,
1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-.SENATE. 275 age, to receive pension at the rate for such disability; to the By Mr. YOUNG: A bill (H. R. 9519) for the relief of iienry F. Committee on Invalid Pensions. Wooda1·d and Samuel Ross; to the Committee on Claims. By 1\Ir. SINNOTT: A bill (H. R. 9495) for the protection of By Mr. TAYLOR of Tennessee: A bill (H. R. 9520) making timber owned by the United States from :fire, disease, or the appropriation for payment of claims of John Sevier, sr., and ravages Qf beetles or other insects; to the Committee on the John Sevier, jr., in accordance with report and findings of the Public Lands. CoUl't of Claims as reported in House Documents Nos. 1302 By Mr. RYAN: A bill (H. R. 9496) to amend the revenue act and 131, under the provisions of the act approved March t\ of 1918 in relation to the estates of soldiers and sailors who 1883, known as the Bowman Act; to the Committee on Claims. were killed or died in the service; to the Committee on Ways Also, a bill (H. R. 9521) granting a pension to Sarah Crippen; and Means. to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. Also, a bill (H. R. 9407) to provide revenue by the sales tax By Mr. WEAVER: A bill (H. R. 9522) granting an. increase upon importers, manufacturers, producers, wholesalers, and re of pension to :Willard F. Bradford; to the Committee on Pen tailers, for the purpose of providing a bonus to those who sions. served in the military and naval forces of the United States Also, a bill (II. R. 9523) granting a pension to Charles L. during the 'Vorld War, and for other purposes; to the Com Nix; to the Committee on Pensions. mittee on Ways and Means. Also, a bill (H. n. 9498) to provicle increased postal facili ties by the erection of a central distributing and general post PETITIONS, ETC. office building upon a it-e to be acquired on West Fifty-seventh Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, petitions and papers were laid Street, between Ninth and Tenth Avenue , New York City; to on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows : the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds. 3277. By Mr. BARBOUR: Petition of the Fifty-fourth State By Mr. SMITH of Idaho: A pill (H. R. 9499) to authorize Fruit Growers and Farmers' Convention of California, indorsing the State of Idaho to exchange certain lands heretofore granted House bill 2373 for the protection of cooperative marketing for public-school .purposes for other Government lands; to the associations; to the Committee on the Judiciary. Commlttee on the Public Lands. · 3278. By Mr. FREAR: Resolution of. tile members and friends By Mr. ROGERS (by request) : Resolution (H. lles. 244) of the first Methodist Episcopal Church of Eau Claire, Wis., in behalf of the Armenians ; to the Committee on Foreign indorsing House joint resolution 159; to the Committee on the Affairs. Judiciary. By Mr. COUGHLIN: R~solution (H. Res. 245) calling for an 3279. By Mr. GERNERD: Resolution from the Manufactur investigation of the conditions and management of the Govern ers' Association of Berks County, Pa., protesting against the ment Vocational School for Disabled Veterans of the World War passage of Senate bill 2267; to the Committee on Coinage, at Pocono Pine, Pa.; to the Collllllittee on Rules. Weights, and Measures. 3280. By Mr. KINDRED: Resolution from the board of di rectors of the New York County Lawyers' Association, approv PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS. ing House bill 7077, relating to conditions in the Patent Office; Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills and resolutions to the Committee on Patents. were introduced and severally referred as follows: 3281. By Mr. KISSEL: Petition of the New York patent bar, By Mr. BIRD: A bill (H. R. 9500) to amend and correct the Duell, Warfield & Duell, Fetherstonhaugh & Co., Fraser, Turk military record of John l\Iartin Van Buren Summers; to the & l\lyers, Ho\\SOn & Howson, Kenyon & Kenyon, Harold S. Committee on Military Affairs. Mac.kaye, Albert E. Parker, Rogers, Kennedy & Campbell, and By Mr. BO,VERS: A bill (H. R. 9501) granting an increase cott & Williams, all of New York City; to the Committee on of pension to James Forsyth Harrison; to the Committee on Patents. Pensions. 3282. By Mr. RAKER: Petition of Piedmont Parlor, 1ro. By Mr. BROWN of Tennessee: A bill (H. R. 9502) granting 120. Order of Native ons of the Golden West. of Oakland, a pension to John A. Brammett; to the Committee on InYalid Calif., relative to the selection of Alameda as the permanent Pensions. naval base of the Pacific Fleet; to the Committee on Naval Also, a bill (H. R. 9503) granting an increase of pension to Affairs. James W. Scott; to the Committee on Pensions. 3283. Also, petition of the teachers' unions of Washington, By l\Jr. CABLE: A bill (H. R. 9504) granting an increase of D. C., protesting against the inclusion of the teachers of the pen ion to \Villiaru Briney ; to the Committee on Pensions. public schools in the act designed to reclassify l~'ederal em By Mr. FESS: A bill (H. R. 9505) granting a pension to ployees; to the Committee on Reform in the Civil Service. Mary E. Johnson; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 3284. By l\lr. TEMPLE: Petition of the Charles \V. Ct·e printing and of p-reparation of each publication, and tbe number "'The United S.tates of America, the Brittsh Empire~ France, of each which has been distributed, which was referred to the and Japan- Committee on Printing. "' With a view to the preservation of the general peace aod SALES OF CONDEMNED PROPERTY RY SERGEANT AT ARMS. the maintenance of their rights in :relation to their insular pos sessions and insular dominions in tbe reO'io~ of the Pacific The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a communica Ocean- - J<.'