Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-01-18
LOSES LAND FIGHT
Court Rules Against Alexan-
dria in Annexation Case.
GIVES SEVERAL REASONS
Need for City's Expansion Is Held
Not Urgent.
ALSO WOULD INCREASE TAXES
Counsel for Municipality Will Take
an Appeal-Squabble on Since
December, 1911.
ALSO WOULD INCREASE TAXES

lie leSdi eHOTt on the part OF the city
OF Alexandria, Va, to expand it's limits
has failed Of success in the circuit court
of Alexandria county. The opinion in the
case was rendered today by the court
Judge Bennett T. Gordon of Nelson
county. sitting. Counsel for the city OF
Alexandria noted exceptions and gave no
tice of intention to apply for a writ OF
error. Judge Gordon allowed thirty days
for the filing of the bill of exceptions.
Following the signing Of the bill of ex-
ceptions it Is understood counsel for the
city will prosecute an appeal before the
court of appeals Of Virginia.
Hearings which extended through sew
eral weeks were held at both Alexandria
county courthouse and Fairfax court
house on the petition Of the city, which
was to annex about two square miles of
Alexandria and Fairfax counties.
Not Urgently Needed.
Judge Gordon. in his opinion, which was
typewriter and read by him from the
bench, gave as his first reason for dis
missing the petition that the increase in
the population Of Alexandra city during
the past thirty years did not seem to in
dictate that the city was in urgent need
of more territory for the city at this time,
as there was no indication that the rate
of the growth OF the city's population
would be any greater in the future than
in the past.
In defense Of this reason, the judge re-
ferred to the testimony given in the hear
fngs before him by E. c. Dunn. city en-
gineer of Alexandria, who said that there
was plenty of territory in Alexandria
city on which to erect homes or factories,
the outskirts being mentioned particu-
larly.
The testimony of Harrie White. a
real estate dealer Of Alexandria,. was
also quoted by the judge in support of
his first reason for refusing the petit
ton. Mr. White said. according to the
court. that fully 80 per cent of the total
which buildings could be erected, about
400 building sites for homes or factories
being available at present.
The second reason given in the opinion
of the Judge was that the financial con-
dition of the city would not warrant any
greater burden being placed upon 1T at
this time. The present bonded indebted
ness of the city of Alexandra Is S16O.OOO
the Judge said and the cost of improve
ments in progress now will be about
$235.OOO.
Would Retard City.
In view of the two reasons given. Judge
Gordon held that annexation would result
in an increased rate of taxation for the
people of the city. and would therefore
retard and impede the natural growth of
the city.
Referring to one of the main arguments
of the attorneys for the city, which was
that the present lack of proper sanitary
conditions in territory touching on the
city Of Alexandria was a menace to the
health of the people OF the city. Judge
Gordon said he did not consider that the
lack of proper sewerage systems in the
suburbs was a menace to the city s
health, and did not warrant annexation.
Fight on Since 1911.
The fight has been in progress between
the people fsthe two counties and the
people Of the. city Of Alexandria since
December. 1911. when the common coun-
Gil Of Alexandria passed an ordinance
providing for the annexation of certain
territory In the two counties. including the
Union station. in Fairfax county, and
Braddock Heights, Montrose. Cottage
Park and a part of the Potomac yards in
Alexandria county. The case has been in
the courts since May 9, 1912 Judge Cor
don was named by Gov. Mann of Virginia
to sit in the case.
The attorneys representing Fairfax
county were c. Vernon Ford. John 8.
Barbour and Thomas r. Keith: those rep
resenting Alexandria county were r. l..
Montague. A. J. Montague and Crandal
Mackey, and the legal representatives for
G. Brent and John NJ. Johnson.