Evening star., 1924-05-01

misc law of 1922 coupled with the
imposition of new and heavier tax
burdens upon the Capital the vitality
important offsetting benefit of re-
tention of the principle of definite,
proportionate contribution, the Dis
trictS safeguard against excessive
and unjust taxation by a taxing body
in which it is not represented. This
bill deprives the District of the only
feature of the compromise law OF
1922, which is clearly advantageous
to the people of the Capital.
The vital feature of the act of 1922.
carried over from the act of 1873, is
that it fixes definite equitabl de
standard of national participation in
Capital making, related to the con-
tNbution cxacted In taxes from the
leave this standard to the shiftings
of caprice.
From 1900 to 1S74-s the national
and local Capital contributions were
indefinite and unrelated. Each con-
tributed what ii pleased toward Cap
ltal upbuilding. The aation meas
ured it's own obligations in terms of
dollars as next to nothing. The local
community raised and disbursed its
own taxes at it's pleasure. 1t meas
ured it's Capital obligation consider
ably beyond the limits of its meager
taxable resources. and twice became
practically bankrupt in performing
almost unaided the nations task of
Capital building.
In 1873 the nation confessed it's
violation or gross neglect of its
Capital obligation. 1t gave practical
expression to its revived sense OF
this obligation in it's undertaking to
pay one-half the accumulated funded
Indebtedness of the District and one
half of future expenses. 1t took
frif f
taxation and assumed completely eN-
ercise of the right to fix the local
contribution as well as its own. In
thus exercising. taxation without
represe ntn ntion over the District the
nation safeEuarded the national COM
munity by the pledge that to every
dollar collected i'm taxes from the
local taxpayers should be added n
dollar from the national Treasury,
and that the agsreEate revenue
building. This provision protected
the District from excessive taxation
| by causing a taxgatherer, alien To
the unrepreSented District, to appro-
pirate from his own Treasury for the
Districts benefit every time he ap-
propriated from the Districts tax
| revenue. Every dollar he took under
the tax power from the local com
munity increased .correspondingly his
| own Capital contribution.
The law OF 1922 retains the prin-
ciple of definite related Capital con
| tributions, in which the law of 1873
| was rooted. That the ratio Of this
relation was changed from $3.50 to
! 60-40 did not alter the basic prln-
| ciple involved.
The pending proposition destroys
| all relation between the national and
local contributions. and. leaving NIL
tnxing power in the hands of the
| United States. deprives the unrepre-
! sented Capital of it's safeguard
| against excessive taxation by n tax
ing body in which 1t Is not repre-
sented.
| 5. 1t destroys the fiscal peace set.
tIement promised by the new organic
act.
To raise now the issue of a lump
sum payment substitute for definite
| proportionate contribution by the ma
| ton is to reopen the fiscal relations
peace settlement Of June 90. 1922, and
| TO plunge the House and Senate into
! the old. weariSome wrangle, SO hurt
| full to the District, over the issue OF
| definite or indefinite proportionate
contribution toward Capital upbuild
| ing and over the ratio (50-50 or 60-4O)
| of definite proportionate contribu-
| ton.
The avowed purpose and promised
result of the new law was 10 bring to
! House and Senate and people of the
! District a period of wholesome and
| refreshing rest from fiscal relations
| controversy. II the act of 1922 is
! left for few years to work out its
| yindication on it's merits or its failure
! on it's demerits this needed rest will
| be secured. If the old controversy
| over definite proportionate contribu-
! tion is to be renewed by compulsory