Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-02-26
OBJECT TO TIE LAW
PROPERTY OWNERS WHO FAIL TO
REMOVE SNOW.
New Regulation Prescribing Penalty
Of Five Dollars Results in In
creased Collections.

The owners and occupants OF property
who have been subjected to proceedings for
alleged violations of the new snow law
and compelled to pay the penalty have not
all incurred the penalty with good grace.
In almost every instance there has been
an exhibition of dissatisfaction.
But" remarked a. policeman who heard
some of the objections this morning, "the
pavements were kept cleaner after the last
snow than they were when the penalty was
only 81"
Most of the complaints were registered
with Assistant City Solicitor Pugh. Some
few defendants gave vent to their feelings
when they handed over their So bills to the
financial clerk at the Police Court. Some
things were said about the District Com
missioners. the police and others connected
with the administration of the affairs of the
District, which, it was admitted, might not
appear to advantage in print.
His First Fine.
tive paid taxes in this city for more t1.an
twenty-five years." said one man who gave
up IS bill land this is the first time I've
ever had to pay fine 1 don't mind the
money, but 1t Is unjust, and that's the
reason I'm complaining"
Then he went on to say things about the
officials and others and to express himself
as believing that the law is obnoxious and
ought to be repealed. incidentally he re-
ferred to the suffrage question, and when
he went away he was by no means salts
fed that his money had been rightfully
taken from him. With him, he said, it was
a case of fish and flesh, and deculared that
the pavements of some of his neighbors
had not been cleaned and that there had
been no prosecution.
In another case the plea was made that
the agent for the paTtiuicar piece of prop
erty had sent out man to clean number
of pavements, and the claim was set up
that he had carried out the orders Of his
employer. The police set up claim to the
contrary, and the prosecutor took the lat
ter's statement that the sidewalk had not
been cleaned villain the time specified in
the law.
"All 1 can do in the matter" said the
solicitor. rs to take the amount OF fine
provided by law"
This amount he stated is s., and the
money was forthcoming.
The Law and Penalty.
In almost every case in which the de-
PENDANT appears in court or in the office
of the prosecutor complaint is made about
the operation of the new law and the
amount of penalty provided. When the PEN
atty was only 81 most of those charged with
amount and were satisfied to allow its for
fixture. In many instances it was far
cheaper to pay fines than it was to employ
a man to remove the snow and the defend
ants merely laughed at the police when the
latter would call and tell them that war
rants had been issued for them.
BUT IT is different. now" remarked
court official discussing the subject this
morning. Five dollars will pay for the re-
moval Of snow from a number of pavements
and will more than pay for keeping the
pavement in front of the average piece of
property clean all the winter"
Increase in Collections
Financial Clerk Sebring told a Star re-
porter this morning that there is great
difference in the collections now and when
81 was the penalty. More money is paid in
one day now than was collected for an en-
tire snow storm under the old law. The
money, as Is the case with that collected in
other cases goes to the credit of the pension
fund of the police and fire departments. 1t
Is perhaps a good thing for the pension
fund that additional money Is being collect
ed. for the number Of pensioners has great
ly increased during the past year or two,
and In order to retire the men who deserve
1t larger collections will soon be necessary.
Warrants in Twelve Cases.
Warrants In twelve snow cases were re-
turned to the Police Court today for trial.
Franklin Kirkstine. who was charged with
not removing the snow from the sidewalk
adjoining a vacant lot near the corner of
14th and Binney streets northwest. declar-
ed that he was not the owner of the lot,
but that 1t belonged to his wife, who was
absent from the city Judge Bundy ac-
copied the explanation and dismissed the
suit. Albert ]. Carico. who also appeared
for trial, was adjudged to be guilty and
paid fine Of s. imposed on him.
The remaining ten persons did not appear,
taking the alternative of FORGETTING So each
rather than stand trial. They were: DIR.
Charles Caldwell. Gertrude B. Moss Wall
ter Donaldson. Sarah L. Lee, Leroy futile,
John F. Mccormack. G. Warfeld Simpson,
Arthur Snyder. Benjamin L. and William
B. Jackson and Court F. Wood.