National Republican., 1874-05-29

oS tho cort-act 1mining the eniire amount"
II I'd = u.s,s' price Of the letting. . !.
~ - 70 remind the committee how
utter, tosai and confessed has been the aban-
Won onI Ie OF the plan legsliLed by the four mil
hsn.i mn y IN, and by It's afirmance by Congress,
AZ use tue complete abandonment Is scarcely
| <guised or denied for Governor Shepherd
I lreeord, page 462) confesses the plan 'Fir-
t9aliy' abandoned. And it is fsct SO unique
that I have never encountered Its like before,
that the very learned aud able counsel who de-
fend this disregard to the Law legalizing the
plan named in this act can only defend 81 in
their pleadings by q misquotation of the plain
words of the act, aad by reading It in "twfst," ("
as they do in their snswer, on page 42S, where,
instead of quoting Il as Il reads, requiring the
four millions to be FUSED and expended, + \
rs fully as may be practicable and consistent
with the public interest, in accordance with the
plan of improvement" !" &C., they make It read
That the plan was 10 be "modifedaad changed,
as far as practicable and consistent with the
public interest" and certainly, thus read, they
have succeeded IN obeying the law, for they
have modified, changed" and 'aisregarded the
law as far as practicable" =. ...
Having thus simply reminded the committee
how complete has been the disregard of the
plan Of improvement submitted to the Legtsls-
ture, and named in the four~million loan act, /
proceed to inquire whether this disregard in
wolves willful disobedience Of law and viola
ton of duty. -...
The first section Of thu four-millioa loan act
Is in these words:
"For tho improvement and repairs OF the streets,
avenues, alloys and roads in the District Of Co:
lumota, and for the esnstruction and repairs OF
TO be used and expended according 70 toe provis-
ions Of the act Of Congress Of the UAited states,
pis;rict Of W GoiunSas M 3 % approved Febausry n ISL
GHa as tutIy as nGy De PraettedSLe oTa consistent
| nf hmitfad said T.aUisla-
ture by the Board Of Public Works Of said Dis
trIct in its Communication bearing date June %,
ASH"
This act received the supreme authority of
| an act Of Congress by its re-enactmen: in the
sixth section of the act of Slh May, 1879. (17
Stat. at Large, p. SS.)
The effect of this provision plainly is to re-
| quire the improvements designated in the plan
| to be adhered to in their substance, but, as to
details, not changing the essentials of the sys-
tenn or its substance to allow departures in the
public interest.
In support of this state the following con-.
sider2tious
l. Such is the plain and natural effect OF the
provision itself, which, by setting out q sys-
TEN CT streets, avenues, &C., and describing
their materials, character, width, &C., plainly,
and in express words, ordered that these, and
not others, should be made; but, at the same
time, suffering these to be varied only when
their exact construction would be % imprac-
| ticable, (2) injurious to the public.
2. A construction which allows the substance
of the plan to be disregarded is, of course. in
its effect to submit to the unfettered discretion
Of the board the whole matter of what the sys-
ten shall be, what the streets and avenues and
sewers shsll be, what their cost shall be, pre-
cisely as if no plan were specified or named.
This is selfevidently q construction which
makes the act identically the same as 1t would
be were all allusion TO a plan wholly omitted
from the act. This is SO simply because, were
this omitted, nobody would deny that the board
would, by oath, by statute and by duty be
bound to expend this money in scrupulous and
conscientious obedience to the requirements of
the public interest; and the board would be
impeachable and indictable if it appeared that
they did not. But the Interpretation which
allows the scope or substance of the plan
nominated in the act to be disregarded, if the
board decide to disregard it, allows the very
same thing as would be required if the plan
were unnamed, to wit: discretion in the board
to decide at pleasure what 1t was the public
interest required the works to be and to cost.
