Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1888-12-11
DISTRICT APPROPRIATIONS.
How the Bill was Amended Before IL
Passed the House.


Mr.. TauLREEs AMENDMENT IN REFERENCE TO
PURCHASE or SCHOOL srrEs-No ELECTRIC
LIsHrIx6 By MEAys OF OVERHEAD WIRES
AFTER SEPTEMBER 80 NEXT.
After the sraa's report closed yesterday the
House passed the District appropriation bill.
to which the day had been devoted The
clause providing for expenditure Of the District
surplus in the treasury towards the liquidation
of the water-works debt was ruled out on o
point of order. that il WAS new legislation.
During the discussion of the bill an interest
ing dispute occurred as to the power of the House
under its rules to provide how certain expen-
ditures shall be made. IL was held by Mr.. At
kinson, as stated in the STAR yesterday, that
clauses requiring the electric lighting to be by
an underground system were changing existing
law and therefore, out of order.
THE DEBATE on THE ELECTRIC LIGHTING CLAUSE.
Following is the discussion on this point CIV
en- more in detail than it was given yesterday:
Mr.. Atkinson made the point of order. To this
Mr.. Clements replied as follows: eff under
stood the gentleman correctly, he makes
point of order upon that paragraph. have to
say in reply that il IA simply limitation upon
the appropriation. 1t is a direction in this ap
preparation bill for the electric lighting, and it
provides the manner in which 1t can be done.
1t is not therefore. a change of existing law
which is obnoxious to the rules. II simply reg
ulates the manner in which money shall be
used for purpose which Is recognized under
prior law"
Mr.. Atkinson-In response to the gentleman
from Georgia, desire to say that this para
graph of the bill is not in harmony with any
appropriation. 1t is not germane to this appro-
priation bill for electric lighting nor is there
any limitation at all upon the expenditure of
money for that purpose; but on the contrary it
is legislation applying to bill of the District,
pure and simple, without any reference what
ever to the appropriation at the beginning of
the paragraph. II prohibits the erection OF
any additional wires. 1t also prohibits the
maintenance of those that are in position. It
affects the whole overhead electric lighting
system in the city of Washington, and has no
reference at all to the appropriation. 1t goes
much further than that, and the committee,
under the rule, has exceeded its powers by
fixing this provision ON their bill.
TIE PROPOSED LIMITATION OF OVERHEAD WIRES
DEFENDED.
Mr. Henderson Qowa).-There is no existing
law that will prevent US from making this lin
itation. That appropriation is for the year
ending June &c. 1880, SO that it is thus our in
tent1on to make this limitation upon expendi-
lures which are now provided for. We are
here appropriating money for electric light
ing. This is the purpose of this appropria-
ton bill; but We say we will not allow that
money to be expended upon wires that are put
overhead. The purpose OF the committee is,
rs fast as it can be done, to take down this sys-
TEN of wires that are overhead and compel
them TO be laid under the ground. Now. it
was our opinion that this provision or limita-
ton was clearly within the powers of the COM
mittee TO say how this money shall be ex-
pended. We are willing that it shall be ex-
pended for electric lighting where the wires
are land underground, but We will not let it be
expended for wires run overhead; and il seems
TO me that is the whole purpose of the bill
Mr.. AtkinsOn-The gist of the gentleman's
argument seems to be that this appropriation
does not cover the period at which these wires
are to be taken down: but the bill will cover a
period after September 80, 1890. 1t is provided
In this bill that the wires shall not be MAIN
tanned after September, 1890, but this appro-
priation viii be expended before that time.
The Chairman-The chair is of the opinion
that at this time private parties holding rights
may construct wires, and that this provision
would change the law in that manner. and
therefore IT is change of existing law in that
respect. The chair does not think it necessary
TO examine further than that particular point
as IT seems to determine this question The
chair sustains the point of order.
MR.. HENDERsoS's PRoHIBrroRY AMENDMENT.
Mr.. Hendersonth then offered his amendment
providing that mo part of this appropriation
shall be used for electric lighting after Sep
TENDER 80. 1883, by means Of wires erected or
maintained that are over any of the streets or
avenues of the cities of Washington and George
town"
Mr.. Atkinson made a similar point of order
against this.
The chair said he was Inclined to sustain
the point.
Mr.. Dingley reminded the chair that it has
been repeatedly held by chairmen of the COM
mittee of the whole that limitation might be
put upon the use OF an appropriation made for
"a particular purpose, and said that in his opin-
ion. the limitation in this case was not obnox-
ious to the rule.
TIE chair thought otherwise.
Mr. Henderson again called his attention to
the fact that there was no law requiring wires
to be put overhead.
THE AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED
long discussion followed in an undertone.
The chair expressed the opinion that the
amendment was not in order, and it was AS
sumed that he had ruled it out, but Mr.. Glenn
ents and Nr. Henderson Howa) still insisting
that II changed no existing law. the chair per-
mltted vote on the amendment and it was
adopted.
Mr. 1AULBEEs AMENDMENT AZ TO THE PUa-
CHASE OF SCHOOL HOUSE SITES.
There was considerable discussion on the
amendment offered by Mr.. Taulbee, providing
that no school sites shall be purchased through
agents, ''or through other persons not regular
bia, or through such regular dealers who have
not had the property for sale continuously
from the date of the passage of this BILL and
IN no case shall a commission be paid to more
than one person or firm, or greater than the
usual commission.
THE COMMISSIONERS SIDE OF THE CASE
Gen. Henderson took the floor to present
the Commissioners side of the case. He said
that the discussion of the subject in the press
Indicated that there was something wrong in
connection with the purchase of these sites:
that agents were buying property at, for in
stance. $1,000 and then selling it to the District
at $4,000, or at some advance: the impression
being given that the man who bought first
from the owner took the property in his own
name and then sold il through the Commits
sioners to the District and made profit which
should have gone to the benefit of the District
Il offered an amendment myself in the commit
tee on appropriations for the purpose Of re-
quirIng these purchases to be made directly by
the Commissioners and to cut off any such in
termediate agencies. Afterward the Commits
siOners came before us and assured US that no
snch system obtained, or had obtained, in their
administration of the District affairs: that in
no instance had the purchase been made by A
acting as an agent for the Commissioners and
the title passed TO him, and then the property
conveyed TO the District. They said that that
had not been their system at all. They stated.
however. that they had employed agents to
obtain information as to what sites they could
buy for school purposes. They found it diff