Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-06-13

REPLY , TO THE STATEMENT OF RESIDENTS
FRANKLIN STREETS IN REFERENCE TO
ESTABLISHMENT OF HOSPITALS UNDER {
statement to the Council by Messrs. Joynes,
business men and others of the city This fact "
we make the following reply public. We have I
printed and there is not time for us to have prir
Board Of Aldermen Tuesday night.
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF RICHMOND:
We note the following points:
rn First with reference to the house adjoining Dr.
and formerly used by Dr. Edwards
Dr. Edwards died the latter part Of 1918. The
premises are now rented: The house vacant.
therefore, for about eighteen months. Was this
because tenants did not wish to be next to Dr.
fuckers Sanatorium or because OF the high rent
and undesirable character Of the premises as resi-
dence?
MI j. r. Ward who lives the street from
the sanatorium wrote Dr. Tucker May 10th
when the house next door to your hospital be,
came vacant, we thought OF moving over there but
did not do SO on account of the high the agents
wanted for that house" The EXPLANATION
OF the high rental under these circumstances is
that the northern side of this block has a large
value as prospective business property Until ut-
lied for this purpose it is very difficult to get
fair return In rents on the value of the property
Street between Seventh and Eighth and other
localities, which are in this transition state from
residence to business property?
What say values on this block Is borna
out by the fact that one of the houses used by
pr fuckers Sanatorum, namely 1O4 East Grace
Street was sold by the in 1913 at a profit
of $40 100000, after having held 1t for very short
period.
With reference to the letter quoted on page
for the purpose of showing that the sanatorium
was Objectionable to the party occupying the resi-
dence adjoining 1t on the east.
This letter read before the Ordinance Com
mlttee close to II o'clock, after all our evidence
and arguments were completed. under the rules
adopted for the meeting, though the committee
courteously extended the time to allow DR.. Tucker
to make brief statement. He pointed out that
the nn-law OF this lady. who has lived
in the said house with her since the sanatorium
was established. came to him since the purchase
of the new site, and told him that his sanatorium
neighbor; and further that her late husband
had made similar statement to him.
Mr. Christian also offered to read before the
out divulging their When objection was
made, ne promptly withdrew these statements and
much surprised, therefore, to find that the sub
stance OF these communications is given in the
statement issued though the names NJ the
authors still withheld.
We will also state that Mr.. Christian for Dr.
Oppenheimer, who was present, expressly dis
claimed before the Ordinance Committee that the
approbrious terms used in his letter had any ref
erence to DR.. fuckers Sanatorium meaning only
that other hospitals of the character described by
him would not be desirable.
The desperate straights to which the advocates
of the ordinance put in attempting to estab-
lish their charge that this sanatorium is a nui-
sance appear when they abandon even alleged
facts as to what the sanatorium is and try to
prove their by quoting from textbooks used
by Dr. Tucker as professor in the Medical College
of Virginia.
1t is uncomfortable to our minds that the Council
could he persuaded to do Dr.. Tucker the serious
injury of branding his institution as a nuisance
upon such evidence" as above even If 1t were not
contradicted by numerous signed statements of re-
liable persons. both from within and without the
On page is reference is made to the conclusions
or the City Attorney to the validity of this ord
nance. -
We will say that the City Attorney when he
drew this ordinance. had not heard our side, and
he has since then stated that he would hear argu-
ment upon It's legality, with open mind If ever
the question should come before him again
1t further says
ut proven to them that the proponents
Of the ordinance had dealt fairly with Dr.
Tucker"
eve have sought for an answer to the
problem of DR.. fuckers unwiingness to part
with the property at COST.
It seems to us that these and like expressions
show an assumption on the part of these gentle
men that they have the right to require Dr. Tucker
to sell his property to them on their own terms
and that If he fails to accede to their demands he
is entitled to further consideration at the hands
Of the Council. He is not to be allowed even the
poor privilege of hagging the bargain. On
the other hand, to obtain this advantage before the
Council. they do not even have to make binding
The statement of Messrs Christian and Joynes
to us that they wanted proposition from us
in order to If a syndicate could be formed to
take the property off of DR.. fuckers hands. we
had no assurance that this could be done, and not
of the protestants, far are informed,
has obligated himself for cent. We know,
OF course, that these gentlemen are amply able to
the ability to purchase is thing, and the will
ngness to purchase s another. When the time
NNNNNNNNXNNNSkIZZHAZ