Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-04-20

clerks In the corisctor.s once from two to
one. II WAS irconcstvAbie to him how there
esks S: s .es g p i . 70 sssD two
The Clerks Retained.
But Representative Giilett explained that
these men did other work, being detailed
here and there as occasion arose. and on
vote Mr. Johnson's amendment was lost.
Mr.. Johnson then moved to strike out the
paragraph appropriating 81. 500 for the sal
aries of two clerks in the sinking fund Of
fee.
But Chairman Gillett explained that these
men were also used on other work when
not busy with sinking-fund Matters and on
q vote this paragraph was also retained in
the bill.
Chairman GiHett then explained to the
House In response to an inquiry from Rep
resentatiye Samuel w. Smith Of the Dis
trict committee the necessity for the enact
ment of a provision forbidding the inspec-
tor OF asphalt and cement from accepting
compensation for work along this line from
outside sources. Mr.. Smith could not see
the necessity for the provision. but per-
mitted It to 80 by without objection.
At this point the committee rose for q
moment while Chairman Tawney asked
unanimous consent to take from the Speak
er's table the San Francisco relief resolu-
ton, which had been amended in an unfm-
portant particular. This was done and the
committee resumed its session on the Dis
trict bill
Anacostia Bridge Approaches.
When the paragraph making appropria-
ton for the Anacostia bridge was reached,
by general agreement. the paragraph which
contains the legislative provision calling
upon the Baltimore and Ohio to pay GER
tain expenses in connection with its i'm
provement was considered as a whole.
Representative Mudd of Maryland made a
ntvxt N4r d. t~,-A - r,t-
committee in its report upon this subject
called attention to the fact that the bridge
across the Eastern branch. known as the
Anacostia bridge, was authorized to be re-
constructed bye provision in the District
Of Columbia act for the fiscal year 1905 at
total cost not to exceed $25O.000.
Celebrating on this, Chairman GiIlett ex-
planned today on the floor that by pro-
vision in the District Of Columbia act for
the fiscal year 1906 the limit of cost was
extended from $3.50. 600 to S37o.OcO the Com
missfoners were authorized to reconstruct
the bridge along the line OF the existing
bridge or as they might determine. and
1t was further required that the structure
should be built by July i. 1907.
Since the legislation referred to-" said
Mr.. Gdllett at has been determined that the
Baltimore and Ohio railroad will not aban-
don its tracks which run across the APP
proach to the bridge. thereby making 1t
necessary to elevate the approach SO as
to avoid the grade crossing Of the railroad.
The committee believe that this expense
should be borne wholly by the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad Company, and that that
corporation should also be required to meet
the annual expense of maintenance of the
bridge and viaduct thus made necessary
because of the presence Of it's tracks.
The committee are also convinced that
the Anacostia and Potomac River Railroad
Company in addition to bearing the expense
of the construction of its approaches and
In addition to any sums required to be ex-
pended by the company under existing law
for its tracks. conduits, ETC., across the
bridge be required to pay the sum Of $50, 500
toward the total cost OF construction of the
bridge, that sum being 10 per cent of the
total cost.
Accordingly the committee recommended
legislative provisions which are explained
in the report with the purpose IN view of
accomplishing this end"
MIR. Mudd. speaking on his point of order.
said that In the first place 1t was germane
to the bill itself, and second, 1t was new
LEGISLATION. He went at some detail into
the subject for the benefit Of the chair.
Eliminated on Point Of Order.
Discussion Of the point OF order made by
Mr.. Mudd was participated in by Represen-
tative Mudd and Representative Pearre of
Maryland. Representative Gillett Of Mas
sachusetts, Representative McCleary OF
Minnesota and Representative Olcott OF
New York.
Mr.. Gillett closed the argument by stat
ing that the committee recognized that the
provision requiring the Baltimore and Ohio
and Anacostia and Potomac railroads to
pay portion of the cost of the changes in
question was subject to a point OF order,
but the committee hoped that no member
would take exception to 1t.
But Mr. Mudd renewed his point of order.
which was sustained and the provision
was eliminated from the bill.