Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-08-24
wv: H. MUSES Is SONS, FSTREET, COR ELEVENTH.


force diminished. but it is purposely left
intact In the act of June II. 1875 enti-
tied An act providing permanent form
of government for the District of Column
bia,' it is stated:
1.-The District of Columbia shall remain
ard continue a municipal corporation as
provided in section of the Revised Stat
utes' the above quoted secuon) relating
to said District, and the Commissioners
herein provided for shall be deemed and
| taken as the officers of such corporation
This removes all doubt, If there ever
was any. as to the intent of Congress that
section 1 of the act of 1871 should con-
tinue in full force and effect.
1t Is true that names are not always
things-that declaring the District of Co
lumbia shall be a municipal corporation
and that the Commissioners shall be its
such unless municipal powers are conferred
| upon the government thus established and
to perform which relate to the District gov
eminent. But without very important and
ccgent reasons, the intent signified in
the express language of the statutes should
not be departed from. The powers enumer.
ated in the statute delegated to the
District of Columbia government are those
usually delegated by state legislatures to
cities or villages; and Furthermore, 1t is
declared by statute that the government
of the District of Columbia shall exercise
all other powers of a municipal corpora
ton not inconsistent with the Constitution
and laws of the United States and the pro-
visions of this act The enumerated pow
ers of the Commissioners relate to the gov
eminent of the District of Columbia and
are such as are usually conferred upon
| municipal officers
A Municipal Corporation.
'The statements that the District of CO.
| lumbia was in fact made municipal cor
poration by the act of 1871, that subsequent
acts have not affected this status and that
the Commissioners are officers of the Dis
trict of Columbia and not of the United
States. are fully sustained by decisions
rendered by the United States Supreme
Court. from which 1 will take a few cita-
lions.
by the act of 1871, which remodeled the
government of the District of Columbia. a
governor and legislature were created, also
a board of public works, which was to con-
sist of the governor. as it's president and
four other persons. to be appointed by the
President and Senate. To this board was
given the control and repair Of streets, ave-
nues, &C., and the power to disburse all
moneys therefor. In the case of Barnes
| vs.. District of Columbia 81 U. S. $40 the
question involved was whether not the
| acts of this board were binding on the
municipality of the District of Columbia.
1t was cOntended that the board was n
federal agency, but the court held 1t to be
an agency of the municipal government of
the District of Columbia and that the
latter liable forsthe negligence of the
board"
United States Supreme Court decisions
are quoted at some length to sustain the
views of the assistant attorney general.
who continues:
Not Business Of United States.
"It necessarily follows that the business
of the District of Columbia is not exclusive.
| ly the business of the United States gov
eminent. The District of Columbia Is a
y,orpicfpa1 hav ho
relation to the United States government
| that a chartered city or village has to the
| state whose legislature created it. The
| business of the District of Columbia Is no
more the business of the United States
| than the business of the city of Baltimore
| is the business of the state Of Maryland.
Furthermore. 1t was not the intention of
Congress in passing the laws authorizing
| the use of the penalty envelope to tighten
| the burden and expense of any municipal,
state or other local government by allowing
it the free of the United States mails.
1t was intended that all those governments
should pay for the use of the United States
mails. and that the United States govern
ment: the national government alone.
should transmit Its matters free of postage.
prior to the act; of March 3, 1877. Con-
gress made appropriations to the depart
ments and officers of the United States gov
eminent to defray the expense of postage
ON official mail matter. The Postmaster
General was authorized. by statute. to pre-
pare a special stamp or stamped envelope,
to be used only for official mail matter, for
each of the executive departments: and all
said stamps and stamped envelopes. were
sold or furnished to said several depart
ments or clerks only at the price for which
stamps and stamped envelopes OF like value
were sold at several post offices. The fol-
lowing appropriation act of Congress for
the fiscal year ended June &c. 1874, shows
the way Congress provided for the pay
ment of postage upon official matter of the
United States:
Language Of Appropriation Acts.
For executive Office $500: for Depart
ment of State. 1900; for Post Office De-
partment. 100000: for Treasury Depart
ment 1901 otN; for Navy Department, $685.
600; for Interior Department. $4,000: for
Agricultural Department, $4,000; for War
of House of Representatives the secretary
of the Senate and the sergeant-at-arms OF
the House of Representatives, $100 each,
making in all 81, S65, 9OO.
THE whole purpose of the statutes au-
thorizing the use of the penalty envelope
confusion that was involved in the old sys-
tenn of requiring stamps to be purchased
of the Post Office Department for use in
transmitting mail of the United States gov
eminent. Were 1t not for these or similar
laws, every department in, and every officer
of the United States government would
still be paying enormous sums annually to
the Post Office Department, and the Post
Office Department would still be performing
the, operation of paying money to itself.
every case where the United Statea gov
eminent could properly be charged with the
expense Of postage. either IN its depart
nents or by its officers. II the use Of the
proper application of the laws will not per-
nit them to be extended to any other caeeG,