Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-12-20

hc Ol the Jaw anu NIe
principles upon which the jury are to pro-
coed having been settled, the proceedings
In future cases should not occupy great
| deal of time. and if the amendments to the
map of section i which We have suggested
should be made. the number of these pro-
ceedings would he so greatly reduced that
the Inconvenience from delay in ascertain
| Ing the value of the land taken would he
:ninimized. To still further relieve the
land owners in these ST bilvis.ons We on
mend that provision be made for the inn
mediate payment of awards when con
firmed by the court. upon the approval. not
| OF Congress, but of the President of the
United States. This was the course
| thorized by Congress in respect of the
| Rock Creek Park
The Cost.
| IS. The next, and most serious objec-
| ton to the law is that it imposes upon tine
| District of Columbia the entire cost of
| carrying il into effect.
I'm opinion this objection. if it can
| not be overcome. is fatal one. The grand
| plan upon which the or ginal city OF Wash
i ington is laid out cannot be followed in the
| extension of the city if the people of the
/ District to bear all the expense of
| maintaining these great thorcue hfares and
| reservations. As to the expense, which is
now imminent and pressing, that of cor
| recting the numerous disjointed and inhar
| monious subdivisions which We're filed prior
| to lSSS. it is one which. if justice should
| OBTAIN, would he borne wholly by the | MT;
| ed states, subject only to credit OF the
| amounts collected by proper assessment.
| But for the neglect of the public authori-
| ties, over whom the people OF the District
had no control. there would have been pre-
| pared not later than 1919 general plan
| for the extension of the city over the ter
| ritory now occupied by these subdivisions.
Again and again the attention of Con
| gress was called to this matter by citizens
] of the District, who had no right in the
| matter but the right of petition. Individual
| land owners in making their subdivisions
| were necessarily governed by their own in
| terests because there was nobody author
| lied to determine where the streets should
| go, and since Congress allowed these mis-
| fitting subdivisions to he made, nay, since
| Congress required them to oe made, be-
cause without a general plan there could
| be no harmony among them, 1t would seem
| to be too plain for argument that ii is IN
| equitable to compel the people of the Dis
| trict of Columbia. who had no power to
prevent this expense from being incurred.
! TO pay 1t.
| IF these subdivisions can he corrected
! only at the expense of our people, then, in
| our judgment they should not he corrected
| at all. And as to streets outside OF sub
| divisions. if the people of this District are
| to pay for the cost Of laying them out in
| the first place and of maintaining them in
| the future. then they should be laid out on
| a much simpler and more economical
| plan. We know of no in the District
| who Is in favor now of the adoption of
| such scheme as is contemplated by the
act of 1893 who ever urged ii upon Con-
| gress to be carried out at the expense of
the people of the District of Columbia.
| And here it may be well TO say that
| when the highway act passed the Senate
| that body was unanimously in favor of the
United States bearing its share of the ex-
pense of carrying the act into effect, and
the committee on the District of Columbia
| Of the House of Representatives also unani-
! mously indorsed the bill with similar pro-
| vision. In their report. which accompanied
the bill (repo TT No. S66. H. r.. Fifty-second
Congress. first SESSION., in explanation of
this they said:
1.-The object of bringing all these sub
divisions into harmony with themselves and
with the city proper is largely one for the
! benefit of the whole community. In con-
! siderable degree it is a national undertake
| ing. The main object is to preserve and
extend the plan of the city adopted by
| President Washington, a plan in which
| streets avenues and reservations are laid
down upon a large scale. because they
were intended for the grand capital of a
| rnighty nation
| I'VE cannot doubt that upon a proper
representation of this matter to Congress it
| will recede from the provision in question
| and will a least follow the enuitab rule
| laid down in the organic act of the District
| of 1878; and if to pay these expenses bonds
| should be issued on the same basis as the
existing 365 bonds. all receipts from assess
ments should be applied to the creation of
i sinking fund to pay such bonds
| Its Practicability.
&C. 1t is said that the highway act is
| impracticable because two juries have
failed to make an assessment in accordance
with the provisions of section Il.
| This is the section which requires the
| same Jury which ascertains the damages in
| any condemnation proceeding to assess one
half of those damages upon property bene-
| fitted, leaving it to the jury to determine
| what property is so benefited. Strangely
| enough. this objection comes mainly from
| those who propose to prohibit any such
| assessment in the future. The remedy is
| simple. If the jurieS cannot make the as
| sessment Congress must necessarily estab-
lish the front foot rule some other equal
| ly obnoxious arbitrary rule in its place.
| Everybody comedies that there are benefits
| to adjacent land resulting from the estab-
| lishment of new highways, and We of the
| District cannot expect the United States to
share with Us the expense of this work
| without collecting actual benefits, as IS
done in every other municipality in the
country.
| I'VE recommend the repeal absolutely of
| section II. We advise. as to existing sub
| divisions. that no assessment shall be made
| until the condemnation proceedings as to
| the Subdivisions covered by any one map
! are finished and payment OF the awards
provided for IN assessment should then
| be made. taking the territory covered in
| the map as the taxing district. but it should
| be made for actual benefits Only and after
| giving all parties in interest an opportunity
| to be heard. 1t should be confined to bene-
| fits arising from the mere condemnation of
| the projected highways through the sub
| divisions, without reference to any benefits
| that may be supposed to accrue hereafter
| from the condemnation of connecting
| streets between the subdivisions or from
| the actual opening and improvements Of
| the streets. In some cases these benefits
| would be practically nothing; in others
/ they would he substantial
| But in condemnation proceedings out
| side of existing subdivisions a very diff
| ferent rule should prevail 1t will sell
| Com happen that new streets will require
| to be condemned through large tracts OF
! land, because experience teaches that al
most uniformly the owners of such tracts
| are anxious to bring the same into mar
| ket as building lots long before the public
| convenience requires such condemnation
| But If the owner of a large tract of land
| should choose to maintain it intact and
| to await condemnation proceedings, the
| benefits which, under section IL of the
| Highway act, would be deducted would
| ordinarily equal compensation for the land
taken, and the man who waited for con-
domination proceedings would thus, and
| Justly, be put in the same position as the
| great majority who give the land for the
L