Evening star., 1914-04-09
The Newman Plan.


the half-and-hah plan because it causes
vigorous controversy and acute friction
between Washingtonians who think it:
maintenance vitauy essential to the vel
fare of the capital and congressional as
sailants who would destroy it. BY an
initiating the plan he would prevent con
troversy between those who would pre-
serve and those who would dernolish it
y is fighting to protect the life of
against Cs murderous assaults. Com
missioner Newman would make peace be
tween \ and c by the simple and in
senious expedient of killing B himself.
Commissioner Newman's main reasor
for abolishing the half-and-half plan is
however that IL cannot be justified il
equity from the standpoint of either
the United States or the District of Co
lumbia and that as consequence it is
economically unsound, not being based
upon justice and truth.
lie explains in some detail the mental
processes by which he reaches this con-
clusion- He says:
There do not exist any tangible
facts or reaSons-real evidence or iu-
formation-upon which it can be truth
fully and equitsbly determined that the
amount OF the contribution of the
United States should be 10 per cent.
Neither are there any such facts, evil
dence or information upon which it can
trutbfully and equitably be determined
that the amount to be paid by the Dis
trict of Columbia should be 80 per cent
Nobody knows what percentage would
represent exactly that which the District
should pay and that which the United
States should pay.
During the time I have been Commits
sioner have spent hours and days trying
to arrive at a conclusion as to what per-
centage should be paid by the United
states and what should be paid by the
District of Columbia from the standpoint
of what are national and what are mu-
nicipal expenditures in the District gov
ernnent. With the assistance of heads
of departments long in the District Serv-
ice. i have taken a particular appropria-
ton bill and have tried TO set down in
separate columns the amounts of the ap-
preparation which ought to be paid by
the United States for national reasons
and the amounts that ought to be paid
by the District for municipal reasons.
but i have found that II is utterly i'm
possible to make that separation.
In the projects and services of the
District government. almost without ex-
ception, the national element and the
municipal element are so interlocked, in
terwoven and overlapping that the ex-
penditure cannot be separated into ma
tional and municipal parts.
That being true-and know that it is
don't you see how impossible 1t becomes
TO maintain successfully that the division
of expense should be half and half?'
That being true, does it not become
equally impossible to maintain successfully
that the division of expense should not
be half and half? If nobody knows
tor can know what percentage would
represent exactly that which the United
States should pay may not the half-and-
half ratio be exactly or approximately
right?
Commissioner Newman, after spending
hours and days in an honest and intelli-
gent effort to decide the proper per-
centage of expenditure to be paid by the
United States and the District of CO.
lumbia. respectively, could not convince
himself that so per cent each was pre-
cisely the proper contribution. Nor could
he decide that any other proportion was
equitable, He gave up the problem as
impossible of solution.
Because he could not demonstrate with
mathematical exactness that the half
and-half plan was absolutely equitable, he
pronounces it inequitable. But Washing
ton holds that the burden is upon the
assailants of the half-and-half plan to
prove that it is inequitable. Commissions
er Newman furnishes no such proof He
suggests no other figures that are more
equitable. His experience and his words
Indicate that IL Is Impossible to demon
stratc that the haif-and-hale plan is in
equitable.
The just proportion of national con-
trioution was a subject of controversy
for the four years between 1874 and 1878.
1t was finally determined that a half
contribution was roughly and approxi-
nately equitable.
The half-and-half provision has con-
verted the capital from the nations
shame into tho nations pride. 1t is the
keystone in the arch OF Washington 9
welfare.
Before it is destroyed there should be
direct, positive. convincing evidence that
it is inequitable- Commissioner New
mans prolonged. commendabIe but futile
struggle with the facts and figures and
his confession Of inability to ascertain the
equitable proportion of contribution are
not such evidence Washington cannot
follow the Commissioners reasoning
when he says in effect: II found it i'm
possible to ascertain that the half and
half plan was either equitable or inequita-
BILE; therefore it is ineauitabie"
When Commissioner Newman has
abolished the haIf-and- half plan, de-
StfOyeQ tHc OeuAitS arDitrHIy standard
of national participation in capital up
building and rendered the national
contribution fuctuating. uncertain
subject to the whins, spites and preju-
dices of individual congressman, what
does he suggest as a substitute? 4
single tax on land values in the Dis
trict. including among the values S9O,-
100000 worth of the naked land be-
longing to the United States. not in
cluding streets. avenues or intersec-
tions, or Rock Creek and Potomac
parks. Mr.. Newman's proposition ir
effect reduces the national conIribu-
tion from one-half to about one-quar-
ter at the first clip without any evi.
dence whatever that the half contribu.
tion is too much Mr.. johnson and Mr.
Prouty would. of course, add to the
single tax heavy levy on land excessive
taxes on all kinds of personality, ano
would whittie down the percentage OF
national contribution still further per.
haps to nothing.
To discard as a trouble maker" the
system to which every one has become
accustomed through the habit of thirty.
five years Of beneficial use and to sub
stitute for it the single tax and a di
rect municipal tax on national propert!
may provo krotesquely Inconsistent ane
Illogical e u is conceivable that 'h'