The times., 1899-08-11
MAY NOT have A SWITCH
No Authority to Allow a Tempo
rary Track in G Street.
The District commissioners Refuse n
Permit to Lay Rails to the New
Government Printing 0fice-Matc-
rials sIust Re Transported by
Teams at An Extra Cost of $4,000.

An application by Lieut.. John Stephen
Seweli, Of the Army, who is in charge of
the erection of the new building for the
Government. Printing Office, for permis-
sion TO lay switch from the tracks of
the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad to the
site for delivering materials, has been re-
fused by the District Commissioners. The
request was made during the latter part
of July.
Lieutenant Sewell informed the Commits
sioners at the time that the proposed
switch would greatly facilitate the work
OF constructing the new building, besides
saving the Government about SIS, COO over
and above all expenses due to the switch
and ensuring a more certain supply
of materials.
1t was proposed to lay the switch on
the parking on the south side of G Street,
from First Street, east 10 North Capitol
Street, which thoroughfare would be
crossed diagonalIy, bringing the proposed
tracks TO the sidewalk on the south side
Of the building site. The only premises
that would be interfered with by the
switch would be the stables of the Gov
ernment Printing Office on the south side
of G Street, and Lieutenant SewelI ar
ranged with the Public Printer TO avoid
any inconvenience in that direction 1t
was proposed by the engineer in charge
TO switch cars only after midnight. when
street cars would not be running. and to
remove the crossing, which would be laid
over the tracks, when it was not in use
Easy crossings were to be maintained for
teams at ali needed points. and provision
made for easy access to Inanholes and
valves in the street
The Commissioners doubted their author
ity to grant the application and referred the
matter 10 their Attorney, Andrew B. Du
vail. This was done and his opinion was
given and acted upon yesterday. Mr.. Du-
vail states that the Supreme Court of the
United States. In the case of the District
OF Columbia against the Baltimore and Po-
tomac Railroad Company, that the right to
use streets for any purpose other than
the ordinary use must proceed from Con-
gress, and that however necessary or de-
siraele il might be for railroad company
TO extend its tracks upon the streets there
was mo place for the assertion of any
right in the company 10 make other tracks
or changes in location of those now ex-
listing without an act giving the consent of
that body" and that when the railroad com
pany wished to depart in any direction from
the line of its present track as prescribed
for 1t by acts of Congress it must obtain
permission from that body. The Supreme
Court also held that Congress, and not
the court or the company, is the judge of
the expediency or the necessity of any
change. and the manner in which the pub
lie good requires il TO be made and the
safeguards which should accompany it.
II was also suggested that the permit
might be granted under the act OF Con-
gress of March 8, 1885, which authorized
the Baltimore and Ohio to extend its road
into Washington. This act authorized the
railroad 10 construct branches from its
main stem within the city to such places as
the corporate authority OF Washington
might permit but in the opinion of Attor-
ney Duvall this legislation does not author
ize the desired permit because, he says,
the grant contained in the act has long
since been exhausted. He holds that the
Commissioners are not the successors of
the corporate authority of Washington -
mentioned in the law. and recommended
that the application of Lieutenant Sewell
be denied, in which view the Commission
are have concurred.