Evening star., 1921-04-27
A Myth" of Bookkeeping.

the Districts surplus of inappropriate
ed tax money is merely d "bookkeep-
ing myth a myth is something that
never existed This surplus. however.
had at least the substance of original
actuality, in the form of real money
taken from the taxpayers of the Dis
trict and deposited in the Treasury
to await appropriation with an equal
sum in federal money. If that is
myth" then the definition of the
word must he revised.
Many years ago a certain sum of
money representing a ''surplus' of
government funds not Immediately
needed for federal purposes was dis
tributed pro rata among the states
Of the Union. subject to repayment on
demand in certain conditions. That
money has never been repaid and the
total amounts to something like
s2I 100000 Some of the states spent
it on public works. some of them
distributed it among the counties Tor
improvements. In others it was paid
Pi u ot1 " liit IS'iAe an" "N''N -''N'
the private pockets. But, whatever
use has been made of it. it is carried
on the books of the Treasury today,
as a charge against the states. as one
of the federal assets. 4 few years
ago the treasurer of the United States
asked for the cancellation of this item,
but no authority has been given. even
though it is generally recognized-by
those few who are aware of the trans
action-that the debt is a bad one and
might well be wiped off the books.
Even that 1900, 900 of federal loan
to the states is not bookkeeping
myth 1t is valid, equitable liability
of the states for actual cash advanced
on specific terms Of refunding. The
states cannot write it off by acts of
reputation. Only the United States,
the creditor. can canoe. it.
The United States has had the use
of the surplus of District revenues,
amounting now to nearly 100000
for several years without interest. The
money has flowed into the Treasury
from time to time and the only myth"
about it is that it has not been physi-
cally kept apart in the original coins
and bills. but has taken its place in
the general cash of the Treasury. The
Districts dollars awaiting appropria-
ton have been used for government
maintenance. perhaps for war muni-
f,r int
ernment obligations. But it has been
District money all the time, and it is
District money today. in the hands Of
the United States as trustee. 1t cannot
be wiped off the books save by breach
Of trust.
Had the terms of the law under
which this money was taken from the
District taxpayers been strictly OBJ
served. there would have been no sur
plus at any time. for every dollar OF
District money would have been
matched by federal dollar and i'm
mediately spent on local works and
maintenance. But owing to the fact
that Congress for a long period re-
AANSN tAAS oPpi cpi Ao bClo" lhc
point Of the estimates. while confin-
ing the Commissioners to estimates
within the estimated revenues, these
funds accumulated and are today an
asset Of the District. They are surely
not an asset of the United States. They
were taken from the taxpayers of the
District on the pledge of the act OF
1873 that they would be expended,
doubled with United States money, on
the Districts requirements.
II there has been any mythology
about this procedure it has been that
the Congress has made myth OF the
formal obligation entered into in 1878
in the form of a statute which the
courts have called the Districts or
ganic act.