The times., 1901-04-05

Mandamus Cnse-Current Notes.
The Commissioners several DAYS ago ap-
pointed a special committee. consisting of
J. r Petty the Auditor, and c. l.. Hunt
the Computing Engineer, and requested
them to formulate a regulation for the
disposition Of all complaints and reports
relative to the removal of dirt sand,
Gravel. and other refuse matter from
paved sidewalks and alleys in the District.
This action was taken in accordance with
the act Of Congress approved March >.
lS97. The committee yesterday submitted
their report in the form Of the following
order. which they ask the Commissioners
to officially promulgate:
THAT hereafter an action relative to
the removal of dirt. sand, gravel, or
other refuse matter from paved sidewalks
and allevS in the District OF Columbia, as
required by the act of March ,, 1897. shall
be under the direction OF the Computing
Engineer. TO whom all complaints shall
be referred. and who shall be charged
with the responsibility OF all inspection,
service of notice, and such work OF re-
1noval as may be found necessary, charg-
ing the cost of the same to the then cur
rent appropriation for repairs to streets,
avenues. and alleys.
moval shall have been ascertained the
papers relating thereto shall be referred
10 the Assessor for assessment and entry
of the amount assessed upon the regular
tax roll of the District as provided in the
aforementioned act. and all moneys col
lccicd i'm accordance with said act shall
be repaid 70 the appropriation for repairs
10 streets. avenues. and alleys for the
fiscal year In which the same shall have
been received
Andrew Il. DuyaH. the Attorney for
the District, has advised the Commission
ers relative to the affirmation Of the Su-
preme Court of Appeals of the District
OF Columbia in the case Of the United
States cx rel Cottcr T Bride against
AIacfarland 1t al The Attorney states
that the action was an application for the
writ of mandamus 10 require the Com
missiouers to execute deed for lot 9, in
square q. sold for taxes April 6, 1898. Mr..
Duvau gives the following review of the
case and its result:
The Commissioners declined TO execute
the deed except upon the payment of the
general taxes, with interest and costs,
due and unpaid for the years 1880 10 1888,
both inclusive for which the lot had been
sold at previous tax sales and bought in
by the District.
The refusal to execute the decd was
based upon the provisions Of the act Of
Congress approved February y, 1898, en-
titled An act in relation to taxes and tax
sales in the District Of Columbia, by
which it is provided, among other things,
in section 3 thereof, that no decd shall he
issued until all taxes and assessments ap-
peariug on the tax books against the
property are paid with penalties. interest,
and costs, including taxes for the years
FOR which the District purchased the
property at tax sale.
February y. 1>gS. was not applicable 70
the tax sales of April 6. 1885 and that ne
was entitled To "A tax deed for TINS prop
erty without the payment OF any ante
cedeut taxes and that upon the eXccu-
tion Of such lax deed he would bc enti-
tied under the decision IN Brewer against
District OF Columbia to have the antcce-
dent taxes Cancelled.
The Court Of Appeals. however. held
that said act OF Congress operated upon
the tax sales of April, 1898, and IN the
course Of the decision Chief Justice Alvey
said:
a The act of February g. 1855, is in
tended as a general comprehensive sys-
TEN OF procedure for the listing, adNertis-
ing. and sale OF property for taxes il IS
not intended 10 be a mere auxiliary meth
cd prescribed to pre-eNisting method. 1t
was intended to take the place of sys-
tenn previously prescribed in which IL was
supposed there were defects that required
legislative change in detail, bat not ~ the
.. Congress by the passage OF this act.
did not certainly intend to deprive the
District of all remedy for the collection
ot tax taxes due prior to the date Of the act
e. The act was simply a re-enactment
81 pre-eNistin2 laws, with mOdlncatIohs
and enlargement OF powers 20 make them
more effective. But in doing this II did
not ia amy manner nuilify what had been
done under the pre-eNlsung acts upon jhe
subject.
Henry j. Woodbury., OF 2S25 / Street
northwest, has again written the Commis-
siouers protesting against tho laying OF
grauolithic sidewalk in front of premises
JIm 10 1lo5 Twenty-fouTth Street north
west and he asks that action be deferred
until The matter can be laid before the
board
G B. Hunt. the Computing Engineer. i'm
making Il second report upon the matter,
calls the attention of the Commissioners
- the fact that cement sidewalk on the
cast side OF TweHtH-fOUrth Street from
!. 10 Vi Streets. including the frontage de
scribed has been ordered. after proper
legal procedure. under the assessment sys-
tom, the same having been requested 10y 81
per cent of the abuttinE property owners.
Mr.. Hunt states that the writer is clearly
n minority representative and as the pro-
posed construction is not only authorized
10y law but is also to a considerable eE-
tent for the benefit Of the United States
Weather Bureau. Mr. Hunt secs no rea-
son for modifying the order already is
sued for the work. and lac recommends
that the writer De 50 advised.
The INSPECTOR Of Buildings has for
warled 10 the Commissioners a schedule
of proposals received for constructing a
school building at Third and Streets
and also FOR the plumbing work Of the
same. The Inspector states that the pro-
posas were for a steam heated building
with front and rear walls faced with light
Colored brick. He states that the lowest
bid received was that OF J. n. Dunn and
that the funds available. after allowing
for the cost Of contingent expenses IN
CIdental TO the construction OF the build
ing is $J625i.lI leaving balance OF
s54517.
Mr.. Brady expresses his belief I'm the re-
sponsibillty Of the bidder. and recon-
msnds thar the proposal be- accepted. MIR
Brady also calls attention 10 the fact
that the plans of the building have been
designed with "A view 70 charging il iu
the future, 50 as 20 contain sixteen rooms
Tho Commissioners. acting upou the ad-
VICE of the Inspector, have voted to ac-
Cppt the bid.
James II. Han. Of Brookland who re-
Gently complained to tbe Commissioners
~ - n g. IL