- ,;;;.:,. ·a-.: tion from the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate, transmitting, "'Have determined to conclude a treaty· to this effect and pursuant to law~ a list of condemned property of the United have appointed as their plenipotentiaries- States sold subsequent to December 6, 192(), togetheP with a list "' The President of the United States of America, • of the proceeds from such sales, which was ordered to lie on " ' His Majesty the King of ilie United Kingdom of Great the table. Britain and: Ireland and of th.e British Dominions beyop(j. the MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. Seas, Emperor of India, ...,ill7 · A message from the House of Representatives, by l\1r. Over " 'And for the l){).monion of Canada, hue, its enrolling clerk, announced that the House had pnssed " ' For the Commonwealth of Australia, the bill. ( S. 2108) prohibiting the inte.r"IDent of the body of any " ' For the Dominion of New Zealand, person m the cemetery known as the Cemetery of White's Taber " ' For India, nacle, No. 39, of the Ancient United Order of Sons and Daugh "'The Preside-nt of the French Repnblic, ters, Brethren and Sisters of l\ioses, in the District of Co " ' His 1\Iajesty the Emperor of Japan, lumbia. " 'Who having communicated their full powers. found in good The message also announced that the House agreed to the and due- form, have agreed as follows: amendments of the Sennte to the bi:ll (H. R. 8744) granting "'I. the consent of Co~ress to the State of North Dakota, the county "'The lligh contracting parties agree as between themselves of Cass and the City of Fargo, N. Dak., and the ·state of Minne sota, the county of Clay and the city of. Moorhead. 1\linn., or to respect their rights in relation to their insular possessions any of them, to construct a bridge across the Red RiveT of the and insular dominions in the region of the Pacific Ocean. North between the cities of F'argo, N. Dak. and Moorhead " ' If there should develop between any of the high contmct Mm~ ' ' ing parties a contro>ersy ari ing out of any Pacific question and involving their said rights which is not satisfactorily settled by Th~ messag~ further a.nnounc~d that the House had passed diplomacy and is likely to affect the harmonious accord now the bill ( S. 10u3) regulatmg the Issuance of checks, drafts, and orders for the payment of motley within the District of Coltun happily subsisting between them, they shall invite the other bia with amendmeBts, in which it req11ested the concunence of high conh·acting parties to a joint conference to which the the Senate. · whole subject will be referred for consideration and adjustment. The mes.~ge also announced that the House had passed u "'II. concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 38) extending the time "'If the said rights are threatened by the aggressive action fo~ the cmn~l~ion of im~estigation and filing of report by the of any• other power the high contracting parties shall communi Jomt Comm1sswn of Agncultural Inquiry to not later tllan the cate with one another fully and frankly in o1·der to arrive at an 15th of April, 1922, in which it requested the concurrence of understanding as to the most efficient measures to be taken, the Senate. jointly or eparately, to meet the exigencies of the pnrticlllar The message- furthex anneunced that the House had passed situation. · · bills of the follovl'ing titles, in which it 1~equestect the concur "'III. rence of the Senate: " ' This agreement shall I'emain in force for 10 years from the H. n. 6380. An act to amend an act entitled "An act to incor time it shall take effect, and after the expiration of said period porate the Masonic Mutual Relief Association of tile District of it shall continue to be in force subject to the right of any of the Columbia,"' approved March 3, 1869, as amended; and high contracting parties to terminate it upon 12 months' notice. H. R. 7601. An act to amend an act incorporating Prospect "'IV. Hill Cemetery, and for other purpo es. ~ The message also announced that the House disagreed to the "'This agreement shall be ratified as soon as possible in ac amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 9237) making ap cordance with ·the constitutional methods oi the high contracting propriations to supply deficiencies in appropriations for the parties and shall take effect on the deposit of ratifications, fiscal year ending June 30, 1922, and prior fiscal years, sup which shall take place at Washington, and thereupon the agree plemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, ment between· Great Britain and Japan, which was concluded at 1922, and subsequent fiscal years, and for other purposes, agreed London on July 13, 1911, shall terminate.' to the conference requested by the Senate, and that M1·. MAD "The signing of this treaty is, on the part of the United State·, DEN, Mr. CANNON, and Mr. BYRNS of Tennessee were appointed subject to the making of a convention with Japan concerning managers of the conference on the part of the House. the status of the island of Yap and what tre tel~med ~the man dated islands' in the Pacific Ocean north of the Equator, the ENROLLED BILL SIGJ\J!;D. negotiations in regard to which are almost concluded, and also The message further announced that the Speaker of the House to the -reservations with 1·espect to what are termed ' the man had signed the enrolled bill (H. R. 3250) to authorize the Secre dated islands' in the Pacific Ocean south of the Equator. tary of Commerce to convey to Augustus S. Peabody certain "It should also be observed that the controversies to whicl1 land in Galveston County, Tex., and it was thereupon signed the proposed treaty refers do not embrace questions which, ac by the Vice President. . cording to prindples of international law, lie exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of the respective powers. SENATOR LODGE'S ADDRESS AND THE :FOUR-POWER TREATY (S. "DOC. "The conference will perceive that I spoke correctly when I NO. 101). referred to the terms of the treaty as simple. To put it in a Mr. KELLOGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to few words, the treaty provides that the four signatory powers have printed in the RECORD in the ordinary 8-point type and will agree as between themselves to respect their insular posses also printed as a public document the address of the senior Sen sions and dominions in the region of the Pacific, and that if any ator from Massachusetts [l\Ir. LoDoE] on the four-power treaty confroversy should arise as to such rights all the high con before the Conference on Limitation of Armament, together with tracting parties shall be invited to a joint conference looking a copy of the treaty. to the adjustment of such controversy. They agree to take The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. similar action in the case of aggression by any other power Hon. HENRY CABOT