Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-09-04
PROTESTED IN VAIN
ASSESSOR REPORTS ASSESSMENT
WAS ACCORDING TO LAW.
I i. Charles G. Warden and Others OBJ
jected to Cost of Water
Main.

Some time ago the Commissioner ordered
a six-tnch water main laid in Observatory
and L!EthiCum places, Georgetown. The
main WAS laid primarily at the request
of Mr. Henry Il. Hedrick. and since It was
put down numerous protests have been
made To the Commissioners by the prop
erty owners on LinthiCum place. They
claim they have not been benefited by the
main and should not be assessed for its
cost. The latest protest has come from
Charles q. Warden, who owns lot II, The
Oaks subdivision. and IN his letter he
says:
in view of the fact that / addressed a
formal communication to yourselves and
subsequently appeared personally before
you protesting against the proposed
sessmsnt against my lot. / had presumed
that through the ordinary courtesy that
pertains to business transactions an an
swer or some formal expression of your in
tended action would be sent me before such
action was taken, showing that some
sideration had been given the protest pre-
sen:sd-
Whether d further protest will be of
avail or not, | wish here TO again formally
protest against the assessment as illegal,
unwise, unfair and oppressive. II is Illegal
because there Is no need of the service in
view of the circumstances, in view of
what the law cOntemplates. You have no
right legally to expend public money and
assess private property 10 accomplish what
Is not needed or wanted by community at
large for the benefit of a single Individual
II IS unwise because you have laid pipes
irrespective Of any fixed or probable grade
whatever-in a most graceful manner. l
must admit. following the beautiful undu-
lattons of the hills as nature made them
but not wisely or in d workmanlike man
ner; not with a view 10 being permanent.
but knowing that when the street is paved
these serpentine pipes Will have to be re-
moved and relaid at public expense.
Regarded as Unfair.
That I should be required to pay now
for this work in unfair. for the reasons /
have heretofore stated to you. You refused
me this service only recently. Your refusal
compelled me 10 obtain IL by subjecting my
self 10 much expense and trouble and now
exact payment for what | am In no need
Of. What l asked for was but a part of
what you have granted Mr.. Hedrick II
you can give him 600 feet of main on his
paying only pro rata on his frontage why
should you have refused to give me 45O
feet on the same conditions? Is this not
unjust discrimination?
Your action is oppressive because / have
secured water at a heavy expense and |
should not be compelled to make additional
and useless expenditure. / stand ready as
/ have heretofore stated, to pay my pro
rata when the main shall have been tapped
for service 10 my property, but until then
you have no right to Cypress me by reauir-
ing me to pay for what l do not use or
what does not inure 10 my benefit | ask
that you relieve me of this payment and
that you notify me of your decision in the
matter"
Assessors Report.
The protest was referred to the assessor
and he has reported upon the matter as
follows:
'It appears that in the spring of 1900
Mr.. Warden applied for water facilities for
lot II, THE Oaks" This lot fronted on
Linthicum place, the nearest main being
that on U street The Commissioners did
not deem 1t advisable at that time to go
to the expense Of extending U street main
through Observatory place to Linthicum
place. and from Linthicum place to lot II.
but told Mr.. Warden that,he could obtain
water IN one Of three ways. e.. deposit