Evening star., 1924-05-02
on or before the first Monday in jan

on or before the first Monday in jan
Representative chindbIoom insisted
that Congress ought to maintain the
present law for the five-year period
agreed upon in 1922, under~which the
District was to build up fund which
would put 1t on a cash-paying basis.
he said be Thought this was as fair
an arrangement as can possibly be
made an the present time until the
proper committee Of Congress, or some
special committee, has had an OPP
portunity TO investigate the whole
subject OF relations between the Dis
trsct and federal government, and is in
some permanent policy.
Would Benefit Capital.
That would be statesmanlike: that
would be businesslike;, that would be
TOR the benefit of both the federal
government and the District Of CO.
lumbia, the Federal CITY," Representa-
tive ChindnIoom said
In presenting his argument Repre-
sentative Chindbloom spoke as fol-
lows:
II want to say to the committee e
that think this House ought to Leg
permanently upon this subject Every
year since I have been here this
question of the apportionpent OF the
appropriations for the District be-
tween the federal government and
the, District of Columbia has come up
during the consideration OF the ap-
propriatton bill, and every year the
question OF the tax rate in the Dis
trict OF Columbia has been discussed
IN connection with the appropriation
DILL THOSE subjects do not belons
mere. In my opinion. the proper COM
mfttee should frame and report to the
Rouse permanent law or a proposal
Lor permanent law to establish the
hscal relations between the feedral
government and the District of Co.
lumbia.
.Denouncea TiAkering.
AT this particular time 1 want to
voice my protest against any further
| tnkertng with this matter. I do not
take the position that seems to have
been taken BY some gentlemen. name
~. that we made a contract with the
. district OF Columbia in 1922. but I do
say tnat we adopted provision in the
District bill for 1922 which was in
tended to be in force for five years
The debate upon that bill will show II
and the language of the bill itseli
shows the intent that that arrange
ment should continue for five years
The arrangement began as follows
That annually from and after July
1922 Annually; not for the years
1923. 1924 or 1925. but annually each
year. so per. cent of the expense
should be paid by the District Of Co
iumbia and 40 per cent out of appro-
priations by the federal government
Then the act went on to say that the
taxes collected in the District of Co.
fumbia should be levied upon the full
value of all property for a period OF
hve years. naming the years 1928, 1924
1925, 1895 and 1927. in order that the
District of Columbia might, during
those five years. place itself upon a
cash paying basis, and so il might
catch up with tho deficiency which il
was having annually.
I'VE did this in 1922; let US stay put
some time: let US stand by our own
legislation some time, and let US give
the District a chance for the five-year
period we fixed. But every year, in
connection with the appropriation
bill. we bring in this legislation. be-
cause whatever may have been the
technical ruling-and / have no doubt
the technical ruling was correct upon
the point of order-the fact Is that
this is legislation. and every year
when we go to make up the appro-
priations for the District we try to es-
tablish the fiscal relations between
the federal government and the Dis
trict Of Columbia on some new basis
But say: Let US maintain the pres