The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-06-13

TN May 81, the Gay named In the con-
tract, settlement was demanded and made,
and the property conveyed to the Tucker
Sanatorium, Incorporated, as originally
intended. DIR. Tucker owns all the stock of
this corporation, except eighteen shares
($1.s00) which had been fully paid in be-
fore this transaction arose. None of these
stockholders, therefore, are liable for an
other dollar The corporation owns moth
ing but its furniture and fixtures and any
equity in the property at Franklin and
Madison The whole risk, therefore, falls
on DIR. Tucker, who is personally liable on
all the notes.
We are confident that Dr. Tucker win
not depreciate values, nor destroy the
peace and quiet of the neighborhood by
conducting his sanatorium on this sit In
fact, we know of nothing that could reason
ably be expected to be done with this prop
erty, which would change the neighborhood
less. Since Mr.. Harrison has determined
to leave, it is not a choice between his resi-
dence and the sanatorium but between the
sanatorium and some other use of the prop
erty, which would bring sufficient revenue
to Justify the investment.
Beside the opinions of Mr.. Leroy Brown
and Mr. Buford, printed with our former
brief, we submit letter from Mr.. Irving
E. Campbell, lawyer, who has had great
deal of experience in real estate matters
and who lives within few doors of Grace
Hospital. Surely so drastic an ordinance
should not be based on supposition about
which there is so wide a divergence of
opinion. We have found in our investiga-
tons very little objection to living in the
neighborhood of hospitals and surely the
property of most of those who are asking
for this ordinance, many of whom live a
block or more away, could not be in the
least affected by the establishment of
sanatorium on this retired site at the cor
ner of Madison and Franklin Streets. In
fact many Of the neighbors at this location
did not join in the protest
We call attention to the fact that there
are at present hotel, an apartment house,
a church abutting out on the sidewalk. a
club and several boarding houses in this
immediate neighborhood.
In conclusion, we ask the Council to con-
slider the proposed ordinance from the
standpoint of the future growth and de-
velopment of the city. This ordinance
hampers its growth in an arbitrary and an
reasonable way. Tt is unjust to DIR.
Tucker, to the medical profession, and to
the citv's interests
There is no question of health or morals
of the community involved as a reason for
invoking the aid of the Council to upset
transaction which has been already con-
summated The Council is simply asked to
grant special favor to few individuals
at the expense of another citizen who is
equally entitled to protection of rights
acquired by him, when both law and
custom, long established justified him in
believing that he could carry ont his plans.
We will submit protests against this or
dinance from the principal hotels in the
city, except the Jefferson, from most of the
clergvmen whose churches this ordinance
purports to protect, and from hundred
and more merchants of our city.
Respectfully submitted,
GEORGE BRYAN,
WIN. CRUNfP TUCKER.
Counsel for DIR. Tucker.
May 90, 1915.
Dear Mr. Tucker:
In compliance with your request for my
views as to the effect of having q hospital
near my home, / would say that I have
been living within less than a hundred
feet of one of the hospitals on Grace Street,
since it was established some years ago,
and neither I nor any members of my
family has experienced any annoyance or
inconvenience by reason Of its proximity;
and, SO far as I know, it has not in any
way affected the value of property in the
neighborhood.
Yours very truly,
IRVING E. CAMPBELL.