Evening star., 1926-05-28
MILLIONS IN TAXES
HELD OWED TO D. c.
Corporation Counsel Tells
Gibson Subcommittee of
Delinquent Corporations.

elsnt large corporations, some OF i
for is years, and there Ia no pressur'
through the courts for it's payment
Corporation Counsel Francis II. Ste
phens declared under crOss.exam nina
ton by members OF the Gibson sub
committee OF the House District com
mittee investigating the administra
ION Of municipal affairs In the caucus
room of the House Office Building
last night.
The list Of Indebtedness includes
the following:
More than 1861 900 In taxes by th'
Washington Terminal GO. whose &c
cunt runs back to 1910, the George
own Gas Light Co., the Washington
Gas Light Co., the Baltimore ant
Ohio Railroad and the Potomac Elec
tric Power co. (since 1910.
For lighting, approximately $l5O,OO'
by the Washington Terminal Go.
$7U.034, and by the Philadelphia. Hal
timore and Washington Railway 60.
T1.234.
In tunnl cases. First street north
east. 500. 900 divided among the CAPT
tai Traction Co., Washington Railway
\ Electric CO., the Pennsylvania Rail
road. the Washington Terminal Co.
and the Philadelphia, Baltimore 4
Washington Go.
Railroads Owe Money.
For one-half the costs Of the Ben
ming Viaduct and bridge, $4,000
assessed against the Pennsylvan nis
Railroad and the Baltimore 4 Ohio
Railroad.
Some of these items have been In
litigation for IA years, and the Cor
poration Counsel said candidly that
this was sorry spectacle" was not
fair to the taXpaying public. when
private owners were sold out for non
payment of taxes and forced to pay
IL per cent and costs to recover their
property. The Corporation Counsel
,houlder~d all the blame.
Representative Gilbert, Democrat
Of Kentucky. who was the principe
questioner on these items empha sized
that the District not only allows the
Washington Terminal Co. to hold out
on paying taxes for l6 years but alsO
has paid its light bill for II years. and
does not try to collect II.
Both Mr.. Gilbert and Chairma n
Gibson repeatedly stated that they
were sincerely trying to remedy the
situation and do not hold the Corpora
tion Counsel wholly to blame. feeling
that II In too much to expect a t6.O0e
year man to fight In court the array
Of astute and highly paid lawyers rep
resentfng these corporations.
Representative Blanton, Democrat
of Texas. pointed out 10 cases as the
only cases in litigation between thu
District and corporations In which
action has been taken. and some ol
these involved as high as $67 .060 and
resulted In the ease being dismissed. >
go that the District really lost and
WAS put to the expense of court
costs. he said.
BiantOn VOie~s View.
Mr.. Blanton insisted that what was
really needed was a first -class law :
Yer In the corporation connxers
Office to push these claims.
The corpora ton counsel said he
had eight assistants, has been In the
corporation counsers Offic~ for ~
wears and for wears has been head
of the law department uf the Dis
trict government. lie now receives
$4,000 for handling all the legal work
of the District. including service as
attorney for the Public Utilities
Commission. lie submitted list
Of all the cases pending, and gave
history OF some Of them. lie "a Id
he comes directly under the admin
istratiOn of Commissioner Rudolph
Mr. Gilbert questioned the cor
pOration counsel regarding the opin-
ion he had written that Mr.. Rudolph s
connection with the hardware hrm OF
Rudolph 4 West did not dis
qualify" him TO be Commissioner. He
asked II since Mr.. Rudolph owns
more than a third interest in this
concern paying 20 per cent divi-
dends and sharing In $1,000 worth
of business with the District. he had
been asked for An opinion whether
1t would be valid for him to take
his one third share Of those prOhts,
and Mr.. stephens said he had not.
Mr.. stephens agreed with MIR. Gil
bert. Mr.. Gibson and Mr. Blanton that
these cases. In which the big public
service corporations owe the District
very large sums Of money, had been
In court too long.
Warns Against Compromise.
Repeatedly Mr.. Gilbert advised this
counsel that he should not
Oh any Of these cases-
that either the money was owed TO
the public fund or 1t wasn't, and this
should he settled by tribunal in fair
ness to the taxpaying public.
Mr.. Gilbert also drew from the cor.
poration counsel that he had advised
the Commissioners that they might
use q little administrative discretion
at the outset of enforcing the Gilbert
social disease bill" BY administrative
order the Commissioners instructed
Lot "A
of this measure passed by Congress
need not he enforced. Mr.. Gilbert said
that such considerations ought to ad'
dress themselves to the intelligence of
Congress rather than to the opinion of
a corporation counsel, and MIR. Steph.
ems agreed that should be done "On
He argued. however. that
"if the law II unpopular to start. a
strict enforcement might have the ef-
feet of multiplying the law"
Mr.. Stephens agreed to submit to
the Gibson subcommittee his recon-
mendati tions for femedying the situa-
tion in the form OF Legislative meas
ures He advocated removal of the
District from the statute Of limitations
with regard to its claims against cor
He also explained the DIFF
ficulty he had In retaining trained as
sistants. and advocated q special as
sistant at a salary OF 5000 to start,
who would specialize on eminent do.
main Or condemnation cases.
Mr.. Gilbert read q letter from a
former service man in Norfolk to u.
lustrate the difference in treatment At
private property owners and corpOr-
ations in arrears for taxes. This ma n
wrote that the had to pay as much as
100 per cent penalty for tax delin-
the New York State concern that had
taken over the property under back
tax sale. Mr.. Gilbert displayed a book
Of $40 pa ges. containing 10000 items.
printed at a cost Of nearly $1,000, and
only Il OF which had been sold-stat.
ing that II a man could hunt through
that and find his property listed 1t was
the only notice he had that he was to
he sold out for nOn-payment of taxes.
\ L. -