Evening star., 1915-11-17
any great extent under principle that is

right.
Commissioner Brownlow proceeded with
his statement:
I'm years when the revenues Of the
District were decreasing" he said. I'm
the years from 1895 to 1902, Congress did
appropriations and appropriated great
deal more than twice the revenues in
those years. 1t is true they were
repaid in another year, however, not by
any specific appropriations, but merely in
a year when Congress failed to appro-
PIRATE more than twice the revenues, and
at the end of that year when state
ment came to be made by the auditor OF
State and other departments and the
auditor of the District Of Columbia. in
that year when the cash receipts of the
District of Columbia exceeded one-half
the expenditures credited, it was applied
on these statements to the extinction OF
that debt
"The very fact of the non-existence Of
the account when Congress began max
ing those advances required this annual
payment to be made by the auditor OF
State and the auditor of the District
of Columbia. If there had been any &C
count which showed any revenues OF the
District of Columbia it would have only
been necessary any day of the year. at
any time, to strike a balance on that
account.
Makes Answer to Objections.
"It has been objected that I said there
was a surplus which was available for
appropriations for general purposes,
and Mr.. Macfarland read to you from
this decision on page $50. volume Il,
of the Decisions of the Controller or
the Treasury. I believe he read the fol-
lowing, exactly:
LAS between the United States and
- ~ c.
trict of Columbia the moneys received
from taxation and other revenues In
said District are the property OF the
United States to be used for the pur-
poses of local government In said Dis
trict.'
II had put all of this opinion in the
record at the time. but I did not read
it, On page $50, above that, however,
it says:
1.-The power of taxation by the fed
eral government in the District OF Co
lumbia is like the power to tax which
the legislature of a state possesses.
which may be extended upon property
within the limits of the District. ex-
cept as it is specially restrained by the
federal Constitution; its power to ap-
propriate and use the money so raised
is equally unlimited
"If that surplus which goes in there
should be appropriated to be spent
elsewhere, in Alaska, the Philippines
or anywhere else, and the warrant Is
drawn upon the Treasury under au-
Congress, and this money is in the
receipts in the general
fund of the United States Treasury, I
do not know who you would get to
stop it," ..
Approves Mr.. Worthington's Stand.
After discussion as to the right Of
Congress to tax the people Of the Dis
trict, Senator Works said:
II think there is a good deal of force
in the position taken by Col. Worth
ington, that there could be no revenue
assessed against the people of the Dis
trict for some foreign use; that they
are at least entitled to have their
applied to the needs of the COM
munity In which they live
Mr.. Worthington asked Commissioner
Brownlow what he thought of the
budget plan for the District. and the
Commissioner answered that II a fixed
of expenses as between the
United States and the District of Co
lumbia is to be retained. then appro-
priations ought to be made first and the
Commissioners should then apply to the
assessment a fuctuating tax rate SO as
to raise exactly the proper amount of
revenue from District property.
Levy Taxes to Meet Needs.
He continued: You ought to raise
the taxes to meet the needs, after the
needs have been recommended by Con-
gress. if you are going to have a fixed
But then will come in the
trouble. there will be years. If Con-
gress does not appropriate very much,
that the tax paid by the people here
may be less than that paid in COM
parable cities. 1 do not object to that,
but 1t might raise the objection in
Congress, and you would come back to
something like the law of 1893. At any
rate / am glad to see that Mr.. Worth
ington and members of the citizens
committee have come around to sup
port the board of Commissioners in
their advocacy of the George bill, if
we are to continue the half-and-half." p"
Mr.. Gard Asks Explanation.
What do you mean by the advocacy
of the George bill If you maintain the
half-and- -half?" queried Representative
Gard.
Commissioner Brownlow explained
that the fiuctuating tax rate is the
feature of the George bill referred to.
Commissioner if he agreed with Mr..
Macfarland that practically half the
expenses of the District have been paid
by the government and half by the
District from 1873 to date.
practically fifty-flfty," said Commits
sioner Brownlow. Since 1900 it has
been forty-eight and a fraction to fifty
one and fraction
"Then," said Senator Salisbury,
"the differences shown by your table
and percentages you gave have been
made up by subsequent payment by the
District to the government in order to
make it half and half?"
"In order to make it half and half
those repayments have been made by
the failure of Congress to appropriate
double the amount of the revenues in
one year." replied Mr.. Brownlow.
But practically the half-and- half
rate has been paid from 1878 to date,
has it not?" persisted Senator Sauls-
bury.
ut has. and so stated in my speech
before"
Senator Salisbury said he had not
understood the Commissioner in that
way.
States Point He Sought to Make.
Mr.. Brownlow continued his explana-
ton:
THE only point I sought to make
before this committee by a submission
of those tables was that Congress in
deciding in any one year on the needs
of the District for that one year did
not determine the amount of revenues