Evening star., 1951-07-27


approved, in 1871, q territorial form of govern
ment. 1t is interesting that the new "compro-
mise" home rule proposal, now before the Senate
District Committee, follows the outlines of
territorial government The territorial govern
ment of 1871 lasted less than four years and
ended in bankruptcy.
Joint Select Committee of Congress,
appointed to view the remains of home rule in
1874 and to recommend ways of avoiding such
future tragedies, made report Senate Report
479, 43d Congress, I'd session. pleading with Con-
gresS to return to the original concept of the
Federal City. Said the report:
It is believed that the purpose for which this
District was acquired will be best accomplished
and the interests of all connected with its
growth, prosperity and destiny best subserved
by the direct exercise by Congress of the au-
thority devolved upon it. While the primary
and paramount obligation and duty is and
will be the National Capital it may not be
overlooked or forgotten that the Capital is
the residence of many tens of thousands of
American citizens and that, independent
of any conflicting interest or authority =.
unity of interest must be assumed and, it is
believed may be credited to exist, in that the
general welfare would seem to be included in
the proper development of the design OF the
Capital City spacious and grand in design,
dedicated to the sacred uses OF National
Capital onerous and even intolerable as a
charge upon private property the provision
for supervision and all suitable improvements
and decorations obviously, properly, and inn
peratively devolves upon Congress, and 1t WILL
as it respects the character OF its jurisdiction
and the dignity of its trust, exercise jealous
care over it. The acquisition of the District,
conceived in a supposed public necessity, Sug-
gested by a humiliating experience Of the Con-
greSS of the Confederacy, its wisdom atf1rmed
by kindred events in our recent history, should,
it is submitted be maintained intact by the
body in which the Congress invested the ex-
elusive power -.
Congress abandoned home rule and set up
the present commission form of government
ATOW, after nearly 80 years which mark the
IN second phase of the Capitals development,
years in which Washington has become known
around the world as the beautiful city it Is
today, the old proposition Of home rule is being
advanced once more.
We must not forget that the Number One
objective of home rule, as stated in the original
reports on the measure, is to relieve Congress
of some of the burdensome tasks of District
government. The vote for Washington, limited
as it is is merely secondary objective. Congress
has been complaining about the burden of local
government since it first moved to Washington
1t could delegate more of its powers than it has
is little reason to believe that home rule is the
correct answer. The probable result of home
rule would be repetition of history.
Congress, relieved by dubious delegation of
its powers and thus evading its direct response
bility for government of the American Capital,
would lose interest in its development. Such
trends as the proposals to solve temporary space
difficulties by shifting thousands of Government
personnel to other cities, instead of providing
for hem at the seat Of government through a
continued program of development, will be en-
couraged
During the years of home rule in Wash
ington the disposition Of Congress was to
become interested and to intervene in local
affairs only under the pressure of national po-
litical considerations, not the pressure of local
sentiment The idea of a working partnership
between Congress and the local community,
serving the needs of both, would be apt to suffer
and with it the original concept of Washington
as the Federal City.
The present bill contains formula on fiscal
relations which is fair enough-a precise meas
urement of the cost of services rendered, plus
q Federal appropriation of 20 cents for every
dollar of local revenue spent But it is not real
istic to believe that Congress will appropriate
upward of $25, 900 900 year for city council to
now over the expenditure of less than half that
much in an appropriation bill, every cent OF
which is approved by Congress. Inevitably, under
home rule, the people of Washington would be
faced with expenditures that would tax their
resources beyond anything so far experienced;
or they would refuse to meet the bill and the
city's development would suffer in consequence.
Senator Neely and his colleagues insist they
favor vote in Congress and for President, by
the people of Washington, and that home rule
is merely the frst step toward this desirable
national representation. But we have already
taken that step. When it was found that it was
leading nowhere it was abandoned. Why should
it be taken again?
It will require the good will and the energetic
leadership of men like Senator Nicely to put
through resolution in Congress for constitu-
tional amendment giving to Congress the power
1t now lacks to confer upon Washington resi-
dents the right of representation in their
National Government-the Government of Wash
ington. But if approved by Congress, it would
be approved by the people of this country. And
if Senator Nicely and his colleagues had spent
half the time working for a constitutional
amendment that they spend on trying to reinsti-
tute an unavoidable system OF home rule in the
Nations Capital, the constitutional amendment
would, by now, be on its way to ratification.