The Evening critic., 1882-03-08
District Estimates and Expenditure,

TO the Editor fhhe ECening Critic:
To illustrate the sectional Determinations
made by the District Commissioners, my little
article as written for THE CRITIC Of the 9th
instant compared G street, between First and
Third northeast with New Hampshire ave-
nue., between M and Q streets northwest the
latter being selected by said Commissioners to
the exclusion Of the former for ''immediate"
improvement. The misprint OF for Q was
the only mistake, but my desire to be accurate
prompts this correction. In my previous
articles / have only referred to the sharp
practice of the commissioners in evading the
law by estimating for necessary improve
ments, aggregating many times tho amount
of the appropriation asked Of Congress for the
appropriated on their said estimate on any of
the items scheduled, according to their own
unrestrained pleasure. By this cunning device
they have not furnished the statement re-
quired by law, Showing In detail the work
proposed to be undertaken by them during
the fiscal year next ensuing. Under this
practice these estimates, as basis Of specific
appropriations, seem to have been q sham and
fraud, apparently originating and culmi-
mating in system Of tavoritism and duplic-
very general, and for that matter quite i'm
partial, while the expenditure of the appro-
priation made thereon becomes aauntingly
But the commissioners dln9t stop there.
| They have boldly ventured sodtside even Of
| their own peculiar system of estimates. In q
single year they have expended more than
| $4,000 on streets not even mentioned In their
| estimates, and therefore obviously without
defiance Of the law law % OF % tRis amount Il about ys
| $4,000 was expended on street from Twen-
| tieth street to Rock Creek, northwest, and on
| West street from Rock Greek to Washington
| street, Georgetown, directly on the line OF
travel between the residences of two of the
| Commissioners, for a pavement costing $2.I5
| per square yard, while the law expressly re-
| Quires that sail said appropriations shall be
| expended In accordance with the estimates OF
| the Commissioners of said District, approved
by the Secretary OF the Treasury"
still more remarkable case of disregard oil
law is found both in the action and non action
OF the Commissioners in relation to the water
supply for Capitol Hill.
The act of June 10, 1879, directed the Secre
tary Of the Treasury TO advance to the sale
| Commissioners the sum OF $4,000, and fur
| ther directed that "the money 30 advanced
shall be expended to improve the water-suppl.
on Capitol HILL" Now, almost three year
after the passage OF said mandatory enact
ment, $24, ,35272 OF said appropriation Still
remains In the Treasury unexpended, Will
| the waterrent taxpayers, for whose relief
was intended, are carrying the water in pail
| and pitchers from their Easements to thei
bathrooms. The residue OF said approprla
sioners to a single private citizen for al
engine and fixtures for pumping the waite
into his single block Of houses to the attic, I
| the detriment, In some degree, of every othe
water-taker on Capitol Hill. I know this 1
| incredible, but 1t is true. For the fair fam
OF our District would that 4 were otherwise
| but II is only In keeping with many other ez
| pedients long practiced "to keep tho peopl
quiet" This case originated in much les
duplicity and selfishness than the stand-ptpe
II has been much less detrimental and les
expensivei but both are equally reprehens
BILE. Respectfully,
March Y. 1890.