National Republican., 1874-05-29

udRI du4 W dAbOu Ol SxpF5tb. law ,
and shall first inquire whether Certificates oi
assessment provided for by the sewerage act
are debts Of the District within the prohibi.
tions Of the act of Congress limiting the debt
10 ten millions.
Since the provisions of the sewerage act are
familiar to the committee, need not state
them In detail. The effect of the act is to i'm.
pose upon every taxable foot of land In the two
cities at designated rates per foot, in five pre-
scribed districts, S2,Sl7s 4oo.64 of tax, payahf
In five annual installments, with ten per ceAt.
interest, and to anticipate these taxes by Ter.
tifcates Of Indebtedness, s., ,120, 900 In ameunt
lcountersigned by the sinking fund coumis-
sioners, registered by the comptroller, bearing
eight Fer cent. semi-annual interest, payable tc
bearer, not exceeding one fourth at the end Of
each year from their issue, and which have
been sold or hspothecated. -
Is this q debt within the prohibitions of the
act of Conaress limiting the debt to ten NIL.
lionsi And, first, if it be granted that the gen
eral sewerage system may be lawfully regarded
as ~local Improvements" .assessable on see.
tfons under the twentieth section of the or.
ganic act would that fact take the sewerage
"district taxi out of the prohibitions of the ten
million prohibition I The following eonsidera.
tions seem to me eonelusiyely TO establish the
fact that 1t would not: L. A reference to the
twenty first, twenty-secona and forsieth Sec
tions Of the organic act will show that in no
event could Washington, or Georgetown, or the
county ever be taxed, except to pay for their
Ipast or future improvements, respectively But
by turning to this section limiting the debt to
ten millions, It is seen that these past debts OF
Washington, Georgetown and the county are
expressly incladed IN the debt making up the
| ten millions.
It is, therefore, absolutely demonstrated
that the debts of subdivisions, sections or
parts OF the District, and which could never be
imposed as q burden on the entire District, were
designed 10 be, and expressly were, counted as
part of the ten millions. Hence, conclusively,
the fact that only Washington and George
town feel the sewerage debt, takes It not out
OF the ten millions, for the same is true of the
old debt of these cities, which IS expressly
brought within the ten millions. Q. But GER
tainly there are other reasons equally conclu-
siye showing this sewerage debt part Of the ten
millions, even granting It to be a local tax
under the twentieth section of the organic act.
One is that this sewerage debt has all the ele-
ments of "publie debt" and is, therefore,
within all the mischiefs meant to be prevented
by the ten-million provision.
have just shown that the fact that it does
not fall upon all the people of the District does
not take it out of the mischiefs prohibited by
that million provision since this provision
expressly includes the same kind not falling on
all. Then, what other element of q public debt
0OCS bLio LAX anu CeILluCGIe I9ckI
shall now proceed to the fuller answer of
this inquiry, including In the question whether
the general sewerage tax can, by this local
tax.
The claim of the District government upon
this point is thus stated by their answer from
the opinion of. Messrs. Cushing and Black.
Governors answer, 475.)
OF these sewerage-assessment certificates
hair fOr fO,,r
the Territorial government may anticipate funds
by selling certificates of Indebtedness, without
increasing the debt of the District" (0pin.
ion of Gushing and Black, Governors answer,
475.) Singular as this position seems to US, the
learned source from which it proceeds inclines
US to examine It carefully.
What we consider now, be It carefully noted
Is whether the certificates of assessment au-
thorized by the fifth section, and the assess
ments authorized by the third section of the
sewerage act, are either, or all of them put to-
gether, debts prohibited by the seventh section
Of the act of Congress of May 8, 1872, within
the mischief designed to be prevented by that
seventh section.
suppose, even in the midst of the "opinions"
and views of law with which these District au-
thorities seemed to have been singularly blessed,
it will be safe to assume, without argument,
that the mischief designed to be prevented and
remedied BY this act of Congress, was exces-
siye burdens upon the people, in the way of
taxation and the preservation of the credit of
the District and its securities. No other con-
ceivable or inconceivable objects than these
can, in the very nature of the case, exist for
enacting this seventh section at all. If these
ends, the, preservation Of excessive taxation
and the preservation of the District credit,
were not secured by 1t, then nothing was, and
the section is dead and senseless matter. So
much is selfevident.
