Evening star., 1922-01-31

How did the forefathers who wefe
the conten,pcraneous defenders OF the
new Constitution interpret the exclu-
sive legislation provision in it's bear
prospective. OF residents of the federal
District? What was their intent In
respect to the future Inhabitants of
the seat of government? Hamilton.
Madison and Jay in the Federalist
analyze minutely and defend ably and
brilliantly the provisions of the new
Constitution. In No. AZ of the Fed
the rights Of the people Of the seat of
government under the exclusive lesis-
latfon clause:
"And as it (the federal District) Is
to be appropriated to this use with
the consent of the state cedinE II;
as the state@will no doubt rroviae ID
consent Of the citizens inhabiting II:
as the inhabitants will find sufficient
inducements Of interest to become
willing parties to the cession: aasthey
will have had their voice In the elee-
tfOn Of the government syhich 70
municipal legislature for local pur-
poses, derived from their own sui.
frages, will. Of cOurse. be allowed
them, and as the authority OF the
legislature Of the state and OF the
inhabitants Of the ceded part OF II to
concpr in the cesslon WI, ,s oe s,s,s uet,ssn 10
their adoption of the Constitution
every Imaginable objection seems to
be obviated."
, Madison does not treat the residents
Of the federal District as deprived OF
American rights. He suggests I'd
that the cedtng states will In the
compact safeguard these rights, Just
NJ the states did in ceding western
territory and a. France did In cedisg
Louisiana, t2) that the Inhabitants
ut the time Of cession Will have had
their voice in the election OF their
national government. and (S) that
they will, OF course. have their own
municipal legislature for local pur.
poses.
Madison's idea was that the com.
munity should have a local elected
legislature, and 1t did have q shadowy
Imitation of municipal self-govern-
ment for nearly three-quarsers OF
century In the beginning the ma
tion had no great property interests
control the local government IN self
At that time it was the impecunious
partner, the beneficiary OF patriotic
charity. 1t had at the capital only
what was given 1t In jurisdict,oa Ic,a a ana ana
Virginia and tn land by the individual
owners Of the soil. The proceeds OF
sales of part of the lots thus donated
much more than paid the cost OF the
public buildings.
Conditions have changed. The ma
tional government Is now a very large
property owner at the capital and a
halifax payer. It feels that for the
protection Of Its interests 1t must
dominate the local government
Under these changed conditions the
local legislature, which. according to
Madison. would. of course, be granted
to Washlngtonians, has been denied.
The conditions have also changed in
respect to the local community as IN
applicant for representation in Con-
eress and the electoral college. The
feeble population Of the infant cap
ital was denied representation be-
cause these few men were no longer
Marylanders or Virgtnians. and be-
cause they were not in SUFFICIENT num-
bers to entitle them to distinct inde-
pendent representation. 1t was 1ndi.
Gated in a congressional debate In
1900 that the Constitution might be
amended to give them representation
in the general legislature when ,,d;as. their
Madison meets the objection of lack
Of representation by the suggestio1n3 Ton
that in voting the cession they VIII
rave had their voice in the election
Of the government which is to sx.
suggestion applies. however only to to
miles SQUARE who voted for cession
had no voice. as alleged, in the seiec-
ton OF such government-unle:s. in
Geed. the few original Inhabitants,