The times., 1898-10-09
THE QUESTION OF Width
Legal Status Of Brightwood
Avenue in Controversy.
AN OPINION IN THE CASE
Application of the Metropolitan
Railroad Company for Permission
Old Figbt-Other Municipal Hnp.
pcninGs of Current Interest.


S. t. Thomas, the attorney for the Dis
trict, has rendered to the District Com
missioners an opinion on the application
recently made by the Metropolitan Rail-
road Company for permission 10 erect a
waiting shed on Brightwood Avenue
above Florida Avenue, for the accommo
dation of patrons.
When the request was received more
than a month ago it was referred to As
sistant Engineer Richards, of the en-
gineer department of the District, who
said: THE building will have to be placed
twenty feet back of the line of the sub
division. Adverse possession has been
had of this property for twenty years,
and it may be that such limitations will
act against the Districts claim for ninety
feet in width. 1t has always been the
practice of this office in making sub
divisions on the west side to require the
building line to conform to the ninety
foot line, and / would recommend that
the Metropolitan Railroad Company be
requested 10 set back on that line their
contemplated Improvements"
The question was then referred 10 At
torney Thomas by Capt. Beach, the en-
| gineer commissioner of the District, for
/ an opinion concerning the status of the
! ground between the sixty-six-foot and
| the ninety-foot width of the street, and
also concerning the Commissioners right
| to grant a permit for the erection of a
| brick structure of the character required
on the ground. His opinion, made public
! yesterday afternoon, is in part as fol-
! lows:
AS to the legal status OF Brightwood
! Avenue, Congress in 1910 authorized the
/ organization of a company 10 build and
/ collect tolls on turnpike road from the
! boundary of the city to the District line
/ in the direction of Baltimore Authority
| was given to acquire by condemnation,
/ and to lay out by metes and bounds a
roadway not less than sixty-six feet wide,
! along which was to be constructed of rock
| and gravel road of not less than twenty
| four feet in width. Ne organization ap-
i pears to have been made under this act.
! In August 1877 the legislature of Mary
! land incorporated the Rockville and
| Washington Turnpike Company and en-
| powered it to construct and operate
| turnpike from Rockville to the District
| line. This corporation was authorized to
| acquire roadway sixty-six feet wide. On
February Is, 1919. Congress passed an act
reciting the Maryland Incorporation and
concluding that the same be declared in
full force in the District of Columbia
THE Seventh Street road or Bright
wood Avenue. as it is now called. is
shown upon the old maps of the city as
being ninety feet wide at the point in
question. In 1893 the District by its Com
missioners, further widened the road at
a point some distance north of the prop,
erty of the Metropolitan Railroad Com
pany, and in so doing removed the fence
of Margaret Krause. Mrs. Krause there
upon sued the District in an action of
trespass. The District defended, and set
up that the alleged trespass within
the line of the public highway The proof
showed that Mrs. Krause purchased her
property in about 1857. and that the fence
then stood as on the line OF a road twen-
! ty-four feet wide; that 1t remained in that
position until 1872, when the Board of
| Public Works removed Il and widened the
road to sixty-six feet. Mrs Krause re-
! built her fence on that line. where II stood
until il was again removed by the Dis
! trict in 1893 when the road widened
| in front of her premises TO ninety feet.
'The trial court ruled that inasmuch as
! the turnpike company was not author
lied to lay out a road to a greater width
/ than sixty-six feet, it acquired no title to
| the difference between that width and
! ninety feet and that the statute of limi-
! corporation and that the District. in
| widening the road to sixty-six feet in
| 1872 acquired title for that width only:
| that the statute of limitations was appli-
cable to the District, a municipal cor
| poration, and hence even though what Is
| now Brightwood Avenue had been origi-
| nally laid out to a width of ninety feet
| if private individuals encroached on it
with their fences and kept them up unin-
farr fal1 O.
| quired title by adverse possession to so
much of the highway as was in their
! possession.
1.-The Judgment in this case was affirmed
| by the Court of Appeals, and being only
| for 81, 600, it could not be reviewed by the
| Supreme Court of the United States.
''It appears that the buildings belonging
! to the Metropolitan Railway Company
! encroaching on this street were erected
in 1875 and that the area of encroachment
| was taxed as the company's property
| until 1893, when it was dropped from the
| tax lists by order of the Commissioners.
| Assuming that title by adverse posses
| sion to one of the public highways of the
| District can be acquired by adverse pos
session, the railway company has title to
the ground s.ween the sixty-siX feet of
| the streets laid out in 1872 and ninety
| feet. the width of the road as originally
laid out, but l am not willing to concede
the proposition that title by adverse pos
! session can be acquired in the pubic
highways of the District My opinion is
that the Commissioners should grant the
| desired permit on condition that the
railroad company erect the substantial
| part of its passenger station on Bright
wood Avenue, outside of a ninety-foot
| roadway. and that it also be permitted to
| build a shed or porch over the seventeen
foot space in question, the same to be re-
moved by the company without compen-
| sation whenever the avenue is in TACT
| widened to ninety feet"
THE NEWPORT PLACE CASE.