Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1925-01-24
U. S. HAS NO OFFSET CLAIMS
TO D. c.. TREASURY SURPLUS

eli Vi teCehl years 10 ~
United States for alleged indebted
nesses of the District existing in
1918 should be reimbursed In
| full to the District, and the
| amount should be entered in full rs
| another District credit in the Treasury
account.
The act of 1873 was a settlement
in bankruptcy $50 to speak which
! treated District credits and debts as
roughly balancing, outside of the
specific provisions of the organic
act concerning the funded debt, and
wiped the slate clean of past debts
and credits (21 Controllers Decisions,
4O5 and 406).
Slate Wiped Clean.
Controller Downey, December, 1914
| (21 Controllers Decisions, pages
405-6), says: But perfect fairness
| in the treatment of the question sub
mitted requires the suggestion that
there are plausible grounds for an
| assumption against the present ex-
Istence of any indebtedness because
| of the advances made under the
| authority of the two acts in ques-
| tion. There Is very reasonable
ground for assuming that when Con-
| gress passed the net of 1873, the or
Eanic act, 1T was intended to wipe
the slate clean far rs the ante
cedent period of uncertainty was
concerned and take fresh start.
tween the acts of 1874 and 1878 had
| not been after any determined or
| systematic plan. The necessities of
| the District had been met as circum-
| stances for the time being seemed to
require. The nearest approach to a
| plan seems to be found in an appar-
ent intention to require the applica-
| 81 ,f trIn cfYiR
needs, and to furnish from the Fed
eral Treasury whatever additional
| ght be required. The organic act
| took no account of and made no pro-
vision for the payment of any in
debtedness growing out of the trans
| actions of the preceding four years
| between the Government and the
| District, and that condition was per-
mitted to continue for 35 years.
| . While these conditions may
| in a measure tend to support a con-
tention that the debt IL existent, had
been released, l do not find in them
| justification for so holding.
There are apparent other reasons
| why the matter should be handled
| by Congress, where power lies to do
| what the circumstances of the case
may seem to require. unlimited by
| the necessity of technical construc-
ton Of the fragmentary and un-
| systematic legislation of the period
involved. If there are reasons for
assuming TINT the Congress- which
passed the act of 1873 did not intend
to require an accounting nv 10 ante
cedent transactions there Is now au
| thority in Congress not found else
| where so to conclude and act Then
every equitable consideration, as well
as the cold facts. may properly be
given their full weight and a con-
clusion reached which not only must
! be deemed authorized because with
| authority, but which can be justified
because II is the deliberate con-
clusion of competent men authorized
TO act, inspired only by right mo-
! tives unhnmpered by necessity of
technical construction and DESTROYS
| only of accomplishing right and
| justice"
Moral and Legal Debts.
The law creating this joint congress
| sional committee specifically broadens
| the scope of the committees jurisdic-
| ton to consider whether there Is in
| debtedness by one party to the other
morally as we'll as legally. So that
this tribunal is specifically empowered
| to respond to Controller Downey's
| suggestion that, "unhampered by ne
cessity for technical construction and
DESTROYS only of accomplishing right
| and justice" 1t representing Con-
gress) should as a court of equity ex-
anime thoroughly and thoughtfully
the Districts contention on this point,
| in respect to which Controller Dow
| ney says: "There is very reasonable
| ground for assuming that when Con-
| Eress passed the net of 1873, the or
Eanic act, 1t was intended TO wipe the
| slate clean so far MS the antecedent
period of uncertainty was concerned
and to take n fresh START
| The entire amount of the latter
| day exactions of ancient alleged debts
| from modern taxpayers should be re-
| funded on the ground that the act of
| 1873, as interpreted by contemporary
| Congresses and Presidents and by
| Controller Downey, was in effect a
| settlement in bankruptcy of the past
debts and credits of the District, was
| treated as such by Congress and the
! Treasury Department for many years
| after 1878, and cannot now be treated
| otherwise except in violation of the
spirit of the statute of limitations and
| Of equity.
! Since equitable and moral consid-
| erations are to enter into this ac-
counting by direction of the law itself
the taxpayers of today should be re-
| lieved entirely of any accountability
| for ancient resurrected alleged debts
Such OF these debts as have been
| separated from the general account
| thus closed, and collected 35 or 40
years later from District taxpayers,
| should in equity be repaid in full
Our figures call for reimburse
ment of several million dollars to the
| District under this head.
EQUITIES SURVIVING FROM
PERIOD BEFORE 1874.
If the act of 1873 is not to be treated
| as a settlement. and equities of the
| United States prior to 1878 are to be