The Washington herald., 1907-03-04

3
The House voted against the Senate
proposition to buy four tracts Of land
for public park purposes in the District
On q motion OF Mr.. Mann TO recede from
disagreement and concur in the Senate
amendment, there were but 70 yeas and
l4J nays and the matter IS again in con-
ference
The subject was reached in the consid-
Grafton OF the conference report on the
sundry civil bin. on which the item was
put By the Senate. Mr.. Tawney moved
10 insist on disagreement Mr.. Mann.
in making his motion. said he was per
sonaIly n favor OF parks and thought
he city Of Washington had not enough
but he objected to the method that had
been taken. 1t was simply to test the
views of the House that he made the
motion TO concur
Mr.. Bartholdt. as chairman of the Com
mittee on Buildings and Grounds, sup
ported the amendment. which had been
thoroughly looked into, and said bill to
the same effect was pending before the
House. He thought some of the land IN
question should have been bought ten
years ago He said the prices in the
bill were very much reduced from the
figures originally placed on the tracts in
volved. when the matter was considered
by the Commission on Parks authorized
by Congress a few years ago. MI Bar
tholdt said these parks were needed by
ba1 mn
up. Old Washington did not need them
so much.
Are you going to let the children play
in them?" demanded Champ Clark.
"Oh. yes" SAID BaTtholdt.
well, you don't let them now" taunt-
ed the MIssOuTian.
Mr. Bankhead made an appeal for the
amendment He said the park commits
sion had Inspected every plot proposed
for purchase. The recommendation to
buy was unanimous, as the price is lower
now than it will be in the future.
He made an especial plea for George
town and the region east of the Capitol,
which has practically no parks If the
parks are secured, he hoped there viii be
40 keep-0f-the-grass signs ia them and
that the children viii be allowed 10 play
there.
Mr Conner, of Iowa opposed the
amendment. He said he favored standing
by the conference. and that the propo-
sitiOn came in an extraordinary manner
The subcommittee Of the Committee on
Buildings and Grounds had turned the
scheme down at the figures first pro-
posed He thought that land could be
bought much cheaper By waiting. More
than that. he said the people are not
cIamorlng for parks. and for that reason
if for no other, he was opposed 10 TIN
idea of buying the tracts.
Sims Opposes More Parks.
Mr. Sims, OF Tennessee, said that Wash
ington already has more parks than any
other city In the country, a statement
that Mr.. Bowers, Of Mississippi, disputed
by calling attention to Richmond. Louis
VILE, Los Angeles, and Columbus. who's,
park areas are greater than Washing
tons Mr. Sims objected to having hi
constituents saddled with half Of tn
cost of parks in Washington. Speaking
Of the people Of the District, Mr.. sims
said: They don't need these parks. They
only work from to !"
he thought the bill had been lobbied {,
death
1T was simply lobby working to sci
some land, and they will be here" de
clared Mr.. Sims. las long as there is
foot OF land In the District that canno
be sold TO private buyers
Mr.. Clark Cites Figures.
Mr. Clark, Of Florida. Iaboring unde
the disadvantage Of illness. had read
letter from the District assessor il
which ii was stated that the Georgetown
tract had been assessed in the 1905-OS as
sessment at So, 1856, and that by the rul
that property was assessed at two-third
it's value, it was worth SS3. 6S5. Under tn
Increased assessment OF 1s0S-l1 il wa
assessed at sSS695. and its value wa
sl25, 49,, For this tract It was propose
10 pay $4,000.
The letter went on 10 state that III
AnacOstia tract was assessed under tn
IgO5-0S assessment at 800 per acre. o
Sl20A for the tract of 1I acres, maxim
the actual value s1S,2l1 Under the late
assessment the tract was held at S36, ~;
making the actual value $54,63i. Mr.. Clar
said that the amendment would give $50
900 more for the Georgetown tract tina
il was worth and nearly $4,000 more 70
the Anacostia tract than II was worth,
Subsequently It was stated in reply tina
important Improvements had been mad
since the assessment, greatly enhancin
the value of the property.
MIR. Mudd Wants Parks.
Mr.. Mudd urged that there is need O
the Anacostia park and that there Is
large population far out beyond the tow
that would use it, lie said that assess
ments do not always show the value q
agricultural lands outlying in the Dis
trict.
Mr.. Tawney called attention to the fac
that the Senate had knocked out a Hous
clause in regard to miscellaneous supple
in order to put the park item IN, and h
objected. The House would, If il agree
10 the park item, not only get s0methin
il did not want, but lose something il re
garded as essential He insisted that
was not competent to adopt the par
proposition as it came from the Senat,
Taking it out Of the bill did not proven
considering it on its merits in the bi
pending from the Committee on Building
and Grounds. However, Mr.. Tawney sal
that he thought that the project would Z
killed effectually for this session by III
House action on the Senate amendment.
Mr. Nann's motion was then lost an
the House at once sent the bin back II
sisting on disagreement with the Senat
oklahoma Convention Crippled.
In agreeing TO the general dedcienc