LoDGE, a Senator from the State of Massa upon these insular possessions or dominions. The agreement chusetts and member of the American delegation at the Con is to remain in force for 10 years, and after ratification under ference on the Limitation of A1·mament, spoke as follows, De the constitutional methods of the high contracting parties the cember 10, 1921, at the fourth plenary ses ion of the confer existing agreement between Great Britain and Japan, which ence: was concluded at London on July 13, 1911, shall terminate. "I should be insensible, indeed, if I did not feel deeply grati And that is all. Each signer is bound to respect tlle rights of fied by the opportunity which has come to me to lay before the the others, and before taking action in any controversy to con conference the draft of a treaty, the terms of which have been sult with them. There is no provision for the use of force to agreed upon by four of the great powers of the earth in regard carry out any of the terms of the agreement, and no military to the islands of the Pacific, which they control, either as or naval sanction lurks anywhere in the background or under possessions or dominions. I will begin by reading to the cover of these plain and direct clauses. conference the treaty, which is both brief and simple, and yet "The surest way to prevent war is to remove the causes of war. I am sure is full of meaning and importance to the world's peaceJ This is an attempt to remove causes of war over a great area o.f 1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 277 the globe's surface by reli..'lnce upon the good faith and honest versies ever arise among them. If this spirit prevails and rules intentions of the nations which sign the treaty, solving all dif-, we can have no better support than the faith of nations. For ferences through the processes of diplomacy and joint consid one I devoutly believe the spirit of the world is such that we can eration and conciliation. No doubt we shall hear it said tliat n·ust to the good faith and the high purposes which the treaty the region to which this agreement applies is one most unlikely I have laid before you embodies and enslirines. to give birth to serious disputes, and therefore an agreement of "Agreements of this kind, I know, lui.Ye often been maue be this character is of little consequence. His~ory unhappily has,. fore, only to fail But there has been a far-reaching change in shown that the1·e is no corner of the eartll so remote o1· so· the mental condition of men and women eYerywhere. That \VIIich valueless that it is not capable of giving cause for controversy really counts is the intention of the nation who make the or even for war between the tribes and the nations of mankind. agreement. In this hour of tr:ilal and darkness which has fol- But the islands of the Pacific, although remote from the dwell _lowed the war with Germany the spirit of the world is no longer i.iig places IQf the mass of humanity, are far from valueless. the same. If we enter upon this agreement, which rests only " The islands of the southwestern Pacific extend over a \ast npon the will and honor of those who sign it, we at least make ~pace in that great ocean. They reach from the l\Iarquesas on the great experiment and appeal to the men and women of the ilie east to the P.hilippines on the west; from the Aleutian nations to help us sustain it in spirit and in truth." Islands on the north nearly to the Antarctic CiJ.·cle on the south. They are far more numerous than is generally realized. PETITIONS AND MEMOJUALS. 1 do not know what the total number iS, but I am informed Mr. JONES of W'"ashington presented 60 petitions of sum1ry AS to the Philippin_es, and it appears that this group alone con citizens of Pacosco, Black Diamond, Seattle, Ravensdale, Issa (ains over 3,1Wi.S~'ds, of whirJ:-1,600 have names. We have quah, Tukwila, Benton City, Kennydale, Bellingham, Ferndale, a.If' probably; heard of the Temark of Robert Louis Stevenson, Everson, Olympia, Puyallup, Sumner, Otting, Harstine I land, when on leaving one of the Pacific Islands he was asked bow he Detroit, Ballow, Allyn, Manette, Ca1·bonado, Nooksack, Blaine, . ~?-S going to{Samo . He replied that he should just go out and Lawrence, Ronald, Marysville, Arlington, Twisp, East Stanwood, -qrrn to the left. These islands are, comparatively speaking, so Bryant, Dominion, Auburn, Hoquiam, Tacoma, Winth1·op, ;dense:that we might descrioe them in the words of Browning as Okanogan, Mazama, Starbuck, Addy, Orin, Hillyard, Coupeville, tii&::- Port Angeles, Elwha, Spokane, 1\.faple Valley, Prosser, Grand Sprinklerl isles. view, Colville, Meyers Falls, Marcus, Joyce~ Eden, Getty~burg, Lily on lily that o'erlace the sea- Washougal, Camas, Vancouver, Everett, Snohomish, Henton, "~~yet ~tp~ region through which they are scattered i ~ so :Monahan, Doty, Dryad, I.,ittell, Bay View, l\Iount Vernon, Ly v~st~ tliaijthe " isles~of Greece and·the Aegean Sea, so famous in man, Enumclaw, 'Vaterman, Big J.. ..ake, Wickersham, A<:rne, histoi:y;ind·:m poetry, could easily be lost theTein and continue Clipper, Lynden, Chisville, Ouster, West Lake, Kettle Fall.J, Ulmoticed except by wandering seamen or stray adyenturers. Glenwood, Laurel, Toppenish, Tracyton, Bremerton, Ridgefield, They range from Australia, continental in magnitude, to atolls Gertrude, Meridian, Camden, Elk, Scotia, Anacortes, Burlington, where there are no dwellers but the builders of the coral reefs, Goldbnr, Sultan, all in the State of Wa hington, praying for or lonely rocks marking the peaks of mountains which rise up the repeal of the espionage act and aU war-time legislation, fro.Ill'-tbe ocean's floor through miles of water before they touch which were referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. the air. To the western and eastern world alike most of the 1r. LADD presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Grand islands of the southwestern Pacific are little known. There still Forks and UniYer:-:ity, N. Dak., 1·emonstrating against the enact lingers about ·them the charm so compelling and so fascinating ment of Senate bill 2135, to enable the refunding of obligati{)nS which an undiscovered country has for the sons of men who are of foreign GoYernments owing to the United States, etc., weary of main-traveled roads and the trampled highways of which was referred to the Committee