Evening star., 1901-03-26
ALLEGED SMOKE NUISANCE
PROTEST FILED AND REPLY BY
WASHINGTON TRACTION COMPANY.
officials EndeavOrinE to Comply With
the Law-COrrespOnden
on the Subject.

A protest signed by Mr.. l. Edwin krouSe
and a number of other property owners
and residents in the vicinity Of the power
house of the Metropolitan Railroad Com
pany, on P street near Rock creek, was re-
ceived by the District Commissioners sew
eral days ago, setting forth that from the
power house there are constantly emitted
smoke, dust and cinders over and through
their respective premises, to their great
discomfort and to the great injury of their
property. They therefore most earnestly
request the Commissioners to order the
company to abate the alleged nuisance.
The protest was referred by the Commits
sioners to the health officer, DR.. Wm e.
Woodward, who has immediate charge of
such matters and he wrote Mr.. Geo. H.
Harries. the vice president Of the'company,
calling his attention to the complaint ana
informing him that 1.-The continuance OF
violations of the law without action looking
toward an inf1ction of the prescribed pen
atty cannot, of course, be tolerated lnden-
nitely."
Replying to the health officers letter, Mr.
Harries stated that when his attention was
first directed to the probable conflict be-
tween some of his companies and the law
relative to smoke, there was an immediate
conference with the president OF the board
of Commissioners and DR.. Woodward, at
which he endeavored to make perfectly
plain the COmpanyS S pOSltlOL anu Ado
imagined he had done SO.
No Quarrel With Law.
1--WE are proceeding, said Mr.. Harries,
with all possible haste to consolidate our
power plants and to provide the surviving
station or stations with devices which are
said to diminish the quantity of smoke
necessarily Issuing from the power mousse
stacks. We have no quarrel with the law
rr-l,f fnt, fo~ tfc-n oh a
the smoke nuisance. We are of record as
being favorable to the prevention of smoke,
but it is difficult to understand why the
law should be invoked to the detr1ment OF
those who are doing their utmost, at great
expense, to bring to a successful conclu-
sion a proposition which is experimental at
best. Tests of so-called smoke consumers
have been freely made, and although our
experts have failed to discover any device
which will accomplish the present impos-
sibility asked by law, we have, neverthe-
less, concluded negotiations for the equip
ment of our entire plant with mechanism
which will undoubtedly do as much as any
thing yet invented to decrease the volume
of Objectionable material emitted from our
smoke stacks.
There can be no two opinions as to the
advisability and propriety of prosecuting
those who Intentionally violate the law
whether that law be wise or otherwise; but
1t should never seem necessary to exert un-
due pressure adverse to those who are do
ing all that can possibly be done to put
themselves in accord with statute which
is being disobeyed not merely all over the
District of Columbia, but in every city
where such law exists"
As to Enforcement.
1t will be observed that the company does
not deny violating the smoke law, and it is
the Intention of Commissioner Macfar-
land to lay the matter before his associates
upon the return to the city, the latter part
of this week, of Commissioner Ross. The
Commissioners feel that they have done
what they could to enforce the law, and
Mr.. Harries company was fined last No
vember $40 for violating it. But in view of
his statement that his company is doing
all 1t possibly can to meet at the very earli-
est day the requirements Of the law, it will
be for the Commissioners to decide wheth-
er the company shall be taken into court
from day to day and subjected to fine. The
policy Of the Commissioners Is and has
been not to prosecute any person or cor
poration making an honest effort to observe
the law, but, on the other hand, to prose-
cute those making no effort whatever to
obey 1t, believing 1t to be a most proper
and wise one.