Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-03-26
OBJECT TO CLAUSE
House Members Criticise
Railway Extension Grant.
REPORT ON DISTRICT BILL
Attention Called to Proposed Track
Construction in Brookland.
APPROVED BY THE CONFEREES
Measure Returned to Conference
After Disagreement Upon All
But One Amendment.
APPROVED BY THE CONFEREES

The conference report on the District
of Columbia appropriation bill came u,
for consideration in the House tnis
afternoon.
Mr. Fish of New York called atten-
ton to the amendment agreed uron by
the conferees authorizing the Wash
ington Railway and Electric Company
to extend its tracks in Brookland. lie
said this amendment proposed to grant
a franchise which the railway had
asked of the District committee and
which that committee had refused. He
said the amendment proposed to give
the railway the right to operate freight
cars on it's existing tracks. He thought
it was not proper to enact this legis-
lation indirectly when the committee
which has the matter in hand has re-
fused to report it in BILL
Mr.. Parsons called attention to the
fact that the amendment was made to
a provision for the extension of streets
Mr.. Gardner Explains.
Mr.. Gardner OF Michigan, in charge of
the bill. then explained the provision, re-
citing the facts concerning the efforts to
improve the streets in the Brookland sec
ton and to abolish a dangerous steam
railroad grade crossing.
Mr.. Burleson said that citizens Of Brook
land had urged this extension, and Chair
man Smith of the District of Columbia
committee had informed him that there
was no objection to the proposed extern
sion, but that it was very difficult to get
any street railway legislation through
the District committee, because every
such effort was hampered by amendments
for universal transfers or something of
that kind.
Mr.. Fish contended that the railroad
should be made to pay for its franchise
Mr.. Burleson observed that the way pro-
posed by the amendment seemed to be the
only way to make the railroad put in
this extension.
Mr. Mann called attention to the fact
that this was not new matter sprung
upon the House. but was proposed in the
original conference report and had been
before the House for weeks.
Mr.. Gardner said the conferees would
have no objections to striking out the
authorization to run freight cars over the
tracks.
But Two Plans Open.
Mr. Payne said the conference report
must either be voted upon or voted down.
and would have to go back to conference
to make the change suggested.
Mr. Gardner declared that the only OBJ
ject of the conferees was to give the peo-
pie Of Brookland the railway extension
demanded, and which it had seemed i'm
possible up to this time to get from Con-
gress.
Another Item Contested.
Many members spoke against the ac-
ton OF the conference in adding the City
and Suburban railway proposition to the
Senate amendment 81, which merely in
creased from 900 to S.. $50 the appro-
priation for the improvement OF Monroe
street Representative Gardner Of Michi-
gan. in charge of the bill, and Repre-
sentative Bureson Of Texas, one of the
House conferees, defended their action
Finally Mr.. Gardner, having answered
a hundred or so Of questions. moved the
previous question to cut of debate, and
this was carried. Everybody laughed
when the Speaker put the formal mo-
ton with "all those in favor OF agree
ing to the conference report say L." Not
a voice answered. But there was a roar
OF noes when the negative was called for.
Then Representative Mann Of Illinois
made a motion to concur in Senate amend
ment 81, increasing the improvement ap-
preparation for Monroe street from $1,000
street railway extension. This was carried
almost unanimously.
Disagreement was affirmed on all the
other amendments, and the bill was sent
back to conference.
The item in the bill providing for an ap-
preparation for Fairgrounds was not men
toned.