Evening star., 1933-03-28
PROPOSED LUMP SUM SLASH
BLOW TO DISTRICT TAXPAYERS
Reduction Would Be From a FIGURE
Already Far Below u. S. Obligations
as Fairly Determined.

they were repudiated. Instead Of q
Federal appropriation for 1882 Of $10,-
183,391. the lump sum" for that year
was $4,000, 0,000-the same figure that
had been appropriated for the previous
fiscal year.
Fair Investigation Made.
All men may not agree on the Bu-
reau OF Efficiency's method OF comput-
ing the Federal obligation. But the
investigation upon which this compu-
tation was based was a fair one made
with the idea of suggesting definite
and tangible formula by which to set
tie the figure in dollars and cents
each year. And that investigation, If
it erred, erred in favor of the Federal
Government.
Those who have argued Washing
tons case in Congress for many years
have always held that the basis OF
the Nations obligation of proportionate
contribution toward the maintenance
and development Of Washington is
not solely untaxed ownership Of District
real estate. though a substantial and
continuous obligation does arise in con-
nection with such ownership. The
strongest obligations resting upon the
Nation are equitable in their nature
and based primarily on the circ,lm-
stances of the Nations creation and the
treatment of the Capital by the Nation
ever since the birth of the Nations
city.
The general Government, by the fact
of planning magnificent Capital, COW
ering large area and characterized by
broad streets, avenues and reservations
to an extent unsuitable for a self-sup-
porting commercial city, and by found
ing the Capital in place comparatively
uninhabited, as well as by the terms of
the bargain with the owners of the soil,
and by the declarations of its represent
atlves at the founding of the city and
afterWard, showed an intention to build
up a national city, at the Nations ex-
pense, on a grand scale, irrespective of
the future population Of the District.
The Capital was to be primarily a CEN
ter OF Federal action, and the occupa-
tlon OF the ground by settlers was merely
incidental to this great purpose.
1t was to be meeting place for the
use, convenience and entertainment of
the people of the entire Union, and the
expense Of its support and adornment
was not to be limited by the scanty re-
sources OF what permanent population
1t might acquire.
The original owners Of WASHINGTON
donated fve-sevenths of the city's soil
and yielded the right of self-govern-
ment to the Nation on the understand
Ing and implied agreement that the
Nation was to build up here a magnifi-
cent Capital at its own expense, reim-
bursting itself from the proceeds of the
sale OF donated lots. A pretentious city
was planned and lots were sold by the
government on the strength of this un-
For three -fourths of a
century the Nation violated or neglected
the obligations which it had thus in
CURED. In 1873 the Government, which
mad IN the beginning impliedly under
taken to meet all the expenses of capi-
tai making and then shifted that bur-
den. In the main. upon private citizens.
oeclded that justice required 1t to pay
Of the Districts expenses.
Washington's Equities.
Study OF the equitable foundations
upon which proportionate contribution
toward capital maintenance by the Ma
ton Is based brings the conviction that
no fixing of that proportion can be lust
which ignores national neglects of obli-
cations in the past in determining the
equitable measure of proportionate con-
for the future.
AS an annual contribution to munich
pal maintenance in definite and liberal
amount the Nation has since 1878. un-
der the wise and fair legislation of that
year. surpassed other nations in this
form OF patriotic expenditure. The re-
suit has been to restore the Nations
self respect as a fulfller of Capital
obligations. and to build up the Capital
OF today, in which every American has
a proprietary interest and in respect to
which every American now feels a pro-
prietary pride.
The second obligation, that which is
coupled with and measured by the de-
gree to which the Nation controls its
Capital, is extraordinarily great in
case.
l. e., financial obligation is coupled
with political power. If the Nation con-
tros, 1t pays, and to the extent that it
controls, it pays.
Washington is the only capital in the
world in which, if certain proposed
policies prevail, the Nation would do all
Of the controlling and none of the pay
ing.
The assumption and exercise of abso-
lutte and exclusive legislative power by
the organic act were coupled with recop-
notion OF pre-existing and continuing
financial obligation. The Nation cam
not equitably repudiate or reduce 10 a
its financial obligation and
retain and exercise its full despotic and
exclusive power to tax and to govern.
Such equitable considerations may not
be as easily reduced to tangible sums
IN dollars and cents, as the Bureau of
Efnclency succeeded in doing by its
method. Nor, on the other hand. can
the Federal contribution to District
revenues be entirely discarded when
comparisons of the financial RESPONSE
ollfy and burden of this relatively small
community, dependent for its very ex-
lstence upon the Federal Government,
are made with those of independent
self governing, self-taxing and self-sup-
porting cities.
But If the Federal Government is re-
garded merely in the light of a mu-
taXpayer-a conception that is
theoretical as the Federal Gov
ernment. Of course, cannot tax itself-is
IL reasonable or fair to other local tax
payers If this Government decides to re-
Leve itself of such obligations by ar
bitrarily cutting its municipal taxes
26.8 per cent?
If the Federal Government paid a
lump sum measured merely by its tax
liability" the lump sum would have
been $8,865, ,722 for the fiscal year 1882.
suppose any other local taxpayer, also
weighed down by obligations to be met
while his revenue, in the form of salary
has been cut, decided to solve his prob
lem by reducing his own tax burden 26.3
per cent In one year, 40 per cent in
two years?
He would, of course, forfeit his prop
erty. His government would allow moth
ing OF the sort. The other taxpayers
would support the government, refusing
to allow one taxpayer to reduce his own
taxes while the others are denied a
similar privilege.
Taxes as High as Ever.
Granting the needs of economy, can
the Federal Government, in fairness or
equity to the unrepresented taxpayers
30