Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-07-25

erty he owned between Kalorama avenue
and Belmont road. 18th ana 2Vth streets
There was about $4,000 feet In thu
original lot, said Richards, who now
owns a third interest. at an original pur'
chase price of 80 cents a foot.
The others interested were former As
sis,ant Assessor Nye and Assessors kalh
fus and Mckenzie. -
Frank Nye is dead The others still
hold the property. said Mr.. Richards.
Tells of Improvement.
Mr.. Richards was asked about i'm
provements In streets near the property
and he said Goth street has been given
a sidewalk. Kalorama road has not
been improved. except for q sidewalk
Water mains have been laid for houses
on the 10th street side. he said.
why did you make this purchase?
asked Representative George.
To build on to live"
For your home?
Mr.. Richards went into . long expla-
nation of the negotiations leading up
TO the purchase Of the property.
Mr.. Richards said his only concern
now Is to get out Of the deal what the
interested persons put into IL. MI.
Johnson led him into q series OF cues ss .
bought on Iowa Circle and Elm street
and on street. Mr.. Richards SAID ne
had sold some OF the property. now
holding the street and Iowa C, hons
$4,000. with a trust on the Iowa circle
property. ,
about some Of his personal AFFAIRS. par
ticularly why he did not build on BEL
mont street. leading to the query ny
Mr. Johnson,
Did YOU buy on Belmont street as
an investment or a speculation
Mr.. Richards reply In detail indicateo
that he did not consider ne was Duy-
ing for speculation
Considerable controversy arose over
Mr.. Richards statement that ne mao
originally bought the Belmont avenue
property for a home and then thought
il was 100 high priced to erect on II
such a home as he could afford.
Then Mr. George drew out that the
property stands in Mr.. Richards name.
"The four men in the assessors ofnce
BOUGHT. but only In your name!
Yes"
what Is it assessed att"
About tWo-thirds of Its value.
Did you take hand IN the assess
ment
NO"
.'Trimble. Kalbfus and Mckenzie"
Assessment Not Discussed.
did they speak to you about IT."
81 think not
Mr.. George handed Mr.. Richards the
assessment book of the assessors ofnce
showing the assessment In 1908 on the
property Mr. Richards owns.
That was before Mr.. Richards bought
and ran from 40 to so cents q foot
The book for three years later was
H.
shown. during which time tne psop-
,nents ran lower by SC foot In most
instances. -,
"Why was the assessment lowerT'
asked Representative Johnson.
.It was made to correspond with
what was paid for the property" said
Mr. Richards.
Mr. George said: :.
Assessment at 80 cents on the corner
lot was really 30 per cent OF the vaiue
was made by the board of assistant as
SCISSORS. and was satisfactory TO YOU.
Goes Into the Details.
Mr.. George took Mr. Richards through
a maze of figures. showing the lot num-
Der area and assessment for 1869 and
for 1911-12, winding up with the remark
that 80 cents was low enough on lot
800, which had not been reduced in the
1911 assessment. The lots in question are
SO4. sos, 500, sO7. SO6. all reduced from
20 cents to 81 cents, and lot 800, remain
ing at 80 cents. -,
"Yes; q gradual one"
But your assessment went down..
The property stayed long time IN
MIR. George took up all the other lots
near the Richards property to show
relative valuations In 1908 and 1911.
The lots owned by other people near
at hand. with a change In assess
70. subdivided In the 1911 assessments
and numbered differently. and In
creased. according to Mr.. George.
Other Property Increased.
Lot No. 124 Increased from u to
sl.5. lot 500 increased from 81 to
s110 other properties were station
airy.
"All the property not owned by the
assessor remained the same or was i'm
creased?" asked Representative George.
Yes"
And the assessors land was all re-
duced except one lot, which was as
sessed at 80 cents and which the as
SCISSOR said he values personally at 81 q
foot"
In reply Mr. Richards said the property
could not possibly be sold at the previous
assessment and had been on the market
and couldn't be sold.
Mr.. George asked II there is any record
why the assessors had reduced the as
sessment on their own property.
MI. Richards said there is nothing on
record TO show why II was done.
Have you anything to prove why this
property went down In value?"
"No''
After considerable colloquy Mr.. Rich
ards declared that the assessments on all
the lots in the square had been properly
made taking everything into consid-
Grafton.
The committee adjourned at noon until
IO O'Clock tomorrow morning.
WIRELESS TO ASIA.