Evening star., 1926-08-21
LEGALITY OF ALLEY
ACT AWAITS TEST
Does Not Apply to Dwellings,
Police Court Rules in Block
ing EviCtionS.

Holding that the alley-closing law
provisions apply only to the alleys
and not to the dwellings, therein. so
far as equipment with sanitary and
domestic utilities are concerned. Judge
Gus A. Schuldt in Police Court yes
terday afternoon handed down Il de
cision quashing informations in four
cases and thus paved the way for
the District to test the constitutions
ality and effectiveness of this law.
which has been subject to uncertainty
and litigation for many years.
Judge Schuldt's decision in effect
would compel the District. in order 10
be successful in prosecuting alley
dwelling cases under the law of 1922,
to allege and prove that the alleys
themselves have no water mains or
electric or gas lighting facilities. Since
few. if any. local alleys are without
equipment of at least one of these
items. the effectiveness of the law, it
is believed. would be virtually nulli-
fed by this decision.
Appellate Courts Decision.
Several previous attempts have been
made by the Distritc to get Il legal in
terpretation Of this law. according To
Corporation Counsel Stephens, but
they failed when the Court of Appeals
not passing on the validity OF the act
at all, remanded a. case on the ground
that fundamental principle of equity
procedure and practice had been VIC
lated in seeking restraint OF Grim
inal proceedings. VIXEN the matter
complained Of could just as we'll have
been a defense if such proceedings
were brought
In the cases decided by Judge
Schuldt yesterday the District sought
prosecution on the ground that the
houses concerned were not equipped
with the utilities demanded in the pro
visions of the act.
Judge Schuldt. in granting the mo-
tionS to quash. held that it was the
alleys and not the houses which should
have such equipment to meet the con-
ditions of the act. And this is the
point on which Stephens now will ap-
peal.
The provision invoked in the four
cases considered by Judge Schuldt
states:
1T shall be unlawful in the District
of Columbia to erect. place or con
struct any dwelling on any lot or par
eel of ground fronting on an alley
where such alley is less than 80 feet
wide throughout its entire length, and
which does not run straight to and
open on two of the streets bordering
the square. and is not supplied with
sewer, water main, gas or electric
light"
Four Defendants Named.
The four defendants-F Franklin p.
Nash, James White. Charlotte Lock
wood and Spiros Koumaris-filed mo-
tions to quash, alleging, unconstitu-
tionality of the law and that INSULT
cient facts were alleged to support
prosecution.
In his opinion. Judge Schuldt stated
three schools of thought prevail on the
moot question of the construction of
the law. The first was that all the
conditions outlined in the latter part
of the section quoted above must pre-
vail In the houses and that unless
they We're equipped with sewer. water
main. gas or electric light. they We're
illegal dwellings,. which must be va
Gated under the law. The second was
that since all these conditions were
linked conjunctively by use of the
word and. all must exist CO Jointly
TO make the dwellings, illegal. The
third was that the conditions merely
applied to the alleys themselves and
not to the equipping of the houses
with the water, gas and the other
utilities.
Judge Schuldt then cited Justice
Bailey's construction of the law in
granting injunctions blocking such
prosecutions against Commissioner
Rudolph, which was to the effect
that there was nothing in the law to
prevent the use of property border
ing on an alley. when the alley was
supplied with sewer. Waterman and
Saslights. Justice Bailey contended
that it would be a forced Construc
tion of the statute to apply this pro
vision to premises rather than to
the alley in the face of the plair
language Of the statute. The iniunc-
tions were granted; the District ap-
pealed; and upon the separate
ground that equity cannot restrain
criminal proceedings when the mat
ter alleged as complaint in equity
is available for defense in the Grim
inl proceedings. the Court of Ap-
peals reversed the District Supreme
Court But this did not affect the
construction Of the law as outlined
by Justice Bailey
5000 Tenants Endangered.
Unless the first Interpretation Is
followed" Judge SChuldt said in his
opinion" !. g. all conditions must
prevail and apply TO the building
which would necessitate ousting of
some 5000 tenants and the ConfsCa
ton of S3,0OO.000 worth of property
the construction placed upon it by
Justice Bailey must prevail. because
the construction placed upon it by the
Government is more or less of a com.
promise.
Accordingly. Judge Schuldt held
that the requirements of the act re-
late to the alley and not to the dwell
ings, that the informations were de
fective and the motions to Quash were
granted.
Since virtually every alley In Wash
ington has at least a water main
sewer or electric or gas light loca ted
in it. II is pointed out, the ruling OF
the Police Court on the law makes
it virtually impossible to obtain such
ousting or ContisCation. unless the
Appellate Court overrules the Police
Court.
Applies Only to Homes.
Judge Schuldt pointed out that
CONGRESS must have intended the