The Washington times., 1911-07-29
TAYLOR SPEAKS
FOR THE DISTRICT
ON HOUSE FLOOR
Answers Charge That Fed
eral Government Pays
More Than Share.
Continued from First Page.)

CONTINUED from First Page)
prtating out of the joint revenues of the
District and the United States Govern
'ment sum sufficient to pay the inte-
est and to create sinking fund to meet
the funded debt. With my knowledge
OF these facts, | could not bring myself
TO believe that the gentleman was COR
rectlv advised as to the law in this case.
II the business of the District was
so run, and the Treasury Department
was so careless in its disbursing of
public moneys as to pay out millions
Of dollars on obligations for which they
were not liable, proposed first to veri-
fy the statements of the chairman and
then demand an explanation. With that
in view / have myself, following the
course pursued by the gentleman from
Kentucky, gone back through all Of the
legislation, reports Of committees, and
debates on the floor of the House and
Senate. which might have bearing upon
this subject. The gentleman from Ken
tucy bases his entire contention in so
far as his statements on tine floor of
the House are concerned, that the
Government is not liable for any part
of the principle or interest on these
bonds. upon an act of Congress passed
in the sundry civil appropriation bill of
1871, which | have cited.
The gentleman seems to have over
looked one very essential thing, to-wit,
that the organic act under which this
for the first time in the history of the
District provides for a fifty per cent
participation in the expenses of the Dis
trict by the Government, was not
passed until one year after the statute
which he cites. He seems TO have
stopped short of the very meat of this
case by citing legislation enacted prior
to the time the Government assumed
half Of tho TliGtrirf EynanSaS
gentleman states that ne has gone back
forty years in a vain attempt to find
any authority for these expenditures.
Where Authority Rests.
"If he had gone forward two years
from the act of 1877. which he cites in
support OF his contention, he would
have found explicit authority for Gov
ernments participation in meeting the
principal and interest on these bonds.
This act Of 1877 has nothing to do with
t1e validity Of these bonds, or the
Governments interest in them.
This act was one simply providing
the necessary money to meet the in
terest on these bonds, because the in
terest fell due at time when the taxes
had not been collected, and. therefore,
there would have been always a default
est, except that the Government met
the interest and had the money refund
ed when the taxes were collected. The
authority for the issuance and payment
Of and the responsibility for payment
Of the bonds, known as the 1865 bonds,
will be found in the Act of June 20. 1874,
18th Statutes, 49, In the Act Of June
II, 1878, goth Statutes, 102; in the Act of
March 3. 1879, 90 Statutes, 40; and in
the Act of March 8, 1881, 31st Statutes,
466
Much debate has been had in Con-
gress subsequent to the passage of this
act, as to what the language Of section
meant. Many able men COntended
that the Government only agreed that
it would pay the interest, and was not
liable for the principal. And others
equally as able contended that the Gov |
ernments pledge covered both the in |
terest and the principal at maturity, |
but none, however, went so far as does |
the gentleman from Kentucky in claim |
ing that no part of the principal or
interest should be paid by the Federal |
Government.
Clears Question.
Later on, legislation, which I will |
cite later, cleared up any question Of |
doubt by specifically providing that the |
Government must pay its full share Of |
the entire principal and interest How |
ever, l contend lnat tnlS language in |
the act of 1874, can be susceptible Of |
no other construction than that the |
Government was obligated to see that |
the principal and interest were paid |
by doing two things: first, paying its |
proportional share toward the same, |
and second, seeing that the District |
collected enough taxes TO meet its pro- |
pOrtional share.
'The act of 1877. upon which the chair |
man seems to rely, was, as have |
stated, clearly enacted for the purpose |
OF meeting the interest on the 365 bonds |
when due. the same 10 be refunded out !
OF the District taxes when collected |
This because Of the fact mat there was |
at that time no legislation providing |
that the Government should pay any Of |
the expenses of the District, and 1t was
not until the following year, when the
act of 1878 became a law, tnat the en-
tire relations between the District and
the United States Government under
went a change.
The act Of 1878. passed June II, 1878,
and found in volume 20. United States
Statutes at Large, page 103, provided a
new form of government, and is the
law which the government of the Dis
trict operates today. For the first time.
In section 3 of this act, Congress enact
ed half-and-half clause which com
PEELED Congress to pay One-half of the
expenses of the District"