Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-10-20
Some Comment Today Regarding the
Verdict in First Case.
JURY MADE TWO EXPLANATIONS
Lawyers on Both Sides Have Some
thing to Say.
CITIZ EMS INTER ESTED

| The award OF the Jury of seven aporais-
ers in the first case under the highway ex-
tension act published in yesterdays
Star. naturally created great deal of
public interest well as comment AS
the readers of Tie S;ar are aware the
| jury reported that they We're unable to
| find any land upon which to assess what
is known as the general benefits. which
under the act was one-half of the sums
awarded as damages. The jury found. as
they state in their verdict that all the
| lano i'm the Dcnson and Leighton subdi-
vision, which was The land involved in the
case, that is in any mar ner benefited 10y
the proposed street extension has been in
cluded in the schedule which WAS part of
| the verdict, and that there is no other land
| in said subdivision which is generally bene-
| fitted.
The jury then proceed to say that having
a; required charged up to the revenues
of the District one-half OF the amount of
| the award, all the taxable land in the
| District is Or may be responsible for this
| part OF the expense. And if for no other
reason this jury can find no other taxable
| land or lands in the District of Columbia
| that are generally benefited by the open-
| ing, laying out and widening of the streets
as shown by the map filed as aforesaid
the area of land embraced in the said Dis
| trict."
The chairman of the appraisers. Colonel
Robert L. Fleming. said this morning to a
Star reporter that tine publication in a
| morning paper protesting to give the rea-
sons winch actuated the Jury referred
10 were his own notes. which he had made
IN the case for the purpose of having the
matter under consideration clearly defined
| he
part of their report
There was quite variety of opinions ex-
| pressed by the business men and citizens
| generally who today Were seen by Star re-
| porters, but everybody seemed to concur
| IN the belief that the verdict WAS one that
must must EaNe peen justified 10y the facts be-
cause OF the high character and the knowl-
eoge OF the men who constituted the Jury
| a conservative man, VINO stands high in
| financial circles, said he regretted that the
| jury found IT necessary to reach the de-
| cision that they had, because it made an
| other hitch in the progress of the move
| ment 10 bring about the application of the
| plan OF the city 10 the suburbs He had
| always thought that street extension was
| an important matter in the future Geyelop-
| ment of the city, and he hoped that some
way would be found by which the law
| could be carried out with due regard to all
| interests.
Not Surprised.
Several real estate dealers said that they
were not surprised by the verdict as they
could not understand how under the law
| and the decisions Of the court general bene-
| iits could be assessed. and for this reason
| they thought that the jury had reached the
| only possible decision in the matter
Another citizen who had given the mat
| ter good deal OF thought said he was of
the opinion that the difficulty arose from
the decision of Judge Cox which restricted
assessing benefits TO the subdivision lie
thought that the whole difficulty could be
femedied II the court would proceed with
the condemnation of all the land in map
No. l. and then he was of the opinion that
there would be no difficulty in assessing
the benefits over the entire area included
within that map.
Others were of the opinion that in the
event the law was not carried out il would
be well for the District Commissioners 10
adopt the plan Of street extension as pre-
pared, and then from time TO time, as the
need seemed TO arise. TO, extend the prn-
cipal thor oughfares going out of the city.
Then II is claimed what is now a rather
complicated question would be simpiified
and a systematic development Of the city
could go en-.
Another well-known real estate man is
of the opinion that the highway act is a
mistake except as means of making a
settled plan for subdividing the farm lands
lying beyond the belt CT subdivision a6-
Jacent to the city, and "a means of re-
curing the owners of these lands TO dedi-
cate to the District land for the proposed
streets and avenues.
This plan. he claimed. would mean no
expense 10 The general or local govern
ment and the land in question would only
be opened up as the growth of the city
created the demand. Others were of the
opinion that one-haif of the damages Of
the highway act should be borne by the
District, whiSh would be proportionatcly
benefited, and one-half by the general gov
ernment, which would also be benefited by
the increased taxation. Opinions were ex-
pressed favoring legislation of this char
acter.
At City Hall.
The verdict was the principal subject of
discussion at the city hall today. the at
toIneys of the land owners expressing gen.
cral satisfaction with the verdict.
The jury declared that they were unable
to assess any benefits outside the suhdi-
vision in question resultant from the Open
ing, laying out and widening of the streets
and highways in the subdivision DESPITE
the fact that the highway act, that of
March 3, 1893, Judge Cox explained TO
the jury, when instructing them as to their
duties, is legislative declaration that ben-
efits would result to lands other than those
embraced in this and other of the subdi-
visions.
Che attorneys of the land owners. IL
would seem. coincide VITA the verdict being
of the opinion that II is practically lmpos-
sible to assess in dollars ana cents the
benefits resulting generally from the pro-
posed improvements.
On the other hand. while they decline
to express themselves for publication, il
is believed that the special counsel for the
District. Messrs. A. A. Birney, John j.
Hemphili and Walter Voorhees,, are of the
opinion that the verdict is incomplete and
does not carry out the provisions of the
highway act. an act, they point out, which
has been declared to be constitutional by
the United States Supreme Court.
At the conference which took place yes
terday afternoon between the District CON-
rlissioners and counsel for the District. IL
IS understood that such was the conten-
ton of the Districts special attorneys.
They submitted. 1t is said. that the case
cannot be left IN its present incomplete con-
dftien. and that II must either De retired or
that another subdivision must be taken
up for trial before new jury.
II the latter step is decided upon. case
419 win. I'm all probability, be dropped
That is. counsel for the District Will ask
Judge Cox to set aside the verdict rem
dcred yesterday in Denison and Leighton's
subdivision OF Mt Pleasant and Pleasant
Plains But II Is understood that whether
that be done or not. counsel for the Dis
trtct win proceed with the trial of other
subdivisions In section 4, and cases 90
Haw's: z36, Prather's. and <37 Wright and