Evening star., 1934-08-01
SLUM CLEARANCE
|SG|VEN IMPETUS
BY OHIO RULING
UphoIding of Government in
Acquiring Land Has
Effect Here.
PROPERTY DECLARED
"FOR PUBLIC USE"
P. W. A. $125 ,0O0, 900 Low-Cost
Housing Program Affecting 80
Communities Strengthened.

The Public Works Administration
has overcome another obstacle in
pushing its 5000, 900 low-cost hous-
ing program. it was announced today.
as a result of the recent decision of
the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Ohio uphold
ing the Governments right to acquire
land for slum clearance and low-cost
housing.
The decision, by Judge Samuel H.
West of Cleveland, held that acquisi-
tion Of land in the Cleveland low-cost
housing project was acquisition for
public use and overruled a motion by
property owners to dismiss condemna-
ton proceedings brought by the Gov
ernment against the site for the
housing project in that city.
The decision, which upholds the
constitutionality of the general slum
clearance program. is expected to have
favorable results in the more than 80
communities. including Washington,
where Federal housing projects are
now under consideration.
Ruling Fortifies Program.
The Cleveland property owners ac-
Hackett, contended the Government
was not acquiring the land for public
use and purpose and therefore had no
right to condemn it. Col Hackett said
the decision has strongly fortified the
Federal program and undoubtedly
would expedite it in those communi-
ties where property owners are seek
ing to oppose condemnation proceed
ings.
1T means that we now have for
NAL court opinion to back us in our
right to acquire property for low-cost
housing" he said. I'VE are free to
go ahead on the program, knowing
that our process of land acquisition
has a firm foundation in law.
1T should be borne in mind that
our real estate operations in assem-
bling sites are some of the largest on
record" he added. LAS difficult as it
is, we are making faster progress than
private operations have ever made
with comparable work. This phase of
land acquisition is the largest part in
any housing project"
Point In Question.
In overruling the motion of the
Cleveland property owners, Judge
West declared, in part:
IT think the testimony shows that
the property is being taken for a
public use, especially in view of the
declaration of our Congress in the act
itself, and what evidence we have
heard here from the witness stand
supports the congressional declara-
ton.
There Is no distinct challenge OF
the law upon constitutional grounds
found either in the motion or in the
answer, and decline to hold that the
law is unconstitutional even If it Is
intended to raise constitutional
question. There may be some doubt
as to the constitutionality of this law
no doubt there is question, but II
that question were made and present
ed here it would not have been shown
to the entire satisfaction of the court
that the law is unconstitutional, and
I would therefore have so ruled"
For some months, the p. w. A
housing division has been quietly al
work acquiring land in Northwest
Washington in the vicinity of Howard
University for a small cost housing
project similar to that in Cleveland
and Atlanta. This project would be
for coloreo families. While it Is not
known that condemnation proceedings
are to be resorted to in Washington
Col. Hackett feels that the Cleveland
decision will have a wholesome effect
on owners of property here.