Evening star., 1922-01-12

consideration proposals for the
settlement of the ShantuAg rail-
Hughes and MIR. Balfour, and that
they will consult their home gov
ernments regarding them.
peared at the judiciary committee
hearing last january lis perfunctory
the matter can be tested by summon
ing or inviting these men and women
TO speak for themselves at this hear
ing. They would respond, l am sure,
with enthusia SIN"
What the F9refashers Planned.
Passing to Another phase OF the
question Mr.. Noyes discussed the pur-
poses of the Constitution makers in
their adoption OF the exclusive legis-
lation provision. noting that it had
been urged that 1t was not their in
tentiOn that future residents Of the
federal District should ever partici-
pate in the national government: that
their political status is Interchangeable.
their political impotency forever in
durable: that their voteless un-Amer-
lean condition was voluntarily ac-
cepted by them more than century
ago. and is not therefore through all
eternity TO becom- 1t any time rea-
sonable subject OF complaint.
Are We forbidden by loyalty to the
venerated forefathers." asked Mr..
Noyes. ito contemplate change in the
political status of District resident
by the declaration that the Washing
tonian's condition was unalterabIy ffx-
ed at the beginning and that what
he was after the Maryland cession he
Is now and ever shall be?
Surrender Only for a Tiaae.
No., he answered. the century old
surrender of the American birthright
of national representation was only
for time and not for all time. Doubt
less the fOrefathers intended that Con =
Rress should for the nation control
the National Capital forever, or MS
long az the republic endures: but
clearly they had no intention of bar
ring the District forever from being
a part of the nation politically. and
from participating in Congress and the
national government which is to ex.
ercise this exclusive control"
Mr.. Soyes went on to note that the
Marylanders and Virginians original
ly marooned in the District were too
few in numbers to be represented on
a state footing in Congress as sepa- :
rate community. and having lost their
rights as Marylanders and Virx:nians
they were never for -fourths Of
IA century In a position of population
and resources to ask consideration as
distinct community. But the Constf-
tuition does not prohibit such request.
or favorable response to it. when
changing and changed conditions
justify it.
Quoting from the debates on the
subject In the constitutional conyen-
tion. and from the opinions of early
writer's on the question. MIR. Noyes
concluded:
What George Washington Planned.
Perhaps the forefathers and CAPT
tai founders may appropriately be
typified for the purposes of this dis
cussion by George Washington. What
did the father OF his country. and the
father also OF the nations city, have
in mind in respect to the Natione
Capital and the people who should
live in it? Was the nations city to
be limited in area to the ground alb
solutely necessary for the public
buildings and the governmental activ-
tiles? No. As the federal district
the Constitution permitted. SO in re-
spect to the area OF the nations city
George Washington suggested in one
Of his letters that the capital Of the
United States should be as much
larger than Philadelpnia as the
United states is larger than Penn.
WAS this extensive city to be de-
voted solely to governmental activf-
ties? No. Washington was located
on its Potomac site and a canal con-
Meeting the Potomac with tributaries
of the Ohio was projected and built
In the expectation that the new city
would become the greatest CONNER
cial emporium Of the country
WAS this extensive capital area to
be uninhab bited except by temporary
government employees. by those cater
ing to their needs. and by other tran
sients? No. In 1895 Washington said
capital that a century hence il the
country Kept united the capital would
be, though not as large as London,
|yet of magnitude inferior to few
others (cities) in Europe
WAS this great population, peopling
an extensive and magnificently plan
ned city, with its broad streets and
avenues. its parks and its numerous
and imposing public Buildings. to be
un-American In status and politically
alien? Who believes 1t? Who by any
stretch of the Imagination can con-
ceive 1t?
The Fssader's Ideal.
"WashingtoA's idea was that the
capital should be a federal city, de-
veloped by the nation and subject to
its control. but 1t was not his idea
that 1t should be without people, or
that its people should be politically
defective and delinquent Americans.
Its grand framework indicates the ex-
pectation Of q large population.
Washington's Imagination covered
the fair fields and wooded hills Of his
namesake city with the homes OF a
numerous, busy and happy people, a
people not aliens politically and less
than aliens judicially. but clothed
with all American rights not abso-
lutely inconsistent with the fostering
control by the nation of the nations
capital.
George washington's magnificent
material city, with It's parks. avenues,
buildings and monuments, 10 develop
ing before our eyes. But the nation
has not correspondingly developed on
American and equitable lines the po-
litical and judicial status Of the peo-
pie who live In the material city. Our
constitutional amendment cofrecta
this omission and remedies this neg
lect."