Evening star., 1916-08-04
House Provides for Joint Con-
sideration of Measure With
Senate Members.
LONG, TANGLED SESSION
OF SWAPPING, PROSPECT
Lower Chamber Representatives En-.
ter Discussion Uninstructed on
Many Important Points.

The District of Columbia ap-
preparation bill was sent to con-
ference by the House of Repre-
sentatives today shortly after the
measure had been received with
the numerous Senate amend
ments which change materially
the character of the original
House bill.
| The conferees appointed by the
Speaker for the House are Representa-
| tives Page. McAndrews and Davis.
| Representative Page, chairman of the
subcommittee in charge of the bill in
the House. asked unanimous consent
that the Senate amendments be dis
agreed to and that a conference with
the Senate should be requested No
vote was taken to show the House at
titude on any of the Senate additions
and changes. The conferees of the
House will therefore enter into nego-
tiations with the conferees of the Sen
principle. the intangible property tax.
the hospital site matter and the other
important Senate changes.
Expects Bill to Come Back.
| Representative Anderson of Minnesota
asked Representative Page whether he did
not believe the House should be given an
opportunity to vote on the Senate amend
ment taxing intangible personal property.
Representative Page. in replying. indicat-
ed his belief that the bill would be seen
again in the House because the conferees
would be unable to agree and be practi-
cally promised the House an opportunity
to vote on the intangible property tax
| DO you not think the bill will be back
here several time?" asked Representative
Mann of Illinois.
Il do said Representative Page with a
smile
| The conversation points to a long and
| tangled series Of conferences between
| Senate and House.
Before the House met today commit
tee OF bankers composed of Hunter H. Nc
| Kee, Robert N. Harper and William T
dailiher called on Representative Page to
ask for hearing on the intangible prop
erty tax amendment. At that time Rep
resentative Page believed a separate vote
would be demanded by the House on the
amendment and he told the bankers he
believed the House would instruct him af
firmatively.
Bill Radically Changed.
The members Of the subcommittee Of
the House who drafted the original
District bill had to look twice at the
measure when they learned 1t had been
completed by the Senate They recoe-
nized only a few passages in the docu-
ment. and the revised Senate total of
s13,S2S.73 is so much larger than
the House total as to create a stir in
the House. However. it can be said
that the appropriations committee
members rather expected the Senate to
increase the bill, and had the Senate
retained the items for the purchase Of
the Dean tract and other parks the
House conferees would have pursued a
line Of action somewhat different from
that which will have to be pursued now
in conference. This is true because of
the fact that the more differences there
are between Senate and House bills the
more cards the conferees have to play
with-the easier the trading and log
rolling. The big and important provi-
sion, the retention of the ha1f-and- half
plan, will be played for by the con-
ferees in a series of compromises and
trades in which the other items of ap-
preparation and legislation are used.
1t is folly to attempt to predict what
the House will do on the half f-and-half
provision. There are members whose
position on the subject is well known
but it was pointed out today by mem
Der of the House that there has never
been a bitter fight-to- the last ditch on
the half -and-half in the House That is.
in previous fights on this vital subject
there always has entered a compromis-
ing element of some sort.
Tug of War Now Exists.
At the last session. just as fight to
the finish and a record vote on the
half-and-half direct was about to be
taken, the Underwood resolution was
adopted. and a joint select committee
was appointed to get the facts in the
case between the District and the,
United States. Now the House has re-
jected the findings of the committee,
and in the District appropriation bill
rejected the half-and- half principle of
appropriation fatty. The Senate spurns
the House. and restores the half-and-
half Between the two there is di-
rect and straightaway tug of war.
1t is understood that the House con-
ferees will not swallow the provision
to tax intangible personal property
without a struggle. What they fear is
being instructed by the House to accept
the Senate amendment on that subject,
although to have such instructions
would make their task with the Senate
conferees easier. 1t would take away
all chance of argument. They would
simply say: The House instructs us to
accept this One of the appropria-
tions committee members said today:
How do we know whether four mills
is a proper tax rate on intangible per-
| sonai property? This is a subject into
| which we should go with great care
and deliberations and not tack it hur-
Pension Sentiment Divided.
On the firemen and police pension
| amendment the House seems to be in
| confusion. The District committee of
the House has been struggling with
| the matter all this session and has pro-
duced nothing as yet, although a sub
| committee to which the bill was in
| trusted reports progress" Some mem