The times., 1899-04-29
CANNOT PAY ASSESSMENT.
Difficult Question Decided by the
Comm sioncrs.


Commissioners.
After several weeks of thorough con-
sideration, the Commissioners have reach
ed decision regarding a request from
Joseph R. Fague, attorney for David G.
Struble, for permission to pay an assess
'ment for curb and sidewalk against part
of sublot q, in square 1892, without inter-
est and costs. The case is an important
one, in view of the statement of Fague
that the assessment was similar to others
which had been declared Illegal by the
courts. The Commissioners seemed TO
have looked at the matter differently, for
they have denied the request.
1t appears that under the law OF August
Z, 1894, which provides for the method OF
doing assessment and permit work the as
sessment was levied for the curb and side
walk in question, and the intention TO do
the work advertised September 3, 4, 10, and
II, 1894, and a hearing set for September
II of the same year. Special Assessment
Clerk Daniel was requested to make
specific statement of any invalidity which
may have occurred in respect to the as
sessment He said there was none except
as regards the advertisement OF the in
tended work. In March last Attorney
Thomas informed the Commissioners that
while the law requires that two weeks
must elapse between the first publication
of the advertisement and the day set for
the hearing in the case In question the
advertisement was one day short. and the
assessments would be quashed II judicial
proceedings were taken. In this opinion
the Attorney ruled that it would be good
administration to accept the proposal OF
Mr.. Fague TO pay the principal.
Engineer Commissioner Beach differed
from the Attorney, and informed his col
leagues that it would, in his opinion, be
inadvisable to cancel interest and penal
ties, except in cases where, by judicial
decision, the principal had been declared
uncollectible He thought the matter one
for judicial decision. rather than for the
Commissioners to remit any portion OF the
amount due the District. Commissioner
| Ross approved the opinion of Attorney
| Thomas, but Commissioner Wight agreed
with Captain Beach, and favored test
| case being made. Early in April the mat
ter was sent TO Attorney Thomas again,
| and that official rendered a second decision
| in which he stated that fourteen days had
not elapsed between the publication and
| the hearing, as required by law.
| ut is settled law" stated Attorney
| Thomas, that where an act is required TO
| be done within limited period from and
| after particular time or event, TO include
| the first and exclude the last day. Where
| statute requires notice to be given in
assessment and tax cases its provision
must be strictly complied with. Thus, in
the leading case OF Early against Homans
| the Supreme Court held in a case arising
over the advertisement Of the delinquent
tax list of the late corporation OF Wash
| ington that where a statute required notice
of tax sales to be advertised once in eact
| week for at least twelve successive week!
twelve full full weeks were required. Thi!
case has been followed by the Supreme
| Court of the District in the class OF assess
ments in question, and no appeal has beer
taken because it is believed different re
suit could not be had in the Court of Ap
peals. If, under the circumstances, thu
Commissioners desire the opinion of the