taken.
| Second. Whether the law Is invalid be-
| of the damages when ascertained by the
court. and because the act provides that
If Congress. at the end of the time fixed
] by section Is. has not made an appropria-
| ton for such payment, the proceedings
shall be void
| Third. Whether the assessment of bene-
| fits provided for by section Is is constItu-
| t:onal.
Fourth. Whether, If the act is unconsti-
| tutional In any of the respects above men
| toned. the whole law falls or only the
| parts that are invalid.
Record of the Cases.
| "Mr. Justice Cox held section II of the
l act to be unconstitutional. and further
held that on that ground the whole law was
invalid.
| Il.
Chief Justice Alvey dissenting) also held
that section IL is unconstitutional That
| court further held. unanimously, that sec
| ton - Of the act is invalid, but that the
invalidity of sections IL and Is did not
| affect the rest of the law. The case was
accordingly remanded to the special term,
| where a final judgment was entered in ia
| vor of the land owners for the value OF the
| land actually taken. as ascertained by the
| jury, without deduction of benefits in any
| case, and without any assessment for bene-
| fits. The Commissioners of the District and
| Butler F: Abbott, one of the land owners
ment to the Court Of Appeals where the
| judgment was affirmed upon the opinion
rendered when the case was in that court
| in the first instance.
The Commissioners of the District of
| Columbia have appealed to this court,
claiming that the law is in all its parts
| constitutional. Butler F. Abbot one of the
land owners. has also appealed, claiming
1 that the entire statute is unconstitutional
| and void. The other land owners have not
| appealed, but all unite in this motion.
A Speedy Settlement.
| Upon this statement of the case it will
be obvious to the court that the law con-
! templates. and the public interest as well
as the private interests of the parties whose
| land Is affected, requires that the constitu-
tional questions involved should be speedily
| determined by this court. Until such de-
termination all proceedings under the act
are necessarily stayed. AS to the public
| interest, the Commissioners of the District
| Of Columbia respectfully submit
| "First-That the delay which will follow
| II the cases are not advanced will result in
great increase of the cost Of the land to
! be condemned.
"Second-Plans relating to the sewerage
of that portion of the District lying with
| out the city of Washington are necessarily
ned IN a6eyance until it shall have been
l determined where q
"Third-No further subdivision Of land
| Within the territory covered by the map of
section one can be admitted to record as
long as 1t is doubtful whether the nIan tn
which such subdivision must conform is
| legal - 40
| "Eourth-Grades Of existing highways in
| the region affected cannot be established
| till the general plan of highways i'm thai
| vicinity Is determined upon.
! , rHtn-No legislation in aid, or modifica-
! ton or the plan contemplated by the act
| shall have determined the constitutionai
questions involved.
Position Of Land Owners,
1.-The land owners who are nart,s. -
| these cases. in support Of this motion on
their part. respectfully submit: That these
condemnation proceedings put cloud upon
the title to their property, which practi-
cally deprives them OF their right to sell.
mortgage or improve 1t. By the provisions
| Of section Is Of the act, Congress is not
required to determine whether 1t will nav
the judgments which have been entered in
their favor for many months. If there is
added to this the further delay which win
result from waiting for these causes to be
reached on the calendar Of this court. the
land owners interested in this case will all
be seriously injured, and to many OF them the
loss will be trreparable, and this argument
applies to the owners Of land in all the
remaining forty-two subdivisions embr iced
| in the map Of section 1, for condemnation
proceedings have been instituted as to ell
of them"
This statement il signed by 8. T. Thomas,
A. B. Duvall, Samuel Maddox and A. s.
Worthington. attorneys for John w. Ross,
George TruesdeM and Charles F. Powell,
Commissioners Of the District Of Columbia;
Nathaniel Wilson, attorney for appellant,
B. F. Abbot: w. L. Cole. Chas. H. Arnes,
attorneys for appellee, Mary B. Armes.
A Poll I'm Kansas.
Chairman Babcock has received the re-
port Of q careful poll, which has been SUBJ