Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1928-01-24


should relieve the people of the Dis
trict from this discrimination and sh,
urged that this was matter which
Congress could dispose of quickly
MIR. Lesh referred the committee t.
the carefully prepared testimony he
had previously given In printed hear
ings. saying in reply to questions tina
he stood firmly upon it.
He discussed the question from thu
national viewpoint. saying that thu
power of the National Government Il
increasing faster than that of tn,
government of States. so that the Ma
tional Government is of growing i'm
portance daily to individual citizen
and Just as important to the citizen;
of the District as to citizens elsewhere.
He explained the objection as to VIII!
this right was not given to the people
here originally by explaining that con
ditions then were different and that II
the District of Columbia at that time
there were not enough citizens to en-
title them TO even one representative In
Congress. He discussed the objection
that the people here should be Olsen.
franchised on account of the coloreo
population by showing that the percent
age here is about the same as in tn:
Maryland belt and that Washington
should not be disenfranchised for that
reason unless Baltimore also was olsen
franchised on account of its colored
population.
Answers Objections.
Henry II. Classic answered the three
general lines of objection that seemed
to be in the minds of members of the
committee. First. that the Government
should be supreme in the District OF
Columbia He said that this was I'M
questioned. but argued that Congress
would have the same exclusive right IN
all cases as it had before. If national
that was all that the founding fathers
wanted
This means one Legislature. one SOW
ereignty. one law" said MFR. Glassie
and it has nothing to do with the
composition of the legislative BODY"
The second objection. he pointed out
is that we are not quite open and are
stultify:ng the American principle by
not claiming the right of local suf-
frage.'
1T was for participation in that SOW
ereign. imperial parliament that made
the law. Local government NAV be
nothing other than local administra-
ton. Self-government is that in which
those who obey the laws shall have a
share in making the laws.
We are asking for local self-govern-
ment when We ask for participation in
the law-making body. because Congress
always must be sovereign and retain
exclusive jurisdiction over municipal af-
fairs in the National Capital. We do
want Self-government, and the essence
of that is to send some man from the
community into the legislative repre-
sentative body that can send you to
war. can tax your property, administer
your estate and control your domestic
relations
These are all things that make the
Government touch intimately the life
OF the community which you cherish
IN your home States and which you
will never surrender.
Automatic Right
The moral right to participate in
Governments is automatic" said Mr..
Classic in discussing the third objec-
ton as to why the people of the Dis
trict are merely asking that Congress be
given authority to say at some future
date That the District is entitled TO
National representation. The time. the
condition OF preparedness are all ques-
tons OF facts that must be left to the
recognition of the fundamental right
to participation in Government. leav-
ing to the constituted authority TO de-
termine when that right may be exer-
cised"
He pointed out that the admittance
Of States into the Union is an example
Of determination as to when large Sec
tons of the country are ready for SIM
liar admittance to National represents
ton.
As a fourth and subordinate OBJ
lection. MT. Classic discussed the prob
lem of where a number of persons now
resident II. Washington still maintain
tie voting right in various States. He
this as taper allegiance"
arguing that those who for many years
have lived away from these commune
ties In the States really have no right
TO participate in the making Of laws for
people of those communities in which
they are not really part, having set
up their domicile here. But he argued
that even in removing this block Of cit
liens in the District. Congress has no
right to deny the franchise TO others
born here In the District. who cannot
have the voting right in some State.
and must be granted 1t here or no
where
A statistical and historical review OF
the status Of the District was presented
by MI Brsndenburg
He declared the purpose OF the reso-
luton was ito remove the anomaly OF
NJ IA
the purpose of paying taxes and obey
ing its laws. but not for the purpose OF
voting upon the laws TO raise such
taxes"
Agitated Since 1918.
This condition. he pointed out, has
been recognized and discussed by several
Presidents in their messages 10 Con-
gress. starting with James Monroe IN
1918 This was followed by Andrew
Jackson In 1880 and by William Henry
Harrison In 1871. The citizens never
have accepted the condition willingly.
he said, pointing 10 efforts OF the IN
habitants OF Georgetown as early ak
1903 10 secure return Of that community
10 Maryland Later similar agitation
By the people OF Alexandria resulted 10
the return 10 Virginia Of the territory
In the District Of Columbia.
MIR. Erandenburg brought detailed
of the District OF Columbia
with various other States which enjoy
representation. The p0puia-
ton Of 1851 shown by the census
u 1920, he said showed that there were
more persons In Washington than In
any one os seven following States: Ne
yada. 17,407: Wyoming. 34.402. Della
ware 223 DOB. Arizona. 1913 273; Yer"
mont 36241i; New Mexico, 3e0,241.
and Idaho, 43I 1875. The population OF
Utah and New Hampshire. he showed.
only slightly exceeded that Of the Dis
trict. These seven States. Mr.. Bran
fenburg said. have 70 Representatives
in the Senate and House while the Dis
trict has none.
Tax Burden Heavy,
Some persons. he said. st'll believe
that the District pays no taxes ana
IA sna functions are