
    FREDERICK WETZEL v. THE UNITED STATES.
    [No. 14443.
    Decided April 7, 1890.]
    
      On the Proofs.
    
    Land is taken for a roadway under the Act 15th July, 1882, for tiie improvement of the water supply of the city of Washington". Suit is brought to recover hoth the value of the land taken and such damages as may possibly arise in the future from grading thcroad.
    Under the Act Tlth July, 1882 (22 Stat. L., p. 168), authorizing the construction of a tunnel to improve the water supply of the city of Washington, the owner may recover for land taken for a roadway hut not for damages which may be caused by future grading, the grade not yet being determined.
    
      The Reporters’ statement of the case :
    The following are the facts of this case as found by the court:
    I. In August, 1883, and for several years before, the claimant was the owner of a certain piece of land lying west of Georgetown, in the District of Columbia, containing 17-£ acres. At that time, or soon after, the defendants, under the provisions of the Act of Congress approved July 15, 1882 (22 Stat. L., 168), caused a wagon road to be surveyed and staked out, extending from conduit road (past the communicating shaft of the tunnel) to Foxball road. Two small pieces of the claimant’s land aforesaid (whereby his north line was straightened) were included in this survey and taken by the defendants. The two pieces of land so taken were described and duly appraised as follows:
    “ Beginning at a stone at the southwest corner of Frederick Wetzel’s property and the southeast corner of United States property at the distributing reservoir, and running thence north 27° 6' west 161.2 feet, thence north 71° 25' east 409.3 feet, thence south 48° 57’ west 417.1 feet to point of beginning, containing of an acre;-we value this at $275.
    “Beginning at a point north 76° 43’east 221.5 feet from stone A (beginning of Harlem), and running thence north 71° 25' east 595.1 feet, thence south 58° 17' east 77 feet, thence south 76° 43' west 646 feet to point of beginning, containing -jWo of an acre j this we value at $ 125.
    “The two foregoing pieces we value at $400.
    “M. Gr. EMERY,
    “Thos. J. Fisher,
    “ Brainard H. Warner,
    
      ‘■'■Appraisers wider Act Approved, July 15, 1882.”
    The claimant refused to accept the $400, and has received no compensation for the land taken.
    II. The value of the land taken by the defendants at the time of taking was $400.
    III. The construction of a level road over the land thus taken would necessitate a cut over one piece of the land taken from the claimant and a fill-over the other. Such a cut and fill would work a material injury to the claimant by making the remainder of his land less accessible. Up to the time of trial (March 27, 1890) no grading had been attempted, nor does it appear by any statement, drawing, or profile made by the defendants that any is in contemplation, nor have they been notified or requested by the claimant to state what grading, if any, they design to make.
    Upon the foregoing findings of fact the court decided as conclusions of law:
    1. That the claimant is entitled to recover $400 for the land taken.
    2. That under the facts stated in Finding III he is not now entitled to recover damages for possible future injuries to adjoining land.
    
      
      Mr. R. GlaugMon for the claimant.
    
      Mr. F. F. Dewees (with whom was Mr. Assistcmt Attorney-General Gotion) for the defendants. ' ■
   Scoeield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

July 15, 1882, Congress passed an act authorizing the Secretary of War to undertake certain works for the improvement of the water supply of the city of Washington, and for that purpose to acquire, by purchase or condemnation, the necessary land (22 Stat. L., 168).

In the prosecution of this undertaking, land for a wagon-road was surveyed, staked out, and taken by the defendants. The claimant was the owner of a tract containing 17-J- acres, across the edge of which the road was so laid as to include l-ift acres of his land. Appraisers were duly appointed, by whom the land was valued at $400. This sum was refused by the claimant as insufficient. ‘

Suit is now brought to recover both the value of the land taken and such damages as may possibly arise in the future from grading the road. The ground is rolling, so that the making of a level road would necessitate a cut over one part of the claimant’s land and a fill over the other. The cut and fill would depreciate- the value of the claimant’s remaining land by making access thereto more difficult.

More than six years have elapsed since the land was taken by the defendants, but no grading has as yet been done. The defendants have not made any statement, plan, or profile showing their intention to change the natural surface of the ground, nor has the claimant requested them so to do. Until some grading has been undertaken, or an intention to grade has been declared by proper plan or profile, it is impossible to estimate the amount of injury the claimant might possibly sustain.

Judgment, will be entered in favor of the claimant in the sum of $400, being the value of the land taken.  