on Finance. trade and commerce which cover the surface of the present He also pre ented a communication in the nature of a petirion earth. . from Henry ,V. Ne\inson, correspondent to the :llancbester " Upon these islands still hines the glamor of romance in t11e (England) Guardian, relative to the granting of amnesty to stories of Melville and the writings of Robe1·t Louis Stevenson, prisoners who have been sentenceu on account of violation of to whom the South Seas gave both a grave and a monument war-time laws, wl1ich was referred to tbe Committee on the imperishable as his own fame. But the Pacific iSlands are much Judiciary, and ordered to be printed in the REcoRD, as follow!:>: more than this. They possess certain qualities other than natu A FOREIGNER'S PETITIO::-!. ral beauty and romantic charm, which to many minds are more Coming as I do from England as a stranger among the Ametican enticing. The larger ones are rich in many way , fertile in the people, I certainly have no wish to interfere in their domestic or politi cal affairs. but there aro some things that appeal to one in the name of gifts of soil and climate and in other forms of riches desired by justice and humanity quite apart ft•om national rights or citizenship. men, which extend from the untold mineral resources of Aus In spite of all my genuine admiration for American life and manners, tralia to the pearls which are brought from the depths of the one discovery fills me with astonishment and reooret. I am informed that tbe American Government still holds some 145 persons in pri<;on on ocean. There are among them all great areas of forest and account of supposed offenses com~itted under the so-called espionage of plain fit for the support and prosperity of civilized man. In act and other special laws enacted auring the late war, whlch has now a word, they have_ a \ery great material value, largely undevel in reality been terminated for three years. l\Iany of the e prisoners are serving terms of 10 or even 20 years oped ; and where this condition exists the desires of men will merely, as I understand, for the expression of their opinions, chiefly or enter, and conflicting human desires have throughout recorded entirely in opposition to war. They come of all classes, but most are history been breeders of war. workingmen, naturally eng-aged in mining, lumber, and agricnlture, so that tbe whole Nation loses by their imprisonment. And they them " Thus far the wastes of the Pacific Ocean, with all the crowd selves, being removed from wh()le.some •employment, are likely to degen ing islands, except on the edges of the continents, have not erate as men do in jail. The longer they are imprisoned tlie less useful they will become. been the scene of great wars; and yet not many years have The right of free speech may perhaps be restricted of necessity in passed since three great nations sent their warships to Samoa war time. But such 1·estrictions are among the most pernicious curses because there was a dispute in regard to those distant islands. of war. and it is the <1uty of" every nati()n to remove them with all Therefore, an agreement among the nations controlling these speed the moment that peace is concluded. In my own country all of fenders under this head have long been released; I think within a islands bas a Yery serious importance to the peace of the world. month or two of tbe armistice. The same is true, I belieye, of all other We make the experiment here in this treaty of trying to assure countries except the ()De co}lntry which I was brought up to regard as in the very land of freedom. One of the most peculiar circumstances in peace that immense region by trusting the preservation of the case is that tbe e....-pionage act itself, so I am told, was suspended its tranquillity to the good faith of the nations responsible for it. last March, and these political offenders continue imprisoned under a The world has just passed through a war the very memory of law which no longer exists. I speak as one who has spent a long. and varied life mainly in advo 'vhich makes us shudder. 'Ve all belieYe deep in our hearts that cating personal freedom and contending with all his might a..,rrainst this hideous destruction of life, this suffering and ruin which oppression and injustice wherever he bas found them. Those long er still beset us, must not be permitted to come again if we can forts and my profound regret at finding this oppression and injustice preYent it. still possible in a Nation which I so greatly honor are my sole reasons for joining in this appeal to the President or Congress of tbe UJJited " If the nations of the earth are still in the innermost recesses States for a general amnesty in regard to these supposed breaches of an of their consciousness planning or dreaming of coming wars and obsolete law. Tbe present occasion appears particularly suitable for this amnesty longing for conquests, no treaties of partition and no alliances since, during this conference in Washington, such speeches denouncing can stay them; but if, as I firmly hope, the world has learned war and extolling :peace have beeri ma their deputies and clerical assistant'3, when absent from theitr HOLIDAY RECEss. official residences; to. the Committee on tlie Judiciary. · l\.fr. CURTIS submitted the following concurrent resolution By Ur. TOWNSEND: : to concur in the amendments -of the -House of Representatives. rgt·ana and petty larceny, it would-Seem to me that there ought I can explain the amendments· in just a moment. · to be some differentiation between the act which sought to de Mr. KING. Mr. President, may I inquire of, tP,e S~nator iJ fraud of 10 cents and· ·the act which eontemplated defrauding this is a bill with respect to the issuing of checks! · 4>f $1();000. Mr. JONES of Washington. ;It !s. . · .. Mr. JONES of Wasfiington. Let me suggest to the Senator Mr. KING. Has the bill been considered by, the,· Co'mmittee that this bill leaves it in the discretion of the court. The court on thE' District of Columbia? · - can fin~ a man $1 if he desires to do so, and I take it that the Mr. JONES of Washington. Yes. It' is Senate bill, No. 1033 circumstances the Senator has related would appeal to the and is entitled "A bill rE'gulating the--issuance of checks; drafts, ·csound discretion of the court in fixing the penalty. The bill and ot·ders for the payment of money