Evening star., 1922-02-01
PLEAFOR CONDUIT
IND. c. ST|RS HOUSE
Representative Ben Johnson
Makes Deep Impression in
Fiqht for District Needs.

UQNNo SVVP "ssFs S
Fight for District Needs.
1nsistence that to safeguard the
army of government workers anu
government business from a water
famine at any time that the ntt!-
nine-year-old conduit might break
new conduit must be built from Great
Falls to the District line. was mace
on the floor of the House late yester-
day by Representative Ben Johnson
of Kentucky.
Equally forceful demands ana ap-
peals to national pride for adequate
provision for much needed street
building and improvement were aiso
made by Representative Johnson. Inls
speech made profound impression on
the House. especially because OF tne
fact that Representative Johnson,
now a member of the subcomHilsee
on District appropriations, was LOT
eight years chairman of the lesiSla-
tive committee on the District ana as
such gained a reputation for antaso-
nism to many projects generally con
sidered to be of advantage 10 the
District. Being recognized as long
time foe of the District, his Appeals
to Congress for adequate funds at
this time to meet drastic needs came
with particular force.
That he has not changed his attl-
tude regarding the fiscal relations be
tween the federal government and the
District taxpayers was repeatedly
shown during his speech. He discuss
ed at length the new controversy over
the sinking fund and the bonded IN
debtedness, caused by shifting from
the $3.50 proportion to the new pro
ha
eral Treasury and the District rev.
enues in meeting the expenses of keep
ing the National Capital going con-
Germ.
New supply Vital
For some time past l have believed
that an additional water supply for
the District of Columbia should be
looked to-" said Representative John
son. He argued that the city has
never consumed the full capacity or
the existing conduit. built fifty-nine
years ago, but that still there ought
TO be an additional conduit built, so
that if anything should happen to the
present conduit the great army OF en-
ployes who are here should not be de-
prived of water, that the people who
are not in the government employ
should not be deprived and that pun.
lie work should not cease because OF
.ao possible breakage of the conduit.
the Knickerbocker calamity as an il
Iustration of how the unexpected may
happen at any time. and SAID: for
that reason, I advocate the building
of another conduit from Great Fails
to the District line"
In discussing the sinking fund and
answering the criticism that Con-
gress is breaking faith with the hold
ers of the 3.65 bonds by not contln-
uing to pay them on the basis or
$3.50, which was the fiscal proper
ton when the bonds were issued.
but on the 60-40 proportion now IN
operation. Representative johnson
quoted the act Is saying by proper
proportional appropriation. He eX-
planned his attitude as follows:
"5O-5O" Not Sacred.
"If Congress considers the proper
proportion to be 60-4O. then the law
which authorizes these bonds has
been complied with and no one can
he hurt. If the bondholder gets his
money. dollar for dollar. with ac-
crued interest. what right has he to
complain? Absolutely none. Yet
here comes the local press of the
District of Columbia admitting that.
Notwithstanding the fact that other
items could be legitimately paid on
the basis of 6O-4O. yet this item must
be paid by the proportion Of $3.50 to
be in accordance with the law, when.
as I have just read from the act. no
certain proportion was then estab-
lished.
THE $3.50 basis, about which you
have heard so much. has never been
sacred. No proportion has ever been
established by Congress that Con-
gress, in it's wisdom. might not
change. When the $3.50 plan of 1878
was before this body for adoption
this House did not at first pass it
at $3.50. AS matter of fact. it came
very nearly passing it at rs per cent
to be paid by the District of Column
bia and 25 per cent to be paid by the
national government. Finally it was
passed on exactly the basis now OBJ
tanning, 60-40. When the matter went
to the Senate. that body changed it
TO $3.50. and the conferees arrived
at settlement of the matter by es-
tablishing the proportion at $3.50"
History Of Bonds.
Representative Johnson reviewed
the history of the bonds and claimed
that approximately three-quarters of
a million dollars have been paid in
excess of the face value and accrued
interest on these bonds" Provision is
made in this bill. he explained. ap-
propriating 100000 for interest and
sinking fund for the purpose of re-
firing more of these 3.65 bonds. They
Will be due in 1924. The committee
has seen fit to follow the plan that
relates to the proportion as between
the national government and the Dis
trict of Columbia and has placed the
retirement of these bonds on the
60-40 basis, like the other appropri-
atoms are made. and have under
taken to stop the retirement of them
at $3.50, he said.
In answering an inquiry from the
minority leader. Representative Finis
j. Garrett of Tennessee. as to how
these bonds were retired at a pre-
mium, and to Representative Dayis
of Minnesota, chairman of the sub
committee. that heretofore the ap-
preparation for retiring these bonds
has been s975,O0O per annum, and
that this is the first time it has drop-
ped to 100000, Representative John
son said:
EVERY year Congress appropriates
a sum of money with which to retire
the 3.65 bonds. The bonds mature in
1924, and now nearly all of them
have been retired through this sink
ing fund plan.
When the holder of any of these
bonds wants money or an unlawful
profit he goes to the treasurer of
the United States. and under a
precedent wrongfully and illegally
established years ago by his prede-
cessors this man is paid 1O5 or log
or LOT for every dollars worth of
these bonds, together with accrued
interest. AS has just been suggested
by the gentleman from Minnesota,
there is limitation in the bill re-
peating the law that none of the
100000 shall be used to retire any