Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-11-01
0BtTERATEO ALLEYS
Spirited Controversy Before
:. /. the Commissioners.
IMPOSITION CHARGED.
DISCUSSION Of oR@& AFFECTING
LEXINGTON INTERESTS.
Alleged That Action Was Obtained by
Misrepresentation
: to Make Investigation.

The charge that the District Commission
ers had been fraudulently imposed upon in
connection with recent proceedings insti-
tuted before them to obtain the oblitera-
ton of thea alleys in a certain block in
central lexington created a mild Sensa-
ton a - hearing before the Commissioners
held in the board room this morning. AS
a result of the hearing the District author
tiles will institute an Investigation, and in
the event they find the charges of i'm
position we'll founded 1t Is considered to be
probable that the order passed several
months ago obliters .ing{ the, alleys in ques-
ton will be revoked.
The hearing was granted to Attorneys
Francis M. Cox and Franklin H. Mackey
on protest against the .obliteration of al
leys in block ID, bounded by 9th, 9th, U and
" streets northeast, in the central subdi-
sion of lexington, which was ordered by
the Commissioners March %, 1904 under
authority granted to them in section 1907
of the District code. II, is stated that the
case mentioned is the first in which the
Commissioners have exercised the author
lty conferred upon them by the code in
connection with the elimination of ALLEYS
Attorney Cox said he represented the prop
erty owners in square adjacent to block
IA. He stated in brief that there are TWEEN
ty-three lots in block IA. and that for sew
II. u.
Thompson, who, according to Mr.. Cox is a
carpenter employed in the Agricultural
Department, owned lots 1 and in the
block The remaining twenty-one lots. said
Mr. Cox, were owned BY Mr.. Samuel Ross
of the firm of Barber & Ross. Several
months ago, the attorney said, Mr. ThOmp-
son wrote to the Commissioners stating
that he was the owner of the entire square
In question, and asked that the alleys in
the block be obliterated, as a part of the
block was improved, and he desired to
erect further improvements upon the land,
detrimental to the public"
Information Obtained From Records.
Mr.. Cox stated that the records show that
Mr.. Samuel Ross conveyed his twenty -one
lots in block IA to George C. johnson, one
OF his employees and that the latter shortly
afterward conveyed the land to Thompson
who thereupon asked TIE Commissioners
to obliterate the alleysesaI. tie block. The
Commissioners ordered the alleys elimnat-
ed March 49, 1904 A few days after this
order was passed Mr.. Cox declared,
Thompson conveyed the land back to john
son. C:E Secs is"
Attorney Cox minated that the proceed
ing was Irregular and he produced and
read copies of the answers of MeSSrS. john
son and Ross filed in a-civih proceeding still
pending before the Supreme Court of the
District. in which it is sought by property
owners in the vicinity of block II to have
the structural irontworks operated by Mr..
Ross on the block in question, declared
nuisance. 2 as ~ Sp
Mr.. Johnson. in his answer stated that
he merely held the land in trust for Mr..
Samuel Ross. who was. ths. real owner of
the property, and" that he held no interest
in the property except at the convenience
of Mr.. Ross. The answer of Mr. Samuel
Ross corroborated Mr.. Johnson's affidavit
as to the latter holding, the Property in