Evening star., 1925-01-19
Answers Rent Bill Foe Raps Careless Motorman

To the Editor OF The Star:
Recently an opponent of proposed
rent legislation for the District of
Columbia gave as reason for the
present high rentals and as a justj-
ication for increases now being de-
manded by many agents and land
lords that the cost of construction
than in 1914, and that. OF course,
this must be met by the tenant.
Also, he stated. that the expense of
maintenance and operation has in
creased in like degree, and that this,
too, must. "of course, be charged up
to the renter"
I am much interested in the work
of an organization pledged to the
study of existing conditions. in order
that its members may form judg-
ments which shall be fair and just
to tenant and landlord alike
In their behalf. well my own.
wish to inquire why the of
course?
Why should all ,he increased bur
den be passed oneto the tenant7 Is
II on tue pTiTClple JHdl-- 10 nlHl tildI
hath shall. be given, and from him
that hath not shall be taken, even
that which he hath?
One of the questions asked by
certain member of the joint commit
istee at its hearings for the tenants,
was. "Is it not a fact that property
! values in the District have doubled
in the past 10 years?" Suppose We
grant that they have. is it quite fair
that landlords should demand a
double rate of interest on a doubled
valuation? Isn't that making it a
bit strong? Bat. to adopt the phrase
ology of the distinguished legislator,
is it not fact that no such increase
in values has actually occurred; but
has only been made to appear so by
manipulation? Is it not also. a fact
that much of the recent construction
is of such poor quality and of such
I poor material that even with the in
! creased cost of material, and the
added wage to labor, many apartment
buildings represent but little more in
| the way of actual investment than in
| 1914? Is it not further fact that
maintenance and operation have been
curtailed until in most apartment
/ houses they exist only in name?
Visit a few and you will find this to
! be the case.
! A further question is, if the pro-
| posed legislation is so vicious in
| character that it will, stop all i'm
! provement in rental property, stop
practically all new building construc-
| tion, cause all values of every kind
| and class of property to slump at
! least S315 per cent, cause wages to
| decrease. stop all growth of the city
| and reduce it's population how is it.
I that while it is still pending, permits
! for building operations aggregatins
! $1,100,700, were issued in the past
week, all but about $4,000 of which
! is for new construction? In addition
! to this a s750.000 apartment house
| (permit previously issued is to be
| begun at once-thie in addition to
work already under way. These
| figures are taken from recent issue
of The Evening Star.
. One more question, and I shall have
! done. Does the person who buys
| from Tom, Dick or Harry bond or
stock in some undertaking. and pays.
! we will say 1915 for 800 par value,
| expect to get his dividend on the
| S375? If not. why should he expect
| 10 get rental return on more than
] the actual value of property. because
| he has allowed some one to sell it to
! him at fictitious valuation?
MRS NJ. NJ. VINCENT, Sec'y.,
West End TeAa&ts' Association.