Evening star., 1923-02-14
WHAT GREAT NATIONS
DO FOR THEIR CAPITALS

2. Does the nation encourage in
crense OF local taxable resOurcesf
3. Does the nation contribute di.
rectly toward municipal expenses,
either discriminating I'm favor of the
capital In this respect or contributing
tionf
4. Are the people Of the capital rep
resented In the national government
5. Have the people of the capital
amy voice In questions OF local tax
ntiOnf DO they control or participate
In the municipal government
u. In there any special equitable Obli-
CATION upon the nation to maintain
and develop the capital based upon
the circumstances and conditions of
the cfty's creation and early history
or upon peculiar control exercised by
nation over capitalf
For convenience of comparison let
us classify the capitals of the world
in respect to which the committee has
reports in the following groups:
l. Those of republics with capitals
In federal districts in varying de-
grees under national control: Wash
ington, Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro
and Mexico.
2. Those of republics without dis
hnct federal districts Paris and Bern.
B.. Those of the practically self-gov-
erning colonies of Great Britain: OF
tawa. Cape Town, Pretoria and Can
berra.
4. Those of monarchies:
% Or democratic tendencies: Lon
don, Brussels. Copenhagen, Athens,
Rome, Toxic and Christiania.-
CD More strongly centralized: Ber-
lin, Vienna and Budapest.
Applying the questions above stated
TO the capitals thus grouped. the fol-
lowing table results: Table omit
ted.l
Does capital pay national taxes like
other cftfeS nnd does nation spend
literally national money on national
objects Mt capitnIf
1t appears from this table that the
people of every capital, including
washington. pay national taxes, just
as the people of the other cities do,
and that nearly all nations, including
the United States. are liberal in the
expenditure of this national money
on national objects at the national
capital. Some nations have been con-
spicuously lavish in such patriotic
are Argentina, Brazil and France.
which have far surpassed the United
States in this respect. Most nations
have been consistently liberal in the
development of their capitals. Prior
to 1873 the United States was. how
ever, far from liberal in such out
lays.
The fact that the people of the
eual terms with the people of the
United States toward all national
taxes and that it is their money as
much as the money of the people of
any state which is spent in national
development of the nations city and
in the development of unnavigable
creeks into nominally navigable riv-
erS in the states is often overlooked.
1t is sometimes said that the people
of the states contribute about 8 cents
a al
maintenance and development and
that for the same purpose the Wash
ingtonians contribute about $50 apiece
annually. 1t is to be remembered
that the Washingtonian contributes
on both sides of the account. He con-
tributes as much as any other Amer
lean toward the national city devel-
opment 6 cents) and the $50 in addi-
ton.
Nations Capital Obligation.
The expenditure of national money
for the development of the National
Capital is recognized as a proper ma
tiOnal outlay everywhere in the world.
There has been controversy over the
propriety of many forms of national
appropriations-as, for instance, those
for internal developments, roads,
canals, etc.-but no one has ever con-
tended that the capital of nation is
not proper object of the nations
fostering care.
The Washingtonian not only con-
tributes toward all national taxes,
but by reason of the location of his
city and it's conditions he pays heav-
lily.
In a House debate in a former Con-
gress a table was submitted, receiv-
ing serious consideration, which dis
tributed the $6.000,000 paid the year
before by the nation for capital main
to population, and credited each state
as contributing approximately that
amount toward the expenses of the
District. OF course, no such contri-
button is actually made. The differ
ent congressional constituencies from
the different states contributed to the
national taxes in widely varying
amounts. Many constituencies do not
contribute as much to the national
taxes as the District itself does and
many of them contribute only small
fraction of that amount.
The only national taxes that fall
directly and Enthusiastically and in
ascertainable amounts upon Amer
leans are the internal revenue taxes.
including the excise, corporation and
individual income taxes. Washing
ton (s12.791, ,961.65) exceeded in total
contribution in 1913 to these national
Idaho. Mississippi. Montana, Nevada,
New Hampshire. New Mexico, North
Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, South
Dakota, Utah, Vermont and Wyo-
ures of 1918 are here substituted for
the original figures for 1914.]
Large National Taxpayers.
The Washingtonian's per capita
contribution to these national taxes
(S3439) exceeds the per capita of all
the forty eight states of the Union
except ten, the larger contributors
being California. Connecticut, Della
ware. Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland.
Massachusetts. New York, Ohio and
Pennsylvania.
One Washingtonian pays more in
this kind of national taxes than one
Mississippian, one Arkansan. one
South Dakotan, one South Carolinian,
one Idahoite, one Georgian and one
New Mexican combined-Seven state
Americans contributing
altogether less than the per capita
contributed by the Washingtonian
alone.
The Washingtonian contributes to
these national taxes over twelve
times as much as the Mississippian
and the North Dakotan. about nine
times as much as the Arkansan and
South Dakotan, about six times as
much as the South Carolinian, Idaho
ite and New Mexican, and over five
times as much as the Georgian.
He contributes somewhat more than
the citizen of Michigan, Minnesota,
New Jersey, Rhode Island and West |
Virginia, and somewhat less than the !
citizen of California.
The figures above given concerning
national taxation throw light upon
the question whether the average con-
greSSman'S average constituent Is