This kept IN mind, let us now honestly, and
without any propensity to selfdeception or to
" make case" attempt-the construction of
this prohibitory seventh section. And, that ]
may go carefully and fortify every step, beg
that the committee will pardon me for again
invoking the light and guidance of the best
maxims of our law, which lie at the very
foundation of the inquiry, what doth this law
prohibit therefore lay them down as the
foundation Of my argument.
And repeat one already quoted &C. II Is the
duty of the courts so to construe statutes as to
meet the mischief and advance the remedy"
(Dwsrris, IA.
Another, SO settled, universal, and funda-
mental in its application as to be maxim in
the law of all civilized states is of vital appli-
cation here, and, in Mr.. Domat's Maxims, is
worded thus:
The laws restrain and punish not only what is
evidently contrary to the sense Of their words but
likewise everything which is either directly or
indirectly against their intent although It seem
to have nothing contrary to the terms Of the law,
and also everything done in fraud Of the law and
to elude 1t. (Dwarris, 1887
To these last words, J" everything that is done
in fraud of the law, and to elude t." crave,
all through this investigation, and in behalf Of
those for whom speak, this committees
ceaseless attention.
Again: "The application of laws is to be
made by discerning what Il is that their spirit
their use-demands." (Dwarrls, 1S9.)
Again: at is never q matter of indifference
whether we apply strict or liberal construc-
tion." (Dwarris, 400
Again, Statutes made, pro bono p,i6lico,
shall be construed in such q manner that they
may, as far as practicable, attain the end pro-
posed"
We set out, therefore, in our inquiry what
debts this act forbids, admonished that we
shall give It such sense and meaning that the
nisehiefs aimed at shall be prevented, that all
devices In fraud or in elusion of this prohibit
ton of burdens on the people are unlawful and
20 down, and that, If possible, the act, made
pro bono pHblico, shall be made to "attain its
purposes" in the protection of the people from
excessive public burdens and taxation; and, as
/ law taking away property, shall be strictly
against such power, but literally In
he provisions made ''pro bono publico."
So guided, let US see whether this imposition
twenty thousand dollars for general system
IF sewerage, as evidenced by the certificates
by the act, is 'idebt' within the
meaning and mischiefs of this act of Congress,
the provisions of the twen-
ieth section Of the organic act authorizing
Ipecial taxes.
The opinion by Messrs. Cushing and Black,
which delights US at every turn, and which ap-
pears to us in all shapes and forms, as in the
Governors answer and In the answer to the
charges, bases its claim that the sewerage-tax
S not debt of the District, upon the view that
hese assessments 'are the debts of the prop
,rty holders of the several sections of the Dis
rict, and that the said sewerage act does not
prescribe any certificates of Indebtedness, the
making and delivery of which would create
lebt of the District to the holder; and, if the
aw be properly carried out by the Board of
'ubiic Works, the persons who advance the
money will be secured by paper having the
egal and equitable effect of an assignment, and
lot the operation of bond" (Goyernor's
'pinion, 475)
This opinion also holds that, "on a point like
his" (whether the sewerage system is local |
'open to controversy, which |
he Legislature was compelled to decide, and |
which It has decided in the regular performance |
# the duty cast upon It, is not open to dispute
gain before the judicial or any other depart
nent of the Government"
Stated briefly, and as strongly as the Dis |
rict counsel state their case, It is this: that |
ince the. sewerage system is not "manifestly |
nd palpably" geperal improvement in its |
and Congres has not decided. by |
aw, whether it shall be deemed general or To- |
al and since the TaOialafTva Aeearnhly he. A. |