The Washington times., 1901-07-16
AFFAIRS OF THE DISTRICT.
A Mistake in Assessment for a
Sidewalk in Georgetown.
NJ Street, Contrary to the General
Rule, is Eighty Feet in Width
The Exception Causes IN Curious
Error In the Tax Department.

| Rule, is Eighty Feet in Width
The Exception Causes Curious
| Error in the Tax Department.
Final action was taken yesterday upon
the request of Catherine Mccarthy and
! others for a sidewalk to be laid on the
north side OF NJ Street. between Thirty
fifth and Thirty sixth Streets northwest
| The application was referred to the sur
face division of the Engineer Department
and after examination into the merits of
the case it was found that the cost of the
Improvement would be about $SSS. and it
| was recommended that the application be
| included in the next list to be advertised
| for objections under the assessment sys-
/ TEN. 1t was later decided that the curb
| should be re$et on the north side of the
street. This work was completed, and
the assessment therefor was approved on
! June g.
Since then the question cf erroneous as
| sessment has been raised, and c. B. Hunt,
the Computing Engineer, has now report
| ed on the case: When the plat of this
property was sent to the special assess
ment Office it was in error to the extent
of showing wrong frontage of private
| property for assessment This error arose
| from inadvertently considering Thirty
/ III otfttl DIS SiAtN Ittt Witt iuStSat Va
eighty feet wide. The almost universal
| rule in Georgetown is that streets are
sixty feet wide, and Thirty-fifth Street is
| the exception. This fact was overlooked
with the result that the distance from
the curb to the building line was under
estimated by ten feet Neither of the
bills under the assessment has been paid,
nor will the money be received pending a
correction of the assessment l recon-
mend that the assessment made in this
case be Cancelled and new assessment
prepared in accordance with the corrected
plat
This recommendation the Commission
ers have approved and action will be TAX
en- accordingly.
A. B. Duval1, Attorney for the District
has forwarded to the Commissioners an
opinion in regard to the communication
of Thomas G. Hensey & Sons, attorneys
for Blanche Claughton West, requesting
the refunding of the amount paid for the
general tax for the year ending June 80
1896, and interest, against sub-lot 64,
square 1872, between Eighteenth and Nine
teenth and and T Streets northwest.
1T appears" says the Attorney, that
this lot was purchased bv Mrs. West upon
the faith of a certified statement of taxes
issued October 26 1897. wherefrom the tax
for the year 1886 was omitted. September
9, 1888. the owner desiring to negotiate
new loan on this lot. new certified state
nient of taxes was obtained by her agents,
upon which the tax for 1885, sl5.15, was
noted. The certified statement of 1897 not
being In the possession of her agents at
the time and unaware of its contents,
they paid the tax for 1896, which is now
asked to be refunded
Under the act of Congress approved
May 13, 1892, it is provided that certified
statement of taxes when furnished shall
be a bar to the collection and recovery
from any subsequent purchaser OF any
tax or assessment omitted from and which
may be lien upon the real estate men
toned in said certificate, and said lien
shall be discharged as to such subsequent
purchaser.
Il am of the opinion that the purchase
of the property upon the faith of the
certified statement of taxes. dated Octo-
Der 70. 1891 discharged the lien of the
tax of 1896; that to Mrs. West there
was no tax for 1896 existing against this
lot and that the payment by her Septem-
Der IA, 1889, should be refunded.
J. B. LanahaE recently requested per-
mission to extend the water service pipe |
OF premises in the rear of 635 l. Street |
northwest to the premises in front. The 1
application was referred to the Water
Department, and George F Green, the |
Water Registrar, has reported:
The writer desires to extend the water |
service supplying a bottling establish |
ment in the rear of 635 L Street northwest |
to the front house, the entire service to |
be metered, and the pipes now supplying |
the front house, which are inadequate TO |
furnish the necessary amount of water, |
to be disconnected at the water main.
AS both premises are on one lot, owned |
by cne party, and the bottling establish .
ment is part of the business conducted in |
the front building. j respectfully recon-
mend the request be granted
This recommendation has been approved |
by the Engineer Commissioner and for
Warded to his associates.
The Commissioners have received an
opinion from A. 3. Duvall, Attorney for
the District. upon the application of Will
liam II. Manogue, attorney for Thomas
w. Smith, for the remission of penalties
and interest on the general taxes for 1898
against lot IS, block 90, Columbia Heights
1T appears, says the attorney, that
the iot was assessed in 1895 In the name of
H. H. Talmadge, and the second half of
the general tax for 1898 being unpaid the
property was liable, in accordance with
law, to advertisement in the delinquent |
tax list for 1898, and to sale accordingly.
By some inadvertence, however, said lot
was not advertised in said delinquent tax |
list.
THE act of Congress for the support
of the government of the District of CO. |
lumbia approved March 3, 1877. which, by
its concluding section, was declared to be
our permanent tax law until repealed,
provided for the imposition of a penalty
upon tax In arrears, and if the tax was
not paid the penalty and the original tax
together shall constitute the delinquent
taxes. for which the property was to be
advertised and sold, and was bought in
by the District, interest at 10 per cent |
from the day of the sale was TO be |
charged on the amount of the tax, penal |
ties and costs. etc.
Under the circumstances of this case, |
the Assessor recommends that the tax |
be received with penalties added to April
II, 1899 Cthe date Of the sale of the other |
property in Columbia Heights subdvi-
SION. and that no interest be charged |
subsequent TO that date. ! see no objec-
ton to this disposition of the matter. Ger
tai inly the imposition of the penalties to
the present time would be inadmissbie; |
and in view Of the fact that the property |
was not actually sold at tax sale to the |
District there could be no justification for |
charging interest based on, and to date |
from, sale which was not made"
Transfer of Bioomingdale Lots.
deed was placed record yesterday by |
Joseph Paul and his wife, Elya 4. Paul, convey |
ing to Ray f. Mddaugh and William Shannon |