Evening star., 1925-07-06
| ZON|NG LAW HELD
CONSTITUTIONAL AS
. VITAL STATE RIGHT
Police Power Includes Au-
thority to Control Buildings,
Says D. C. Supreme Court.
MANDAMUS Is DENIED
IN SHERMAN ACTION
Failure of Woman to Specify Type
of Business Intended in Stores
Fatal to Case.

| Justice Jennings Bailey of the Dis
! trict Supreme Court today upheld the
( constitutionality of the Zoning law and
| declared the regulation of the Zoning
/ Commission as to the loca ting of busi-
ness houses in residential areas to be
( neither arbitrary nor unrea soma BILE
| The court accordingly denied an appli-
| cation of Mrs. Annie Sherman for a
mandamus against Col. John w. Och
mann, building inspector: the District
Commissioners and the Zoning Com
mission to compel the issuance of a
permit to make alteratio to premises
1656-5860 Columbia road so that the
property could be used for business
purposes.
The court points out that the zoning
laws are within the police power as de-.
fined by the United States Supreme
Court when that tribunal said: I'VE
hold that the police power of a state
embraces regulations designed to pro-
mote the public convenience or the
general prosperity as we'll as regula-
tions designed to promote the public
health, the public morals or the pub
lie safety"
The regulation against business
houses in residential areas. the court
| declares, is designed to promote the
| public convenience as well as the
public health and safety This is
shown, he says, both by common
! knowledge and from the testimony in
! troduced by the defendants Business
houses in such areas. the court de-
( clarss, are in the nature of a nuisance.
Legislature May Act.
I Like most general laws, the court
! suggests, this regulation as to coming
may work hardships in individual
cases and there might be some forms
! of business which could be conducted
I ~,
, the public convenience, health or
morals, but since the legislature has
/ power of the general policy of a law
/ it may also determine the question of
( fact upon which the legislation is
based and may prescribe general rules
not arbitrary or unreasonable. In
! this event, says Justice Bailey, the
courts are bound by the acts of the
legislature.
Failure of Mrs Sherman to set out
the use for which she intended her
property-what kind of business-is
declared by Justice Bailey to have
been fatal to her case and to have
been enough to bar her from the re-
lief asked
The opinion of the court reads:
I'm my opinion, the coming law is
within the constitutional power of
Congress, being included in the police
power as defined by the Supreme
Drainage Commissioners, 200 U. s.,
561, where the court said:
I'VE hold that the police power of
! a State embraces regulations designed
| to promote the public convenience or
the general prosperity, as we'll as reg
ulations designed TO promote the
| public health, the public morals or
the public safety
THE particular provisions of the
zoning regulations attacked in this
case, those prohibiting business
houses in residential sections, are in
my opinion designed to promote
the public convenience as we'll as the
public health and safety, and this I
find to be the case, both as a mat
ter of common knowledge and from
the testimony introduced by the de-
fendant. There seems to be nothing
arbitrary or unreasonable in this
limitation on the use of property in
resident sections or in the particular
section in which REALTORS property
lies.
Il think, too, that the effect of the
decision in Hadarcheck VS.. Sebastian,
239 u. S, 394, is to sustain the power
of the Legislature to prohibit the
conduct of any business in a resi-
dental neighborhood as being in the
nature of nuisance in such a loca-
ton.
Application Denied.
1T may be true that the zoning
law or the zoning regulations may,
as general laws usually do, work an
injustice in particular instances, but
they are not unconstitutional for that
. reason. 1t is true, too, that there
might be some form of business which
might be conducted in REALTORS prop
erty without injury to the public con-
where the general policy of the law
is within the powers of the Legisla-
; ture ii is also within its powers to
determine the questions of fact upon
which its legislation is based and TO
prescribe general rules designed to
carry out its purpose and where
there is nothing arbitrary or unrea'
sonable in its determination Of those
. facts the courts are bound by its
acts.
Besides. in the instant case a
relator in her petition does not state
= the particular business for which she
intends to use her property and, even
if the question were material, the
court cannot determine whether the
particular use would or would not be
( a detriment to others in the par
ticular neighborhood. This omission
t is alone sufficient, I think, to bar
realtor from the relief asked.
1t results, therefore, lIldI the dp-
plication for a writ of mandamus will
be denied and the petition dismissed"
Bell Is Gratifled.
Engineer Commissioner Bell, chair
man of the Zoning Commission, today
expressed qualification over the deci-
sion of the court, and said he regard
ed the case as an important one, since
it involved the question of regulating
business development in residential
sections.
IT am gratified at the outcome Of
the case" Col. Bell said, and the
commission is also deeply apprectative
of the support It received not only
from the citizens but from the busi-
ness and real estate organizations of
the city"
In preparation for the case citi-
zens' committee raised a fund with
which it employed Edward NJ. Bassett
of New York, a legal expert on zoning
laws. to assist Corporation Counsel
Stephens and Assistant Corporation
L.