Evening star., 1921-05-04

letter today by Henry B. F. Maefar-
land, former District Commissioner
| and chairman Of the joint citizens
committee on fiscal relations between
the United States and the District
of Columbia. that Mr.. Focht was
| misinformed as to the law and the
! facts when he gave an interview
! stating that the surplus of nearly
s5.o00.0O0 to the credit of the Dis
| trict taxpayers in the federal Treas
ury was a myth" and "non-eX-
istent" and had been wiped of the
| books"
Mr.. Macfarland's Letter.
| Writing as the representative Of
all the civic organizations in the Dis
t1ict' opposed to any use of this sur. qa.
which it was collected in taxes from
the residents of the National Capt.
tai. on which the federal government
has no claim except to match dollar
! for dollar in expenditures for the
! development and upkeep of the capl-
| tai. Mr.. Macfarland says.
Il have observed with the greatest
| interest the intimations in the news
papers that you have been informed
| by some one that the so-called sur
| plus of the District revenues in the
| national Treasury might be treated
| as national revenue, to be used Tor
| national purposes and not preserved
and used for local purposes. l am
| confident that upon examination OF
| the law and the facts you will see
| that you have been wrongly Informed
| on this vital question. which is the
| important one of the hour.
! Act OF June IL. 1S7A
| 1.-The so-called surplus is. of course,
| not surplus. but simply Accommodations
unexpended because of the failure to
appropriate particularly for large
| purposes like the school buildings
| and increased water supply. and gen.
| orally to the slowing-up in municipal
| progress during the war. amounting
| to something like $5.0G0,O00. and the
main thing is to insist upon its use
| according to the law, namely, the act
| of June II. 1878. which is. of course.
| unrepealed and in full force. 1t was
| under that act, and only that act,
| that the taxes were levied WHICH pro-
| duced this unexpended revenue. and,
| of course, the law calls for matching
| of that unexpended revenue with an
equal amount from the United States
| Treasury.
"All the civic organizations of the
! District of Columbia are united in
| this so-called surplus for any pur-
pose whatever except the municipal
| expenditures for which it was levied.
and in any manner whatever except
under the terms or the act OF June
| II. 1878.
"The legal status of the so-called
! surplus and of all other tax rev.
enues Of the District of Columbia
| is that of any other municipal tax
| revenues Our people pay national
high per capita amounD, and they
also pay local taxes: The latter are
| what we are talking about when
we speak of the surplus. OF course.
any surplus Is due only to lack OF
appropriation and is contrary to the
II, 1873, which does not contemplate
that District revenue shall be raised
beyond what is necessary to meet
the Districts one-half of appropria-
tions. But in no event under the
Constitution of the United States
could one dollar of District tax
money be used for national purposes
without a plain violation Of the
spirit and letter Of the law.
Select Committee Hearing.
"All this was threshed out fully
before the joint select committee OF
Congress in 1915. in their three
weeks inquiry into the District fiscal
affairs. Our joint citizens commit
tee presented very fully tho facts
and the law and members Of the
Joint select committee were satisfied
that our contention was right. AL
though certain individuals had urged
upon tho joint select committee that
District tax revenues could be used
for national or any other purpose
in the absolute discretion and power
Of Congress. the committee in it's re-
port ignored this contention and the
entire report proceeds upon the
theory for which we had contended
Il shall be glad IL you will send fol
Senate document No. PAT, Sixty-fourth
Congress. first session, and read the
report Of the hearing, the citations
and the argument which we pre-
sented.
by Col. A. S. Worthington, leader OF
the District bar, a member OF your
committee, who prepared and pre-.
sented it with his accustomed thor.
oughness and cogency.
1T 80 happened that two of the
then Commissioners of the District OF
Columbia we're opposed to our con.
tention and presented their argu'
ments as strongly as possible. &c
that the fact that the joint select
committee ignored their claim wal
very significant.
ma 1 call your attention pa-ticu-
larIy to two passages in the report OF
the hearing contained in Senate docu.
ment 247, Sixty-fourth Congress. frs
session: First, from the closing
statement of Col Worthington. pages
1715 and 1716, and second. in my owr
closing statement. pages 1862 te
1867, inclusive.
tunity at your convenience to talk
this m after over with Won in more de.