within the District of reads, as the Senator will note: Columbia. I do not know whethE'r or not it is the bill the'"Sen For not more than ooo· year, or be fined not more than $1,000, or a tor has in mind. both. Mr. KING. I did not know that.it had been considerecl. by In other words, the court could fine the man 10 cents and the committee. · let ·him go. · · · Mr. JONES of Washington. It h~s been so considered. Mr. KING. Yet the Senator knows that with respect to Mr. KING. I had supposed that such a bill would be re larceny or embezzlement there is a maximum fixed for the ferrE'd to the Committee on the Judiciary. amount under $50 usually-that is, six months in the peniten Mr. JONES of Washington. The bill passed the Senate on tiary and a fine not to exceed $300. That is the penalty in June 10 last. uearly every State of the Union; whereas in grand larceny, Mr. KING. I was not aware of that. I should like the where the amount purloined is in excess of $50, the minimum Senator to allow the bill and amendments of the House of Rep punishment is one year in the penitentiary and $500 or $1,000 resentatives to lie over until I have a chance to examine them. fine, in the discretion of the court. Mr. JONES of Washington. I can explain the amendments Mr. JONES of Washington. Of cour e, that differs in the of the House of Representatives in just a moment, and then the different States; but that, of course, is not, as the Senator Senator may realize that the amendments of the House really rea1izes, the situation in controversy here. The bill has passed sUpplement what the Senate had in mind and make the bill a the Senate. It has passed the House with these minor amend better one. ment that really make the language of the Senate bill more The bill as passed by the Senate reads: clearly express what was intended. That any person within the District of Columbia who, with intent l\fr. KING. It seems to me that the more we talk about mercy to defraud, shall make, draw, . utter, or deliver any check, draft, or and charity and civilization the harsher penalties we prescribe.' order for the payment of money upon any bank or other dl:'positot·y I do not believe in these harsh penalties which we so often * * * shall be imprisoned for not more than one year. E'nact · and I think the penalty of $1,000 fine and a yE'ar in The House struck out the word " imprisoned " and inserted the penitentiary which may be inflicted by the court for the the words " guilty of a misdemeanor and punishable by impris fraudulent procurement of a dollar or othet· insignificant sum is onment." I think that is much better language and expresses too great. better the intent of the act than the language of the bill as Mr. JONES of Washington. I can not conceive that the passE'd by the Senate. court would impose a penalty of that kind under the circum ThE'n, beginning in line 5, on page 2, the Senate bill rends: stances related by the Senator; and this bill allows the court rrovided such maker or drawer shall not ha~e paid the holder thereof, to make the punishment just as light as he feels that the cir upon demand, in person or in writing, the amount of said check, draft, cumstances warrant. It does seem to me we could safely trust or order. the court in cases of that kind; but, of course, that i my opin The House strikes the language out beginning with the words ion, and the Senator has a different view of the matter. " upon demand " and inserts in lieu thereof the words " the Mr. KING. 1\Iay I inquire of the Senator as to another mnt amount due thereon,'? but the next amendment practically covers ter? I have not the bill before me, but I hastily read the·wot·ds the part stricken out, for on page 2, line 7, after the woTds "th_e that certain things would be prima facie evidence. I do not like amount due thereon, together with the amount of protest fees, any bill that makes any act criminal in cha'racter and makes if any," the House has inserted an amendment reading " within certain things prima facie evidence. five days after receiving notice in person, or writing, that such Mr. JONES of Washington This bill reads in this way- I draft ot· order has not been paid." have not examined the bill with that in view, because I simply The amendments of the House meet substantially the int~ntion had in charge the matter of these amendments: of tlle Senate, and are probably expre>:sed in somev llat better .As against the maker or drawer thereof tlle makin"", drawjng, utter language. ing. or delivering by such maker or drawer of a check, draft. or order, -Mr. payment of which is refused by the drawee because of insufficient SHORTRIDGE. Mr. President-- funds of the maker ot· drawl:'r in its posses ion or control, shall be The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Wnshington prima facie evidence Of the intent to defraud nnd of Knowledge or yield to the Senator from California? insufficient funds in or credit with such bank or other depositot·y, pro Mr. JONES of Washington. I yield. vided such maker or drawer shall not have paid the bolder thcn'of upon Mr. SHORTRIDGE. I should like to ask the Senator what is demand, in person ot· in writing- .the rnaxirimm punishmE'nt in case the amendments suggested And so forth . be adopted? 1\fr. REED. Now you amend that by inserting "within five Mt·. JONES of Washington. The bill provides in the case of days?" conviction imprLonment for not more than one YE'ar or a fine :Mr. JONES of Washington. We amenu that in this way.: In of not more than $1,000, or both. That language was adopted line G we strike out the words "upon demand, in person or in both by the Senate and th<:' Honse; there has been no change in writing, the amount of said check, draft, or order," nn I appreciate tltat it can not be amended. We must take the the bank, and· the money is checked out on it, and when a new bHl as it is or reject it as it is. check comes in there is no money there to meet it, or not suffi 1\lr. ROBINSON. l\Ir. President, will the Senator yielU for a cient funds. Mistakes of this kind are of daily occutrence. statement? I was talking only yesterday with a man engaged exten 1\fr. KI~G. I yielll. sively in the cattle business, and he told me this story: That in 1\Ir. ROBINSON. This seems to be an express effort to use a certain community of foreigners he had bought cattle in very the machinery of the criminal courts to collect a debt, contrary large numbers for many years; that they insisteu upon having to criminal procedure in most of the States. his checks in hundred-dollar amounts; and although the deal l\Ir. KING. That is what I was trying to say, but the Senator might in\olve many thousands of dollars, he had to make hun has . alu it better than I could. dred-dollar checks. He did not know the reason for it at the M.