Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-02-14
Fine Arts Plan Hit.
Proposal to Limit Buildings
Near Lafayette Square Scored.
To the Editor of The Star

| To the Editor of The Star:
At the meeting of the Senate Dis
trict committee of February 10 the
statement was made that the Fine Arts
Commission was attempting to cheaper
property on Lafayette Square in order
| that the Government might at some
future time acquire it at a low price.
| do not share this, opinion. The bill
itself is damaging enough without
,, having recourse to any such theory,
proposing. as it does, to subject own
ers of all land within 200 feet of any
public park or building to the abso-
lutte rulings of the commission.
This bill might we'll be entitled a.
bill to take so per cent of value
off the property of thousands of real
estate owners in this District and hand
it over to the Fine Arts Commission.
Thirty-three per cent of Washington Is
open squares and parks. The prop
erty within 200 feet Of them would
amount to great many million dol
lars, held by many thousands OF citi-
zens.
One might also question the quail
f1catiOns of commissions from the
point Of view of art, when one looks
at some of the modern unsightiy
buildings already permitted on La
where about the city. 1t is the very
fact that such a building as the
Veterans Bureau has been construct
ed with the permission Of the Fine
Arts Commission, and the BrOoking
Building with the approval of the
ZOning Commission, which has made
the square q business zone accom-
panied by business taxes and living
discomforts, that has finally driven
some of those who own residences
there to seek homes elsewhere. They
have made their dispositions on the
basis Of values as heretofore deter
mined by the law Of supply and de-
mand. But they find overnight their
values cut in two, cloud on their
titles because of the proposal that the
Fine Arts Commission be given the
power to control their properties, al
though it and the other commission
have brought about conditions on
Lafayette Square making continued
residence there impossible.
Even if the commission were APP
pointed by Pericles himself in the
brightest days of Athenian art, it
would nevertheless be a very dan
gerous aggression upon the principle
of private property to give them the
power they so blandly ask--sO far
do fundamental political rights tran
scend in Importance any theories of
art that a small body of men may
at the moment have. I know that
in certain districts of some foreign
cities conformance to skyline IS OBJ
ligatory. but | doubt if any SOW
ereign in Europe would risk invest
ing a body of men with any such
absolute control of the private prop
erty of other citizens. 1t would be
equivalent to taking the crown from
the sovereign's head and placing 1t
on the head of Mr.. Moore. But this
is not the whole danger.
Grants of power of this kind, like
the cells of q disease, are apt TO
spead and grow. If Senator King is
correct in his contention that the Con-
stitution has given Congress rights
over property here that are safe
guarded in other communities in the
United States from legislative control,
there is hardly any limit to the ag-
gression upon private rights which
might ensue in the District of Column
bia. The next demand would be Tor
the regulations OF houses on boule-
wards, and then again for the houses
on elevations overlooking the city,
until the rights Of all private citizens
owning land here would be entirely
overlaid by schemes for the beautitica- |
ton of the city. Therefore the ne
cessity of vigilance and resistance |
to measures of this character is of |
such vital importance. Where pri- !
vate property is concerned the func- |
ton Of the Fine Arts Commission !
should only be advisory; where pub |
lie building is not concerned it's de- |
cision should not be compulsory.
Even as this goes forward to you |
hn oil dxy eli inc in
their brief issued February IL for more |
power. They have discovered that |
the bill put forward last week at the |
Senate District committee meeting |
is subject to the safeguard of the Con- |
stitution, as it would not be retroac- |
tive. This curtails their power. and |
they are now asking for more author |
ity to circumvent this time -hOnored |
of popular rights. Constitu- |
tional safeguards appear to be mere |
to them. The proposal now is, !
only a week has elapsed |
since their first sweeping demand i
"rezoning of the areas to head off !
building development pending action |
by Congress giving the proper Fed
eral authorities the right TO consider |
the use OF these sites and forcing |
them to decide whether or not they
wanted the property"
It. is a gloomy prospect for the vic
TINS who own property. After being /
taxed for years as a business zone.
when they are at lest at the point Of
selling, they are to be rezoned and |
forced to await the inevitable delays
Of struggle by the commission ito
force" the Federal authorities to work
the commissions will.
Does education in art at the Beaux
Arts and the SOrbonne in Paris, which [
most of these young gentlemen have
had the benefit Of, absolutely exclude
from their consciousness all idea of
human rights and their legal and con
,titutional guarantees?
Fine arts has been called the eff
1orescence of civilization. but we must
not lose sight of it's foundation, the
rights of property.
TRUXTUN BEALE.