The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1911-04-09
ACCORDS With
MODERN SPIRIT
Why Attorney Peyser Thinks
. Mr.. George Is Right.

the District of Columbia Is too autocratic
to suit the needs of the people, never
theless, all things being equal, 1 think,
accepting his proposition as correct, the
| head Of the District government should
| De one person, whether governor or COM
| missioner, appointed by the President.
The citizens of the District Of Columbia
| should be entitled to suffrage, and should
have the privilege Of electing twelve citi-
| zens who shall constitute a legislative
body, which said body should enact the
proper laws and ordinances for the gov
ernins Of the District Of Columbia This
proposition will be a system of suffrage
WITHOUT the election Of the head of the
District government, and 1t is the con-
i, sensus Of opinion by the taxpayers,
often expressed. that the head should
be an appointive officer.
The question has often been raised
about the defects of the former Terri
torial government when the right of sufr-
rage was given to the citizens Of the
District Of Columbia. but the defects, as
shown by history. were not caused by
reason Of the right of suffrage, but by
reason OF the abuse of the power by some
OF the board of public works. In other
words the abuse was the direct cause
OF the dissolution of that particular FORM
Inc idea of the installation of a sys-
tenn Of government in the District of
Columbia with the privilege of the mi
tiative, referendum, and recall would
doubtless meet the needs and wants and
result in making Washington one of
me best governed cities in the United
States.
In Dodd's Government OF the
D1strlct OF Columbia" page 81, the fol-
lowing quotation shows what is Thought
Of Congressional legislation.
The system of Congressional lepisIa-
ton works badly in great measure no.
cause OF the want of interest in District
atalrs upon the part of the great body
OF Senators and Representatives. Inn
portant legislation to which there is no
particular objection often fails simply be-
cause of the pressure Of other business
whloh anects more closely the interests
OF the members of Congress"
And it is admitted that the defective
legislation is caused not by the willful act
OF Congress. but solely because Con-
sress in Its many important duties Is
unable to give the proper time to District
matters.
II the District is unable to obtain
proper legislation from Congress en-
utling II to the initiative referendum,
ana recall system of government, there
are two other propositions if properIv
combined and connected, would prove
very beneficial. First, what is known as
the advisory referendum, submitting to
the people OF the District Of Columbia all
legislation before Congress finally acts
upon the same: and. secondly. the enact
ment OF a law governing public service
corporations, or what Is commonly known
as public service commission, which COM
MISSION should take charge and regulate
all public service corporations doing bust
sess in the District of Columbia
Up to the present time the citizen NJ
the District of Columbia are unable to
know whether or not they are citizens
OF the United States or whether the Con-
stitution of the United States is appIi-
cable to the District of Columbia. The
Supreme Court of the United States, in
its wisdom, has undertaken on several
occasions to define the status of the
citizens Of the District of Columbia And
on reading these several decisions we
find that the more they are read the less
we know about our status. In the
case of Hepburn VS.. Elezey e Cranch
U. S. A5), in an opinion by Chief Justice
Marshall, it was held that "a citizen of
the District of Columbia was not a cit
lien Of a State within the meaning
of the Constitution. but later. in a case
known as De Gerfroy VS.. Rigg n32 u |
s.. 25S, 1t was held that the District |
of Columbia is a State Of the Union" |
In other words, the Supreme Court of |
the United States says that a citizen |
of the District of Columbia, is not a |
citizen of State" and then explains |
and says that the District of Columbia is
a State" In the latter case, constru-
ing the treaty of 1853. between the United |
States and France, which gave a citizen
Of France the benefit OF inheriting real
estate in the District of Columbia, and
apparently for that purpose and that pur-
pose alone, 1t was decided that the Dis
trict of Columbia was a State: yet, never
in the prior decision by Chief
Justice Marshall, known as Hepburn VS..
Ellzey, it was held that a citizen of the
District Of Columbia had not the right
to protect himself, and prevented him
from suing in the United States courts.
was said, the District Of Columbia was
not State within the meaning Of the
statute
Some time, some day, some great
scientist will fathom the exact position.
who and what a citizen Of the District
Of Columbia is, and, with the sugges-
lions as made by Mr.. George. give us
the right OF suffrage. The citizen does
not care what his exact status Is as
ong as he can exercise his right to a
voice in his representation.
The conclusion reached by Mr.. George
N thoroughly in harmony with the spirit
IF modern times, and, therefore, as
stated, the people ought to be intrusted
with the control OF their own affairs and
government, which seems to touch the
keynote of all modern idea, emphasizing
he proposition laid down by the fore
'athers that taxation without representa-
ion is tyranny. JULIUS I. PEYsER.