3. Contemporaneous debates, reports, and
official expositions, showing what the law
maker meant by the words of his act are al
ways to be looked to in interpreting his words,
If their meaning is fairly left in doubt. Q3
Wheaton R., 210; l Blschf., 21S.) In this
case, insist that there is no room for the in
depreciation resorted to by the board in justi6-
cation of their complete disregard of the plan
made part of the law. But if l am wrong in
this, and there be room for resort to interpre-
tation, then that Interpretation is furnished to
US by this board itself in the construction they
put upon the law In their official report, on
which the law was based, and in which they
point out the supreme mischief which they in |
Vfte and urge the Legislature to prevent by this
act. That mischief which this report SAYS they |
invite the law to proven: is ''excessive'' and |
fraudulent m oil %
contractors. They say, in this report and the |
plan which invited and embodied in this act, |
that these Excessive" measurements "win be |
prevented by the establishment, in advance, of |
the exact quantities and kind of each work to |
be executed, and thus, when a contract is en-
tered into, the entire amount to be paid can be
specifically determined. No increase can be 1
thereafter allowed, as by the terms of the Or
ganic act even the Legislature is prohibited, |
after the contract has been made, from grant
ing or authorizing extra allowance or compen-
sation to the contractor"
The Legislature took these gentlemen at their
word, and made law expressly and ayowedly
to do the very thing they asked, namely, COM
pei the exact quantity and kind of each work
to be executed, "to be known and established |
in advance, to be provided for in the contract"
and thus to cut off "extra compensation TO |
contractors" and now, with an effrontery
which is most singular, they interpret this act
to do no such thing, but, on the contrary, to
leave to their supreme and lawless discretion
to make just what works they please, at what
cost they please, with or without prior esti-
mates, as they please, and without signed con-
tracts filed with the secretary, as they please.
Surely, this contemporaneous Interpretation
put upon this act by this board is alone enough
to stamp with the character of bad faith their
subsequent one under which they have assumed
to overwhelm this District with the Identical
mischiefs which they pointed out to the Legis-
lature as existing in the past, and as designed
to be rendered impossible, by this law, in the
future. But that this immensely important
point may be rendered doubly sure, submit
still further proofs Of the wantonness of this
violation Of law in ignoring the plan here
legalized. In this view invite the committees
careful attention to other provisions of the
Federal and District laws sustaining my inter-
probation of this first section of the loan act
but which, in themselves and independently of
this first section, also render illegal this disre
gard of the specific improvements appropri-
ated for in the loan act. One of these pro-
visions is that one in the S7th section of the
organic acts which prohibits any disbursement
Of moneys except for Improvements author
zcd by law"
This requirement is most manifestly one
orohibitory of the power in the board either to
iisburse money upon, or to assess adjoining
property for, any improvement which had not
0NSA P1N'4OASAy ouLAOAASCN1 NSeiSuhbCu,
proved by law as one fit to be made, and TO
lssess for upon adjacent property, and to nay
or by general taxation. Any other interpreta-
ion, including the one now made by this board,
caves the Legislature wholly ignorant of and
Indifferent to the entire character of the i'm
orovement, including its location, its extent,
is materials, its nature, (whether it shall be a
street, a sewer, or light-house,) and also its
COST
Again, another provision of this 37th section !,
equally conclusive in giving construction to !
his LIST section of the loan act prohibitory of |;
he abandonment of the plan named in that
'ection, is the one prohibiting money contracts
except when made Sin pursuance of appropria-
ions made by law, and not until such appro-
oriations have been madc.''
Upon this clause W. shall comment here |
lfter, and only cite II In this connection as !.
orcing upon the first section of the loan act .
'ur construction, which renders II essential .
hat there must be an antecedent appropria- i.
ion act specifically designating the Improve
nent before any contract for money can be
nade-tnis because q contract for an improve
nent cannot be said to "pUrSue'' law, when {
he law wholly ignores what the improve |
nent is to be. ,
THE SECOND SECTION OF THE LOAN ACT.
have now shown that the first section of }
he loan act, interpreted by its own words, by /
he light of the boards own official declarations
s to the mischiefs 1t was meant TO prevent, :
nd by the analogous provisions Of that organic
which II unusf rt1reua pIafnlv rrohfhita tbfa