Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1922-03-01

but in the principal ports Of Europe.
(b) View Of the Judiciary.-How the
community thus built up on the banks
Of the Potomac was regarded from
the judicial point Of view is suffi-
GENTLY indicated by what Chief JUS
tice Marshall said in Hepburn V. Ell
zey e CT. AS, 452). Holding,'wfth
apparent reluctance. that the word
state" IN the special sense In which
the Constitution employed it with ref
erence to controversies between citi-
zens OF different states, did not in
clude the District of Columbia. the
great Chief Justice freely conceded
that Columbia is a distinct political
cording to the definitions of writer's
on general law" Similar recognition
or the District as separate politi-
cal community" possessing an organic
social and political life Of it's own is
to be found in other cases in whic
the Supreme Court has placed the
District for certain purposes In the
same category as the states of the
Union. (Geofroy v. Riggs. 1913 U. S..
26s, 269; Metropolitan r. r. Co. ".
District Of Columbia, 1872 U. s., l. 81
(co Legislative Action.-That the
people of this distinct political So
ciety" were not regarded as a mere
collection of voteless individuals for
ever condemned to political incapacity
and impotence, is shown by the con-
time when it first began to legislate
for the District. While the population
of the infant city, as shown by the
census of 1900. was but insignifca Mt
in numbers. Congress- incorporated the
inha bitants of the new city into a
regular municipality with all the
usual Safeguarding powers. tAct Of
May 3. 1902. . Stat. 1859 The estab-
lished corporations of Georgetown and
Alexandra were continued with the
tYf1 r.lsr 4, tfI hay ho1
lively enjoyed under the laws of
Maryland and Virginia. and the three
municipalities continued in the eX-
=ercise of these rights and powers un-
GINA in lS46. (Act of July 9, 1916. 8
Stat. IS. 10000 And the municipali-
ties Of Washington and Georgetown
were replaced by territorial govern
ment in 1871. During the life of these
municipalities Congress more than
larged the basis of their suffrage.
(Act OF January s.. 1867, IA Stat. 375.)
BY the act of February 81. 1871 G6
Stat, 419), legislative assembly.
gates) elected by the suffrage of the
people, was established for the Dis
trict Of Columbia, and this form of
government continued in operation
until June 90, 1874, when it was re-
placed temporarily by a commission
1874 us Stat. 116). which was estab-
lished in a permanent form, by the
organic act of June II, 1873 GO Stat,
1922. Surely the action of Congress
for period Of nearly seventy years
Is a sufficient refutation of the no.
ton that the people of the District
were regarded as essentially devoid
of political capacity.
Sine Uncertain. Population Negligible.
In considering the course of this
legislation. however. 1t is important
to remember that when the Consii-
tuition was drafted it was by no means
certain that any state would be found
willing to make the needed cession Of
territory for the seat of government.
While in no event could the federal
district be larger than ten miles
square. no one could foreteli how re-
stricted the area might actually be.
When the present location was final
ly decided upon, the population Of
the entire area, including the existing
towns Of Alexandria and Georgetown.
was widely scattered and scanty. And
when a municipal government for the
city of Washington. with suffrage for
I'D by the act Of May 3. 1902 q Stat,
1859. the population of the infant city.
as shown by the census of 1900. was
but 1903.
1t is not strange. under these cir
cumstapces, that no provision was
made either by the trainers Of the
Constitution or by the legislators of
those early days for the place in our
oil
held by the Inhabitants of the federal
district when their population, wealth
and other circumstances should have
raised them to the dignity of sep
arate political community.
In the ordinance of 1887 for the gov
eminent of the Northwest Territory,
Congress had provided for the cree
ton of new states when the popula-
ton Of a defined area should have
reached $4,000 This provision. al
may give US some clue as to the ideas
of the time. 1t serves at least to eX-
plain the failure to provide for the I'LL
innate constitutional status or the
population Of the federal district at
time when the very existence of
such a district was still conjectural.
But it is worthy of note that Madison
in discussing the provision for legts-
lative power over such district had
taken it for granted that "a municipal
from their own suffrage. would. of
course. be allowed" (Federalist ALI1)
And in 1918 President Monroe. in a
message to Congress. drawing atten-
ton to the fact that while Congress
legislated directly on local concerns
Of the District the people had no par
ticipation in the exercise of that
power. proceeded to add
LAS this is departure for special
purpose from the general principles
of our system, it may merit consider
alton whether an arrangement better
adapted to the principles of our gov
eminent and to the particular inter-
ests OF the people may not be devised
which will neither infringe the Con-
stitution nor affect the object which
the provision in question was intend
ed to secure"
National Representation and the
Presidents.
As the District continued to grow
other Presidents. notably Jackson.
Harrison and johnson. drew atten-
ton to the disadvantages under which
the people Of the District suffered by
reason of their inability through po-
litical action to make known their pc
culiar wants and to secure legislation
adapted to them. None of these Pres
idents, however, regarded the exer-
else Of political rights by the people
Of the District as in any wise incom-
patible with the grant to Congress Of
exclusive jurisdiction in the District of
Columbia. In his message to Con-
gress in 1881, President Jackson put
the matter in these terse words:
ut was doubtless wise in the franz
ers of. our Constitution to place the