-. llOBIKSO r. I thank the Senator from Utah. No one time, but afterwards discovered that these foreign people put · couJll Ray anything better than he. the checks away in their homes and held them, and that some 1\Tr. llEJ~D. l\Ir. President, in most civilized countries if a of them were not cashed for three or four years; that in the man were to commit a crime by getting money through false me:intime, while his book showed his banl{ account was ex pretenses or otherwise and the person injured were to threaten hausted, the bank's books sbowed that he bad thousands of dol- tlle iu(liviUnal with prosecution in order to compel him to pay that lars to his credit. · money, he would be himself guilty.of a crime, and the prosecuting This sor t of legislation is ·wholly unnecessary. There are attorney who woultl threaten to employ the criminal processes plenty of laws on the statute books now proviUing that if any for the purpose of compelling a man to pay a civil uebt would man draws a check with a fraudulent purpose, and does not him. ·elf be guilty of usurpation and of being a party to extor have funds in the bank, he can be punished. It is a common tion, and would be liable to punishment. law cTime to obtain money or credit in that way, anu all that is Tllis act, if it were properly entitled, would be entitled "An necessary is the proof that a man gave a check under such cir act to authorize the use of the criminal processes for the pur cumstances as to indicate his fraudulent intent, and from that po. e of compelling tlle payment of a civil debt." To my mind the intent can be inferred. it is utterly monstrous, and will set an example that wlll I go back . to the first proposition I discussed. 'l'o put upon be exceedingly injurious, both in its mot·al effect and in every the statute books the bald proposition that a man may conceive otlter way. a fL·aud, may execute his fraud, may obtain the proceeds of his Following the analysis of the Senator from Utah, the bill frauu, and then, if he pays the money back, the criminal process amounts to tbis: It declares that any person who shall utter a shall cease, is a monstrous and unthinkable thing in criminal chec-k without having funds in the bank sufficient to meet it jurisprudence. shall be guilty of a crime. Mr. ROBINSON. The language of the proposed stn.htte, if l\Ir. JONES of V\'ashington. Mr. President. will the Senator the Senator from Missouri will permit, makes it even worse permit me to suggest there that tl1e language of the bill is '· \Vith than that, because the prima facie presumption of fraud does intent to defraud "? not n. ttacb, however the actual fraud may have occurred, if the 1\Ir. REED. Very well. That makes it worse. It provides, party guilty of the fraud subsPquently pays the amount of the then, that whoever, with the intent to defraud, shall utter a eheck to the holder of it. It is Yidous in every aspect, I agree check without having funds in the bank sufficient to meet it, with the Senator from Missouri, and is contrary to the laws of shall be punished, provided, however, that at any time within almost every State in the Union, to provide that if one practices five days he can go around and pay the amount of that check, a fraud be may be relieved from the penalty for it by making and his criminal intent and his criminal act cease to exist. reimbursement to the party upon whom the ft·au ns the Senator from Utah has said, would not be subjec-t to The VICE PRESIDE~nr. The question is on the motion of conference, and would not be corrected even if they should be the Senator from Washington to proceed to the consitleratio:q corrected. I do not think there can be any reasonable objec of Sen ate bill 205. tion to the amendments made by the House, but I am willing, at The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee t11e request of the Senator from Utah, to let the matter go over of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bilJ, which was read, until to-morrow rather than ask that it be disposed of in the as follows: absence of the Senator from Delaware [Mr. BALL]. Be it nacted, etc., That the general expense of the District of Co Mr. FLETCHER. l\fay I inquire of the Senator whether the lumbia shall be chargeable to and paid out of the Treasury of the United States and the revenues of said Distt·ict in the prop-ortion of ,,,. hole matter is not one for State action? 50 per cent from the Treasury of the United States and 50 per cent 1\lr. JO~TES of Washington. This relates to the Di trict of from the revenues of the said District. Columbia. EC. 2. That the Secretary of the Treasury is author'ized and directed to ad•ance, on the requisition of the C 1\lr. JONES of Washington. Even 1.mder that condition, I Mr. CARAWAY. Mr. President, may I suggest to the Senator can not see any reason why we should change the rate. I think from Washington that they absolutely recommended that the the 50-50 plan would still be fair. rate of fifty-fifty be abolished. l\:Ir. LENROOT. Then, does the Senator think that by a Mr. JONES of Washington. The Senator can not find that proper, reasonable means of taxation we should accumulate a anywhere in their recommendations. very large sum which can not properly be used for municipal 1\Ir. CARAWAY. That was in their recommendation, if the expenses? · Senator will pardon me. They said possibly that was a fair 1\Ir. JONES of Washington. I do not understand the Sena rate then, but they recommended that the rate be abolished. tor's question. Mr. JO:l\TES of Washington. But fhey did that on this Mr. LE~TROOT. Assuming that a very large sum would be theory-- raised through that means and assuming, further, that the rate Mr. CARAWAY. . I know the theory upon which they did it. fixed in the bill is only a reasonable rate, does the Senator think l\Ir. JONES of Washington. That the Government should pay we should raise money that we do not need for municipal pur~ more than 50 per cent. poses and that the Federal Government should