Evening star., 1902-02-19
INTO OLD RECORDS.
Senator Penrose's Bill as to Money
Paid District


A bill has been introduced In the Senate
by Senator Penrose Of Pennsylvania, the
object of which, as already stated in The
Star. is Ito enforce the repayment of
moneys alleged to have been Illegally col
lected by the District of Columbia from the
United States" The bill is the outgrowth of
claim Of street paving contractors under
the old board of public works in 1872 and
1873 and it's purpose is to inquire
whether or not the District collected a
sum from the United States for paving
around public spaces in excess of the
amount paid to the contra ctors. The bill is
unusual in form. reading as follows:
Whereas Congress passed an act to re-
imburSe the District of Columbia for work
done on the avenues apd around reserva-
tions in the city of Washington; and
Whereas it is alleged that the District
of Columbia collected from the United
States large sums of money in excess of
the cost of said work; and
whereas the persons who did said work
were notified to do the same at certain
prices. which We're by inadvertence not in
serted In the written contracts, that We're
signed. many Of them, after the work was
done; and
Whereas said persons brought suit to
recover the prices SO agreed to be paid, and
which the United States paid to said Dis
trict; and
Whereas said persons did not recover
said prices by reason of the various techni-
cal objections raised by said District; and
Whereas the money 50 collected from
the United States ought in all honesty
and fairness be paid to the contractors for
the work done by them or be paid to the
United States: Therefore,
BE 1t enacted by the Senate and House
of Representatives Of the United States Of
America in Congress assembled. That In all
such suits heretofore brought In the Court
of Claims against the District Of Columbia
a NJ do
within sixty days from the passage of this
act, reopen the cases and allow the claim
ants for the amount due them for work
done and material furnished to the District
OF Columbia. the judgment Of said court
to be paid as now provided by law. And
II In any of said suits the said court shall
find that said District Of Columbia has col
lected from the United States any sum in
excess Of the price due to said contractors
and not paid over to the contractors, then
the said court shall render judgment in
favor Of the United States for said excess,
to be paid out of the revenues Of the Dis
trlct Of Columbia by the Secretary of the
Treasury upon presentation Of the ceriti-
cate of the clerk Of said court attested by
the chief justice of said court. The at
torEey OF record may be allowed by the
court not to exceed IS per centum Of the
judgment rendered in favor of the United
States, to be paid out Of any money appro-
priated for the District Of Columbia upon
presentation Of the clerks certificate afore-
said.'
At the time the paving work referred to
in the bill was done the District assessed
the government for work done around res
ervations at the same rate as was charged
private parties. The half and half prnci-
pie or the compact of 1878 : had not then
come into being 1t is claimed that the
board of public works let out a number
of paving contracts at certain figure Be
fore the work was done, or while it was
progressing, under these contracts. the
board adopted resolution fixing a board
rate for paving. This rate was in excess
of that specified in the contracts, the board
having taken into consideration the rise in
the cost of paving materials.
1t is further claimed that when the con-
tractors were paid they received only the
contract price. 1t is alleged that the Dis
trict assessed the government at the board
rate and paid the money out at the con-
tract rate. The bill introduced by Senator
Penrose, should 1t become a law, would in
quire into this feature of the matter The
inquiry would date back thirty years and
many old records would have to be pored
over. The contractors brought suit for the
board rate when their contracts We're
completed. but it is said that the Supreme
Court of the United States decided that as
the board rate" was in the nature of a
gratuity the contractors had no valid
claim.
Senator Penrose's bill has been referred
to the committee on claims.