Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-06-24
BAY WINDOW CASE
Important Hearing Before the Secretary of
War.
The Right to Go Beyond the building
Line-JHstice Gray
Objects.

cecide question at issue between the
District Commissioners and Mr. Gordon
Mckay on one side and Mr.. Justice Gray
of the United States Supreme Court on the
| other side. He gave hearing TO all the
persons interested at the War Department
this afternoon al 2:30 o'clock, and his de-
cision will be awaited with general interest
by the property holders Of the District.
The question under consideration involves
the extent of the powers of the District
Commissioners in the matter of projections
over the building line
Some time ago Mr.. Gordon Mckay owner
OF the Arno. made application for per
init to construct a bay wind Nv to premises
No. 1907 l street, the dimensions OF which
were given as ; feet by Il feet wide. He
was represented in the matter by Mr.. Rob-
ert j.. Fleming. architect.
Inc permit was granted by The Commits
sioners. and In the usual course of bust
ness was referred to the Secretary OF War.
This action was taken under a provision
or the act of March 3. 1891, referring to
| projections. which provides AS follows:
And hereafter no snch permits Chat is.
or projections beyond the building line)
shall be granted except upon special appl,-
cation and with the concurrence Of all of
SAID Commission ar5 tof the District. and
| the approval of the Secretary OF War
Justice Gray Protests.
Mr. James Lowndes. as attorney for MIR.
Justice Gray, who lives at No. 1901 street
has made protest against the issue of the
permit to Mr.. Mckay. In a letter to AS
| sstant Sec: etary Meiklejohn of the War
Department. he states his objections sub
stantially as follows:
First. That the projection which extends
| five feet from the building line practically
| at right angles thereto for a width of II
feet, beginning feet and inch from the
party line and extending to a height of a.
or 40 feet. with lateral windows will inter
fere materially with the enjoyment of air.
| light and prospect Of the owner of l6ol l.
| and (having lateral windowsD will entirely
| destroy his privacy
Secondly, that no good ground has been
shown for the issue of the permit
Secretary Alger and Assistant Secretary
MeikleJohn gave Il hearing to the parties
| in interest several days ago with the result
that the matter was returned to the Dis
| trct Commissioners for further considera-
| ton. in view of the objections male by MI
Lowndes behalf of MIR. Justice Gray,
owner of 1tD1 | street.
In his letter Of objections to Assistant
Secretary Meikejohn. Attorney Lowndes
says. among other things:
The objection to the bay window goes
| entirely beyond the points that 1t
inches in width in excess of the width APP
proved In the Commissioners schedule and
one foot in depth in excess of the depth
approved there for right-angled bay win
dow.
The objection is to any bay window De
ing placed there at all; or if the Secretary
I
proper to grant permit for "a bay window
of some kind the objection is to one that
al proaches in size the one a present pro-
posed.
I'm the present case the land at 1G01 /
street was granted to the predecessor in
title of the present owner by the United
States. with implied right to air. hight
and prospect over l street Tor Il width OF
ninety feet.
The permission which you are asked to
give will derogate from the rights under
this grant and the United States is now
asked 10 take away what il has sold to one
Individual and give il to another.
There would not be the slightest color
of public use IN this proposed grant to
the owner CT 1864 l street The case diff
fers in this respect from the case of the
Baltimore and Potomac railroad VS.. Baptist
Church, los L. s., 3l1. in which the doc
tribe is laid down that Congress can grant
the of the streets to d railroad COM
pany. subject to the grantees liability to
ali action for damages.
Important as "a Precedent.
This case will be important as a rreoe-
dent and ii is respectfully submitted to
you that if the permit should he granted 1t
will commit the department to the policy
of giving a part Of he soil of the public
streets to any one who asks for tia policy
which seems to conflict with that OF the
al OF March ;. 1881.
Hearing by the Commissioners.
Under date of the 18th instant the Dis
trict Commissioners Informed the Secretary
CT War that they had given Il hearing to
the parties in interest, at which Mr..
Lowndes. Mr. Robt i. Fleming and others
expressed their views on the subject.
Mr.. Lowndes contended that the Commits
sioners are not compelled to allow projec-
tons to the full extent of the limit pre-
Scribed by the regulations, but that each
case should be decided upon the special
circumstances involved and with due regard
TO the convenience and comfort of the pab-
lie and of the interests of owners of con-
tiguous private property. He protested
against the issue of a permit applied Tor,
on the ground that the proposed construc-
don would be unsightly and would destroy
the privacy OF the adjoining residence of his
client.
Application Approved.
The representatives of the applicant
claimed that the application as amended
was clearly within the law and regulations.
and that it would be illegal and unjust for
him in favor of the contestant. especially
in view of the fact that the regulations IN
this respect have heretofore been impair
TALLY applied.
After a full consideration of the mat
ter" say the commissioners in their let
ter, the commissioners concluded that
there appears to he sufficient reason
why they should revoke or modify their
concurrence in the application. and they
therefore have the honor TO herewith re-
submit. the matter with that status to you"
The arguments made 20 Secretary Alger
today pro and con. were in line with the
views above EXPRESSED on both sides of