Evening star., 1937-06-23
sessed at $l1,776 and Improvements

at $4,000.
Then Mrs. Norton said that mem
bers of Congress had asked about tn,
question of compensation and tina
the reasons for her questions was II
determine that. Seal volunteered tn,
information that the District assess
ment Of all the land involved-som<
| IA acreS-WaS now $4,000.
Both the president Of the Gobel CO
and Clarke had previously stated tina
the $l,400,00O figure had been basee
on an appraisal by the American Ap'
praisal Co.
Under earlier questioning, Clark,
had admitted that the investment al.
legged in 1928 is mot worth that much
now."
Sees Ruthless Policy.
Ainsberry, who made statement
before the close, contended that "tht
value Of the land wouldn't begin tt
pay this company for its loss If de.
prived of operating at Benning.
He added that this would not be 9
voluntary loss" and that Congress
had the power to take the land. "Bu,
it would be a pretty ruthless policy
Of confiscation for 1900 stockholders, ;
he declared.
He asserted that a $4,000 leas.
would be lost If the company is pro.
hibited from operating. II don't be.
lieve you can adequately take care o.
U.s." he told the committee Are you
conflscating our property to let peopl.
enjoy more abundant life?"
(Other witnesses had testified in ia.
vor OF housing developments in tn,
area)
Here, Chairman Norton asked thu
| witness if the Government had com.
pensated for the losses to liquor in.
terests in 1920
Two wrongs never make q right,
Ainsberry replied
But it has been DONE" the chair.
man insisted.
"Ah," the witness exclaimed loudly
Chemist Opposes Bill.
The hearing closed when Davie
Peeles, chemist, testified in opposi.
ton to the bill. He and his wife, HI
explained, had purchased more thar
three acres in the District and hi
planned to establish small ammonia
plant. He protested he could not de-
so under the pending bill, if enacted
and would be deprived of his rights.
During the testimony of Gobel rep
resentatives, who kept hammerine
away on the twin issues Of "confisca-
ton and compensation" Clarke
warned the District Committee that
in seeking to bar industries from
Washington, two lines of thought
would have to be settled by Congress
sooner or later"
They were, he said, whether the
National Capital will have any in.
dustries in it that might be construed
as Objectionable, or only such indus.
tries as can maintain the city.
Us it to be a capital for the Gov
ernment,' he asked ''or a capital with
business enterprises for the support
of the Government
Clarke contended that If Congress
took away the right to do business
in Washington, the Government would
have to foot the bill. On the othe,
hand, he claimed If necessary indus
tries are allowed, the burden on the
Government would be less.
The attorney went fully into mat.
ters leading up to the flnal issuance
of a permit to the Gobel Co. The
day that the permit was issued, on
April 81, and the District took $62s
from the company, Clarke charged
Senator King chairman Of the Sen
ate District Committee had intro
duced the first anti-nuisance bill.
The company previous to this had
been held up from time to time, ne
cessltating mandamus proceedings, he
pointed out, and when he heard OF
Senate hearings he had advised his
company not to proceed further with
construction pending outcome Of the
legislation.
Other Odors Protested.
Earlier in the afternoon John Rig.
giles OF Seat Pleasant. Md, who said
ne spoke for Maryland and Virginia
farmers desiring to sell live stock al
Bennlng, protested about flve sewers
from Prince Georges County emptying
into the Anacostia stream above Ben
ming. The odor, he said, was "sick-
ening." and worse than any abattoi1
odor."
Later the Gobel president also re-
ferred to these sewers in DISCUSSING
favorable reports he had received
from various packing plants In othel
cltles. He contended the amount Of
water used per animal at these plants
was considerably less than the amount
estimated by Walton for the Benninp
plant.