appropriate l\Ir. CARAWAY. Oh, no. It was on the theory that the peo money that is not necessary for :r;nunfcipal purposes? ple of the District should pay a fair tax, and then whatever the Mr. JONES of Washington. No; we probably would have to amount lacked of taking care of the expenses of the District of change the rate then. If we impose a rate upon citizens here Columbia the Federal Government s,hould pay. The Senator's on personal property that takes from their incomes a large bill prohibits the taxation of the people of the District of Colum •. amount of money, there is no reason why it is not fair to them bia for more than 50 per cent of the expenses of the government that the rate on the real estate should be made lower, but I of the District, although that might result in practically ex believe that a contribution by the citizens of the District of GO empting wealth from taxation in the District of Columbia. per cent of the taxation necessary to carry on the affairs of the That is the bill which the Senator is championing. District is really fair and just. · 1\Ir. JONES of Washington. The bill that is presented now is Mr. LE.J.~ROOT. Does not the Senator think the citizens of based upon the theory-- the District of Columbia should pay as large a tax propor . l\fr. CARAWAY. I know the theory, and that theory makes tionately as is paid by the citizens of a State? it absolutely impossible for the Government to require the citi Mr. JONES of Washington. .I do not know about that. Con zens of the District of Columbia to pay a fair tax provided 50 ditions here are quite different from what they are in the States. per cent of the expense is paid by the Federal Government. There is so much property here that is withdrawn from taxation 1\Ir. JONES of Washington. It simply leaves it so that when entirE"lY that it makes a condition which I think is different ever Congress comes to the conclusion that 50-50 is not a fair from that in the States. rate, it can change it. Of course, if Congress bas reached that Mr. LENROOT. That has nothing to do with my question. conlusion now ~t can change it in this bill. I am proceeding ori Mr. JONES of Washington. It seems to me that it has, or the theory that the 50-50 rate is fair to the Government and else I do not understand the Senator's question. fair to the citizens of the District of Columbia now. Mr. LENROOT. Suppose three-fourths of the property were Mr. CARAWAY. It is absolutely tying the hands of the Co·m withdrawn, does the Senator say that would affect the question mittee on Appropriations when they come to fixing the amount of the amount of taxes which ought to be paid by the individual? to be contributed by the District and by the Federal Govern Has lle any right to complain if he is not paying any more than ment. It makes eV"ery item subject to a point of order. , citizens of the States are paying? l\11'. JONES of Washington. It is not the duty or the business Mr. JONES of Washington. Possibly not. I really do not of the Committee on Appropriations to determine that; it is a see how that makes any difference here. legislative proposition that Congress ought to lay down by legis Mr. WADSWORTH. 1\Ir. President, may I interrupt at-this. lation. As I said, if the time is not now, but should arise next point, in Yiew of the question asked by .the Senator from Wis~ ye.ar, when the 50-50 rate is not fair, then we should legislate cousin? to that effect so that the Committee on Appropriations may be Mr. JOKES of Washington. Certainly. guided by it. It is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee Mr. WADSWORTH. It does not seem to me that we should on Appropriations to legislate on this question. E"nact a tax law fo1; the District Of Columbia on the theory that Mr. CARAWAY. May I ask the Senator another question? a citizen here should pay as much as a citizen of the State of Why would it not be fair under the present law to let the com New York, for instance. The citizens here should pay enough mittee fix the amount necessary to maintain the District gov to support the District government. The tax should be meas ernment, first applying to it whatever sums may have been ured by the cost of the government and not py taxes in any raised by a reasonable tax on the property in the District of other part of the countrj·. The taxes in one part of the country Columbia, and supplementing that from the general revenue of should not be measured or controlled by what happens to be the country? Vvby should a man in my State or in the Senator·s paid in another part of the country. State be required to pay three times as much tax as a man liv Mr. JONES of Washington. I think there is much force in ing- in the District of Columbia, in order that we may relieve that suggestion. the man in the District of Columbia? Mr. LENROOT: l\Iay I ask the Senator this question: If the Mr. JONES of Washington. The Senator should not state it citizens of the District of Columbia enjoy all the privileges and in that way. Thafis not the purpose of the bill. all the benefits so far as taxation can affect those privileges or Mr. CARAWAY. That is the effect of it. benefit , does the Senator think this should be a haven for citi l\lr. JONES of Washington. That is the Senator's opinion; zens of other States to come to and escape paying their fair ·it is not my opinion. · share of taxes, and that the Government, all the people of the Mr. CARAWAY. I am entitled to whatever opinion I draw United States, should contribute for their benefit? from it. 1\lr. JONES of ·washington. Certainly not, 1\lr. President. I Mr. JONES of ·washington. Certainly the Senator is, but do not think this should be a haven for anybody trying to evade he has not any right to question my opinion and the integrity the payment of taxes. of it. l\ft'. LENROOT. It is suggested by the Senator from New Mr. CARAWAY. I am not q,uestioning ·the integrity of tlte York that it is not a fair measure of taxation to compare it Senator's opinion, but I am saying .that is the effect of the witll what other citizens pay. It must be remembered in this bill. proposition that all the people of the United States are to con Mr. JO~"ES of Washington. Tllat is the Senator's opinion tribute 50 per cent of the expenses of keeping up this municipal and I think he is honest in his opinion, but my judgment is the go"Vernment irrespective of whethe't· the