The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-09-25
AFFAIRS OF THE DISTRICT.
Various Matters Considered by the
Comm missioners.


J. A. sweeny. attorney for Thomas J.
Chase. recently applied to the Comm s.
sioners for the remission Of the interest
and cost on the assessment for sewer
against part Of lot 1, square 40, on the
ground that the description of the lot
assessed was insufficient to identify it.
He agrees to pay the assessment without
interest and costs. if permission is grant
ed. The assessment reads, against lot
l. square 77O, abutting 100 feet en- Third
Street" The application was referred to
the Attorney of the District for consider
alton. \. A. Duvall yesterday rendered
his opinion in the matter. He considered
that this may have been an insufficient
description Of the property assessed, and
for that reason the assessment may be
open to objection, but the owner was
personally served with notice of assess
ment, and he was not in any wise misled
by the description. HIS property has
received the benefit of the improvement.
The Attorney states in cases similarly
situated the Commissioners have here
tofore declined to quash assessments ex-
cept in pursuance of a judgment OF court
directing them to do So" Mr. Duyall is
of the opinion that the application should
be denied.
Edward ]. Stellwagen, 1924 F Street, ad-
vised the Commissioners recently that in
January, 1899, he purchased part of lot l,
block 81, Columbia Heights, for Mrs. Julia
s. GilIis. and that at the time OF purchase
he personally inspected the premises and
saw that the curb was laid prior to the
date of purchase. y bill for the laying OF
the curb was later rendered to Mrs. Gillis
by the special assessment office. Mr.. Steil-
wagen had taken the precaution to secure
through the Columbia Title Insurance
Company certificate dated January Il,
1899, which was endorsed, mo unpaid as
sessments to date" On June 21, 1899. five
months later, Mrs. Gillis was served with
rhe bill for the curb, which Mr.. Stellwagen
asserts positively was laid at the time the
p.Tchase of the properly was consummated.
The complainant expressed willingness to
meet the 1927 special assessment provid-
ing the penalties and interest were re-
mitted. Mr.. Stellwagen states that he ad-
vocated that a notice OF special assess
ment pending be placed upon certificates
of taxes when such is the case. Special AS
sessment Clerk J. W. Daniel. to whom thu
communication was referred, made the fol-
lowing report:
Even haa it been customary TO enter
pending assessments upon tax certificates
at the time, no mention Of the assessment
in question would have been made upon
this certificate, dated January p, 1899, for
the reason that no copy of the order 10 lay
curb on Kenyon Street had been sent TO
this cifice. In fact, no copy of such order
has ever been sent to me. The papers
upon which the assessments are based did
not reach this office until March 6, 1899.
''The acts of Congress approved Febru-
ary G, 1879. and May 10, 1892, provide for
a certified statement of all taxes and as
sessments, general and special, that may
be due and unpaid at the time of making
said certificate Inasmueh as they made
no provision for noting pending assess-
mentg,' is it advisable to so beyond the
law and so incur the risk of loss by reason
OF omission Of pending assessments from
tax certificates?
There is no question of the fact that
1t would be a convenience to the purchas-
ers of property to SO note them but the
same informa ton could be obtained by en-
quiry of the Engineer Department. l would
suggest the insertion in the form used for
tax certificates, of a paragraph in large
type cautioning parties to make such. en-
quiry. respectfully recommend THAI pay
ment of the enclosed bill be not accepted
without interest"
The papers were referred to the Assessor |
for his consideration of the recommends |
tion with regard to the suggested notice |
on the form cautioning parties to enquire !
as to pending assessments.
A II. Chase has applied for permission |
to remain in occupation OF the condemned |
building at Seventh and l. Streets south !
west. until the 18th of December. The |
Commissioners Saturday notified the appli- |
cant that he could not be granted further !
extension of time beyond the 1st of Octc- |
Der. and was informed that the building |
must be vacated by that time.
Mr.. Chase formerly applied for an ex-
tenson from the latter part OF June, until !
October l. and this was allowed, on the |
promise of the applicant to properly shore |
and brace the walls OF the building an III |
consideration of his removal by the date |
set for tae limit of the extension of time. |
In rendering an adverse opinion upon |
the last application for extension, Engi- |
neer Commissioner Beach notes that the |
extension to October was granted to en-
able Mr.. Chase to make his business ar /
rangements to vacate the building, and |
that any neglect to do so is his own re- |
sponsibillty. The recommendation of Cap !
tain Beach that no further extension be |