The Washington herald., 1913-07-25
ASSESSOR under
FLAIL OF PROBE.
W. P. Richards Appears Be-
fore the House District
Committee.
TARGET FOR QUERIES
District Official Reads Statement IN
Which He Dramatically De-
tends His Probity.

District Assessor William P. Richards
yesterday was placed under the probe Of
several members Of the House District
Committee and called upon TO defend
his Official conduct as an ofiicer OF the
District government
The committee was acting without any
p power to command the presense OF wit
nesses or to administer oaths, inasmuch
as no such authorization has been grant,
ed by the Sixty-third Congress. II act
ed, however, in anticipation Of the pas
sage by the House of a resolution vesting
II or any subcommittee with full inquis-
itorial powers This resolution will be
fsvorably reported out by the House
Rules Committee shortly.
Mr.. Richards apparently appreciated the
fact that the committee intends to probe
his motives rather than his methods. As
announced by The Washington Herald
at the conclusion of the assessment and
taxation investigation of the George SUBJ
committee last summer, Mr.. George
planned further probe directed more
specifically at Mr.. Richards, Mr. George
is understood to expect sensational de-
velopments concerning Mr.. Richards and
possibly others in his office.
Prejudged in advance by a majority. at
least, OF body which comprises Judge.
denced the extreme strain under which
he labored. He prefaced his examination
by a dramatic reading OF a prepared
statement in which he reviewed his
career as a public official and invited
the FULLEST investigation. Questions of a
nature most pointedy touching upon his
personal and official integrity and judg-
ment were hurled at him, and at times
his replies scarce were audible to the
stenographer.
Replies Not Satisfactory.
Why do you assess property in the
District on a two-thirds valuation, when
the law would permit you to assess on a
full valuation?'
The last tax law provided that assess
ments should not be below two-thirds,
and did net require full value assess
ments.
1t was this question. in one form or
another. which members of the commit
tee. Representatives Johnson, George,
Prouty, and O'Gorman hammered into
the witness for nearly three hours yes
terday. His replies We're not OF the most
satisfactory nature, for. apparently, Mr..
Richards was not entirely certain why
he did assess on two-thirds basis. He
had consulted a number OF lawyers, he
said, because he was not himself suffici-
emily versed in the law 10 interpret the
act to his own satisfaction. But he
could name only one lawyer whom he
had consulted. a Mr.. Simmons whom
he referred TO vaguely.
Mr.. George who wrote the report of
his investigation on assessments and
taxation in the District. seemed much
put out that Mr.. Richards had not taken
the hint from that report and started
the last assess meRt- ont upon = fill valu- |
alton basis.
Now. the fact is.'' he said. you have |
begun the new assessment under the old
two-thirds plan, in spite of the unani- |
nous report of committee of Congress
in favor of full value assessments. Do
you deny that We have any right to ad- |
wise you in this respect?'
No"
why. then, have you done nothing
about it?v
Il thought you would clear it up in a
bill"
Responsibility on Congress.
You set up your own opinion against |
a committee of Congress, and you pay no |
attention to what Congress recommends |
or does not recommend" commented Mr.. |
George. apparently overlooking the fact |
Congress has neither recommended nor |
failed to recommend anything in this |
regard.
Il do not look al it in that light" re- |
piled Richards.
Mr.. Richards was at his best when he |
did not attempt to explain his reasons |
for interpreting the law as he has in
terpreted it. He did not wish TO take
upon his own Judgment full responsibility |
and yet he could not shift 1t to any other
tangible authority.
When Richards explained that he be-
lieved it was the intent of Congress TO
have assessments based upon two-thirds
valuation, Johnson wished to know upon
what he based his belief. The law was
enacted in 1902 and Mr.. Richards said
he had drawn his conclusions from de-
bates in Congress on the subject.
You read the debates?" queried John
son.
They were meager. I read all could
find about the law" replied Richards.
But did you read this debate, such
as it was, and gained therefrom the
inten of Congres5?''
Yes"
Can you recall the names of Congress
men who spoke on the subject"
Il can't recall them now
But you are sure you read the de-
bate?'
Challenge of johnson.
Yes, l don't think there was much
debate. but 1 read all / could find"
Well" said johnson, with an air Of
triumph, 81 challenge you to produce one
syllable of debate in Congress on this
question of two-third valuation"
II said there wasn't much debate" ex-
planned Richards
well, produce one word of II. You
may present the Record tomorrow"
Richards admitted that he had not re-
'erred the question Of the probable in
tent Of the new law of 1902 to any Of the
egal departments of the District govern
nent for Interpretation.
Examination of Richards developed the
act that about three years ago he had
,sked Commissioners Rudolph and JUDI
ION to give him q younger man than
Assistant Assessor Matthew Trimble, de-
,laring that Trimble was incompetent
he said that he had been guided largely
~ Trimbls's advice in interpreting the
aw of 1902 as he had.
When questioned as to two loans he
lad made on property at Iowa Circle and
N Elm Street, Richards almost broke
lown at the implication he thought his
intended to make. Almost
he denied that he had ever
made a crooked dollar.
Statement of Record. H.
81 came here in 1881 at S1,sN I was /.
to $500. and later 5000. and
S assessor received $4,000. have al
Ways lived economically. I have always /
Iaved money. I have lived always As {
{ I were to be kicked out at any mo- !
1ent. I came here as surveyor, civil