Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-04-21

e street 10 opposition to the bill. M.
Eaacket said that when the cross-town line
rothing definite az to its location, young
man appeared at his door with petition
which he asked should DO signed las q mat
t tsr OF no consequence" Mr.. Hackett read
the petition and It was an instrument to
pc signed BY the residents Of II street.
praying that Congress should grant to the
Great Falls and Old Dominion company the
II street n. HscEett sdee not fa sicn but
ne stated that the petition eventually con-
tained the names OF no less than 230 per
&C MS. It was afterward ascertatned BY
means Of canvass. however. that OF this
number only eight were owners of property.
FCrty-six names were Withdrawn from the
petition because the signers did not under
lures were those of tenants merely. seven
ty-sfx OF them colored pe0ple-"very re-
spectacle people," Mr.. Hackett added, 'but
here today and gone tomorrow"
Mr.. Hackett said that under the form or
government in the District the Commission
ers were charged with various important
duties. He was surprised that nothing had
been said in the hearings with regard to
the report OF the Commissioners on the
crcss-t0wp railroad project. He commend
ed that report to the committee for careful
reading, saying that II dealt with the sub
ject admirably. fully and wisely. 1t had
been made to appear. Mr.. Hackett contend
ed, that the Commissioners had said the
road was a necessity. He denied that this
was SO. The Commissioners said merely
that the road would be q great convenience
and was desirable. Mr.. Hackett said a
petition Of protest from the owners OF
property on NJ street had been filed with
the committee. It contained between 3O0
and 400 signatures.
Former Senator James X. Jones' who re-
sides on NJ street. took occasion to say
that fully 95 per cent of the owners Of
property on the thoroughfare opposed
street railway line.
Tribute to Existing Companies.
Mr.. Hackett. continuing. paid tribute
to the efficiency of the two existing rail-
way companies. and said he believed they
were capable Of caring for the future needs
of the national capital in railway facilities,
and could do So more easily and better
than outside companies. He contended
that the new company had no right to
break into the residence section of the city
in the manner proposed.
Representative Campbell asked Mr..
Hackett IL he did not believe a cross-town
road was needed. Mr.. Hackett replied in
the affirmative.
"Conceding then that the cross-town line
Is necessity" continued Mr.. Campbell,
would not the same objections that you
interpose as to M street apply to any
other thoroughfare on which It might be
MT. Hackett said he thought they would
Then" said Mr.. Campbell although the
road Is necessity. 1t should not be built
because certain property owners objectT'
Mr.. Hackett. in reply, said there were
NUMBER OF thoroughfares which would be
less seriously damaged than M street He
favored provision in the bill providing
that the constructing company should be
responsible for depreciation In the value Of
property along the line Of the road.
wouldn't this damage be SO great as to
preclude the construction of the road?"
Mr.. Hackett was asked.
Il hope sO,' he replied.
He argued In favor Of extending the u
street line as proposed by Mr.. Henderson
Mr.. Hackett said that east of 18th street
NJ street Is but thfrty-two feet in width from
curb to curb. President Dunlop stated that
the clearance of double-track railroad in
Guiding overhang of cars. is twenty-five
feet. This would leave but five feet on each
side of the street railroad
Mr.. Hackett was still speaking when IL
o'clock was announced and the committee
adjourned