The Washington times., 1903-01-29

I5Zf9 ED o.
VIII Absorb Whole Loan.

VIII Absorb Whole Loan.
This viii practically absorb the whole
amount of the proposed advance Of $40
000.0t9 and forms the basis Of the estI-
mates Of the Commissioners of the Dis
trict Of Columbia for an advance of that
amount In other words, if the full
amount of the current revenues Of the
District Of Columbia are used. as in the
opinion OF the committee they ought to
be, for needed current expenditures.
there must be an advance by the United
States to enable the District to meet its
share OF The estimated cost OF exJraordi-
nary projects already authorized and
those which. owing TO their Importance
must be authorized at an early date.
approximately the sum OF $4,000 coo
This amount should be further in
creased by the cost of a new Police
Court building, the present structure be
ing now in a depIorabIe condition.
Wise Policy to Be Continued.
Advances 10 the District have here
tof0Fe been made for extraordinary pro-
iects. payable in annual instaiment.
with interest This wise and helpful
policy, if we understand the AppTopria-
tiou Committee Of the House Of Repre-
seEtatives. is 10 be discontinued and the
new policy Of pay as you go hereafter
followed.
Now, II this new policy is examined
in the light of the floating debt just
mentioned, created for purely muui-
cIpal projects Of a permanent character.
such as in other cities is always pro
vided for by a bond issue. and it is fur
Their considered that this floating debt
furnishes the one and only reason for
/ the enormous cur in the CommissIoners
estimates. its serious and threatening
+ consequences become apparent. tt is
seemingly SO unwises so Injurious. and
/ so unnecessary that II ought to find no
defenders
"a careful inspection Of the pending
appropriation bin viii show what this
policy means TO the District this year
and for several years 10 come. A cut
I Of over $4,000 900 III The carefully con-
sidered estimates of the commissioners
cannot De made without serious injury
20 the municipality. It is a startling
( proposition which. IN the opinion Of the
committee, can find no Justification in
existing conditions
with good credit and largely in
creased revenues. can anyone suggest
+ q valid reason why the District should
not be permitted 10 fund its floating
obligations? 1t is to accomplish this
and thereby relieve the present IN
( satisfactory condition and irs threatened
+ consequences that the Commissioners
T have formulated and the House Commit
tee on the District of Columbia has ap-
proved Of H r. 1851
This bill is not 10 provide for new
projects Of any kind nor TO encourage
fresh raids upon District revenues. II
+ iz TO provide no funds for the payment
. of the cost of executing any part OF the
F proposed plan for beauufying the public
park nor for extending new streets. It
VIII result in nc increase Of the present
debt, but simply provides for the pay
meur Of an existing floating debt already
authorized and the needed projects like
/ lha reclamation Of the Anac0stia flats.
which otherwise. under the new policy,
must be paid within the next three or
. TOUR years from the current revenues of
the District
Would Pay Debt in Easy InstaIiments.
1T follows the policy heretofore es-
.fabEshed OF permitting the District 10
+ pay its debt TO the Treasury in easy in
.s-aIlmenrs. so as not TO necessarily re-
Guee TO unreasonable limits the apPr0-
. nrla-lous for current needs In other
words. to the extent which Congress ap-
. proUriatos money Of the District for ex-
+ r-aordinary projects authorized by eZ-
tsliHE law and which may hereafter Be
authorized, not exceeding $4,000. 600 the
District shall have the privilege OF pay
ing the same at the rate OF 100000 per