Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1915-10-25

congress "hlCn ylelood reports oy
committees ana action by Congress Of
value to tho National Capital. eventual
ly leading up to the most beneficial Of
all. the organic act Of 1873. The intent
Of the founders and tho duty Of Con-
gress to contribute at least half Of the
expenses were clearly set forth in the
very first Of these reports by Chair
man eouthard OF the Senate District
committee in 1888. It Is the best au-
thorisy on all that hsa gone before It
seduent reports to Congress. It IL
noteworthy that on tho different Joint
and regular committees that dealt with
this subject were some Of the foremost
Thurman.
Governments Duty Recognized.
THE duty of the national govern
ment to contribute largely to the ex-
penses Of the National Capital had been
recognized. The necessity that this
contribution should be a definite. fixed
proportion Of the expenses had become
apparent with the Ill effects OF the
lack of systematic contribution. The
indefinite method Of contribution had
prevented regular. steady progress in
the development of the city plan. In
made by Congress, and In other years
they varied greatly and were made
spasmodically, without relation to the
continuous execution Of the plan of the
city.
1.-THE proposition now made to return
to the unsystematic and unsatisfac-
tory practice before 1873 is condemned
by the experience under that practice
and by the findings Of the statesmen
Of 18747S. who changed the method of
national contribution because Of that
experience. The condition of the early
records. the different methods of book
keeping and other reasons have made
1t very difficult to ascertain even ap-
the United States and what was con-
tributed by the District of Columbia
to the expenses Of the District govern
ment between 1890 and 1878.
From the facts collected by our COM
mittee we can state approximately that
the total amount contributed by the
District Of Columbia for the whole
period was $51.407.742.32. while the ap-
parent amount contributed by the
United States was s32,413.755.S5, of
s1s.5s5,s57.5s. was contributed between
1870 and 1878, under the new desire
to improve the National Capital. On
the face OF this statement the excess
contribution OF the District of Column
of the contribution of tho United States
such as we have made in our brief for
the period between 1890 and 1871
shows that a large part Of the contri-
outlon OF the United States was not
for general municipal purposes.
But, whatever classification Of the
items in the United States govern
ments contribution may be made, the
saaical 1ault OF the method of contri-
sons why. for the sake Of the United
states government and for the sake Of
the District OF Columbia, the amount
OF United States contribution should be
IN nxed proportion to the Districts
Coz nave been clearly stated
senators and representatives. The Al
l1son committee, in its report of June
16. 1874. said: For the protection Of
the government 1t is essential that
som some nxed. unvarying rule should be
established for the ascertainment of
what the government should contribute
toward the expenses OF this District
without IT an appropriation commits
Tee Will always be likely to be misled
into improper allowances
The House judiciary committee In
It's report of June I. 1874, said:
Lack Of Consistency Noted.
":As to the third and last branch of
the resolution. asking whether some
accurately defined basis of expenditure
cannot be prescribed and maintained
they believe this to be OF paramount
importance both to tho federal and To-
cal government There never has been
since the location OF the capital at this
place any consistency. or even intelli-
gence. in the adjustment Of these ex-
pendttures.
1T is believed that 1t will be much
wiser and much more economical. both
to the national and local government,
to fix upon a definite sum or proper
ton to be contributed by both, and that
1t 10 more important that these appro-
priations should be made regularly and
upon some well defined principle, than
that they should DO large
Senator Root. in the Senate debate
OF last winter. announced that he stood
for the old half-and-half plan,' for one
reason-because it was the sole protec-
ton of the people Of Washington
out that the obligation to appropriate
dollar for dollar prevented extravagant
or reckless appropriations. such as
might be made out of District revenues
without the half-and-half obligation.
Senator Blair Lee put 1t strikingly
when he said that the fact that every
dollar from the District must be match
ed by ono that bites gave the District
protection from unwtse appropriations
of Its money.
"False Assumptions" Of 1912.
Tho power of taxation and the power
OF appropriation being in Congress, and
not in tho people of the District of Co.
lumbia. it 10 clear that the taxes might
be increased to meet increased appro-
priations so as to save the national
Treasury from contributing, until those
taxes reached the point of conf1scation.
Advocates OF tho abolition of the half
posed this very thing. On false assump-
tons they claimed. in 1912, that the
real property in the District should be
assessed at $744.000,0OO and that the
real and personal property should be
assessed at $933.000.O0O. This is, of
course preposterous, as a glance at the
census bulletin on cities for 1913 shows.
New York. Philadelphia and Boston are
tho only cities there reported as hav-
Ing to ss3s.o00.000. and those three and
Pittsburgh are the only ones reported
as having moro than STA, 90, 900 in real
property. Chicago, ST. Louis, Cleveland.
Baltimore, Pittsburgh. Detroit, Buffalo,
San Francisco, Los Angeles, Milwau-
kee. Cincinnati. Newark and New Or
leans are cities of greater population
and wealth than Washington, which
are reported as ihaa hay, much less total
'"The high 1915 assessment of real
property in the District Of Columbia
an over-assessment as we claim
amounts to $500. 098.s4s We shall show
that Is 1909 per cent Of the true value
as to over thirty-four millions actual
sales reported by the assessor. which