The Washington times., 1908-01-02
Justice Gould DiSmisses
Suit to Prevent Re-
moVal of Historic
Trees.
Says Sentimental Loss "
Should Have No>PIace
in Court of
Equity.

Justice GSaid today declined 10 inter
fere witlAShe plans Of the Grant Memo
rial CoHsmissioH 10 establish the Crane
MemQFfal in the Botanic Garden. He
den5ed the petition for injunction Of At
/ toFTiey Conrad H Syme who protested
against the'propOsed action Of the com
mission, on the ground that it would
destroy certain historic trees" Mr.
Syme probably win enter an appeal
The court prefsced its decision by
saying that the plaintiff was met with
the unsuTmOunta BILE objection TO his
plea that he had no right for the relief
sought because the injury alleged wa5
one he shared with the public at large
and not by himself The court Justice
Gould said. could not entertain such
prayer unless jhe plaintiff specified and
proved specific injury.
No Sentiment in Court.
He briefly reviewed the petition, stat
ing that Attorney Syuie. as citizen
and taxpayer, wished to- enjoin the
Memorial Commission from erecting q
monument in the garden, contendins
that such action, would entail d loss
upon the citizens Of the United States.
both from a sentimental and financial
standpoint" The financial injuries had
not been proven. the court held. and
Justice Gould said courts OF equity had
nothing 70 do with sentimental stand
points If such existed
Justice Gould cited a number OF au-
thorities and decisions from other jurIs-
dictions In support OF ms Tlilli!ng= Con-
tinuing. he said:
Tested by these principles. this bill
Of complaint cannot be maintained II
contains no allegations that the piaiA-
tiff pays any taxes TO the United states,
or that, if he did. such taxes would
be increased by the proposed action
of the commission. Il sets up no prop
erty interest whatever Of plaintiff that
viii be affected by such action.
Loss Is Alleged.
1T does state that the destruction OF
the trees in question will entail a loss
upon the citizens OF the United States
both from a sentimental and financial
standpoint and upon your complainant
as a taxpayer ard taxable inhabitant
of the United States
Courts Of equity. as stated by Chief
Justice Fuller. deal only with civil and
property rights and have no facility for
preventing loss from q sentimental
From the allegations IN the bill, II
is clear that Whatever loss may be suf-
feTcd from financial stand point, dig
fcrs II, no respect from that which VIII
De suffered hE every other taxable in
Eabitant OF II United States. Nor does
the bill afford the court any opportunity
Tor concluding that from a financial
standpoint the actor. Of the commission
viii result IL any loss.
Cannot See the Argument
Assuming that the plaintiff is a tax
payer. il is impossible 10 conclude from
the face OF this record that his financial
obligations will be increased by the lOca-
ton of the memorial to General Grant
in the Botanic Garden. rather than IN
some other locality.
For these reasons the bill will be
dismissed"
As he concluded his decision. Justice
Gould informed Attorney Stuart Nc
Nanara, representing the Commission
and the Government. that while his &C
ton was intended as ar opinion he
was so confident that his position was
correct that he would sign formal or
der denying the injunction and finally
disTsissipg the case Mr. McNamarG
effect, and al further action. II taken
by the plaintiff. must be before the
Court Of Appeals.
To Appeal as a Test.
Mr.. Syne, when acquainted with the
text of the decision, said that he would
probably note an appeal He contended
that any citizen had a right TO apply
Tor an injunction proceedings when he
was cognizant Of palpable violation
of the law. as he alleges in this in
a. al h f.r
The present case ne said. had never
had a parallel in either England or
America. Mr.. Syme Seid it row re-
NAMED for Congress TO either permit
or refuse to allow the destruction Of the