The Washington times., 1903-08-11
Opinion on Renting HoSpi-
tai for Contagious Dis
eases Disputes Former
Attorney General Griggs.
CONTROVERSY HINGES
ON THE ORGANIC LAWS
If Comptroller Is Right Dis
trict viii Suffer, There
fore Legal Fight Believed
to Be Imminent.

The decision of the Comptroller of
the Treasury. submitted to the Com
missioners yesterday. denying the Dis
trict the right to rent buildings for the
care of persons afflicted with contagious
diseases. has been subjected to much
adverse comment among District off,
cials, and a long legal controversy is
imminent. The Commissioners are not
disposed TO accept the ruling of the
Comptroller as final, although Ee is
generally considered a court of last re-
sort
Contrary TO Griggs.
AS authority for their apparent oppo-
sition, the Commissioners look 10 an
opinion given five years ago Ly the
then Attorney General John w Griggs.
who cites, in his own support. the Su
preme Court of the District OF Colum-
bia. In reaching his decision he de-
clared the District of Columbia to eb "a
municipal corporation proper. as distin-
guished from a corporation established
as an agency of the Government Great
ing it" Comptroller Tracewell also
found it necessary to define the status
of the District of Columbia and says ''it
is not an Independent body, acting for
itself. but an agency. established by
Congress" In other words the two de-
cisions are in absolute conflict.
AS soon as the decision of the comp
trolIer was made known to Commits
sioner Macfarland he sent for Acting
Corporation Counsel E H. Thomas. and
the matter was discussed.
Mr.. Thomas cited the opinion of the
former Attorney General. which was
directed TO the President under date of
April 20. 1898. It was written in re-
sponse TO a request as to whether the
civil service act, approved January 10,
1888. applied to clerks of the District
of Columbia It says in part:
Is Strictly Municipal.
''In the case OF Metropolitan Railway
Company VS.. District Of Columbia Q32
L. S, II the legislation relating TO the
organization and government of the
District of Columbia was reviewed. It
was then decided that the form of gov
ernment which prevailed in the District
of Columbia and city of Washington
prior TO 1871 was strictly municipal in
its character: that the government of
the United States except so far as the
protection Of its public buildings and
property was concerned, took no part
in the local government, any more than
any State government interferes with
the municipal administration of its
cities.
''The Court then considered the moii-
fications made in the form of the Dis
trict government subsequent TO ls7l,
aud including the act Of juno II, 1873,
and expressly decided that the corpor-
ate capacity and corporate liabilities OF
the District of Columbia remained the
same as prior TO 1871, and that its
charter as a municipal corporation had
Lot been changed
In the case Of Barnes VS.. the Dis
trict OF Columbia. (91 L. s.. SOD. it was
coutended that the board Of public
works. which at that time performed
the same functions subsequently con-
ferred upon the Commissioners of the
District Of Columbia by the act OF 1873
was not a department OF subordinate
agency of the District. but a Federal
commission. This view was expressly
rejected in the Barnes case. where II.
was held that the District of Columbia
was strictly a municipal corporation.
competent 70 sue and liable to be sued
upon contract or for negligence
Distinguished From Agency.
1T was also decided that the Dis
triet o: Columbia constituted a muni-
cipal corporation proper as distin-
guished from a corporation established
as an agency Of the government Gre
ating II.
The decision in the Barnes case and
in the Metropolitan Railway Company vs..
the District Of Columbia. G32 U. S. II,
was expressly affirmed by the Supreme
Court OF the District of Columbia in
District OF Columbia VS. Woodbury.,
l36 U. S, 45O). The statutes relating
TO the District Of Columbia have not
been materially altered since those
cases were decided"
That portion Of Comptroller Trace
wells opinion which conflicts with the
Attorney General follows:
Comptrollers Views.
"Undoubtodly, the government of TIE
District Of Columbia is a municipal cor.
poration. but il is not an independent
DC0Y acting lOr lLEtH- II Is an A2eTCy
established by Congress for administer
ing the laws which II enacts for the gov
e-nment Of the inhabitants within the
territory OF the District OF Columbia.
over which it has exclusive jurisdiction.
Its powers arc limited. and Congress
may AT any stime alter them OF take
them away, or act directly IN any tn-
stance. in its own discretion. UIthout
the aid OF the municipal government.
The revenues Of the District are re-
Quired 10 be covered into the Treasure
Of the United States. and in general tue
municipal government can make no dis
bursenents except Of moneys appropri
ated bY Congress"
In the face Of these two opinions the
Commissioners are undecided as 10
which way 70 turn. The ruling Of the
Comptroller IS odiOus and 10 abolish
the hospital where smallpox patients
and others suffering from conta gious
diseases are treated would endangcr the
health OF the entire District Conse-
quently, IL IS not at all improbable that
the case will be reoDened and fought