citizens of the District other way. are called upon to pay a fair share or not. :Mr. CARAWAY. I presume the Senator will give me credit Mr. JONES of Washington. It is irrespective of that. It is for being honest. I took that for granted or I would nClt han! ou the theory that that is a fair share. That is the theory on asked the question. which this is based. This question has been investigated many l\lr. JONES of 1\.. ashington. The Senator suggested rather a time~ . I have not gone into the details of the matter as fully peculiar thing by the language he used. as I would if it had never been investigated, but it has been Mr. CARAWAY. This is what I said: If Congress is corn investigated especially of late years by a special committee pelled to contribute 50 per cent out of the general re,·enues of created by Congress to look into that very proposition, and that the Government and give to the Commissione-rs of tbe District committee took hundreds, and possibly thousands, of pages of of Columbia the right to fix their rate of taxation so that they testimony. I have the two volumes here before me now in shall be required to raise only 50 per cent of the taxes, are they which they submit the testimony that they took, together with not compelled under the Senator's bill to lower the taxes ln theit· report, and they came to the conclusion that the people order that they shall not raise more than 50 per cent? As it bere should pay a reasonable rate of taxation. is now-and I speak now advisedly, because I know whereof I 284 CONGllESSIO AL R.ECORD-SENA'fE. DEC1Jl\IBER 13, peak, having paid taxes here and in another jurisdiction as pay the expenses in connection with that? Numerous officials we11-the tax in the District of Columbia is not more than 33! and employees of the Government mru,"t live here, and they must per cent of ''hat it is in my State, and we are obliged to pay have schools, hospitals, and ether institutions ancl facilities that high rate there in order to contiibute a part of that tax required in civilized communities. to the expense of the District of Columbia, so that the Commis Mr. McNARY. Mr. President, I wish to ask the Senator fl. sioners of the District of Columbia may lower the rate here. question more or less personaL I wish to know what his lovely The Senator's bill makes it absolutely imperative that they shall home on Massachusetts Ayenue would be worth if the Govern lower it whene...-er the rate of tax would raise more than neces ment wer~_ not conducting its activities he1·e and erecting from sary to raise the 50 per.. cent. time to time its splendid_departmenthl and other buildings? 1\Ir. l\lc:'il.ARY. Mr. President, may I make an inquiry of the l\Ir. FLETCHER. Of ·course, the Government is not conduct Senator from \Vashington? ing its activip.es for the'bene.fit of my property or any,body else's llr. JO:i~;"ES of Washington. Certainly. p_rop_erty. I can n2t see r~ally: the relevancy of that inquiry, Yr. l\lcN~illY. Is it the theory of the Senator that the Gov because the question of whether the Government's activities ernment . should pay half the taxes because the Government here really, have an-y beiuing.on the .value of property has noth occupies a certain territorial part of the District? Is that the ing , t~- d,o~'vi_th-;th· ~~!"ter:of.o;uetermip.ing what proportion of t4e theory? . burden :of Jakmg . care of the property should be born~ by the l\1r. JO:NES of Washington. It is based largely upon that and Government:and-,vhat proportion· should be borne by tl:ie taxpay the value of its property. · ers of· the ;District. I ' re_a}.iZe, of course, that the improvements l\lr. :McNARY. If the Government property were removed !!lade tO:~tlie: proper~y ofJ;lie _" Government, beautifying the parks, from the District, would not the Senator from Washi~on · c~n constl:ucting ihandso:rp.e buildings, tends to make the property at cede that the other property would not have ·any value; and that tractive and valuable;and ~ make Washingtorr a desirable city to it is the governmental activities and property that give private' live in arid-Jlas its bearing, on the value of .other property. Of property here its value? course, if'there were no such activities here.. there would be no l\lr. JONES of Washington. Of course, this is the capital of such city as we have ai!_d ~ no property holders anu no taxes to the Nation. trouble anybody' but tha"t ""Uoes not reach the point of 'this matter Mr. McNARY. It is a charity, the Senator must admit. at all. It is beside the question entirely to raise that issue. 1\lr. JONES of Washington. I do not think it is a charity The question here is whettler or not the expenses in connection at alL with the aclministration 'O:f ~1he Government ' in the District of Mr. McNARY. Let me ask the Senator from Washingt9n Columbia shan be borne in due proportion by the Federal Gov another que tion. Out in the great Western States the Gov~rn ernment and the taxpayers of the District. ment keeps off the tax rolls a large portion of the property. 1\fr. CARAWAY. Mr. Pr·esident, may I ask the Senator from Does the Government come to the aid of the States and pay Florida a question? taxes on t1iat untaxable land owned by the Government? 1\Ir. FLETCHER. In a I.OOment. There is another view, and Mr. JONES of Washington. I think it ought. that is ttus: In no State are governmentataffairs administered l\lr. l\lcNARY. Does it? by the Eederal Government; they are administered by the peeple Mr. JONES of 'Vashington. The Government furnishes a lot through their chosen representatives. If tliat were true in the of money for forest trails that is used reaJ;ly for good-road Distlict, the taxpayers o{"the Dist1ict would not expend the purposes, and so on, but I do not think it does its duty w~th ainount of money 'tb'at is . ~eiiig expended in Washington in the reference to those States. I agree with the Senator from Ore way of public improvements, lights, ancl pavements, and that gon. l\ly State is affectecl probably worse than the Senator's sort of thing, which'are desirable and absolutely necessary in a State, about 20,000,000 acres in it being forest reserve,. and £reat city which is the Capital of tlie Nation. there is no hope that it will ever be made ubject to taxation. I say that the city ouglit to be kept up properly, but some of l\lr. McNARY. r' am very glad to hear my colleague and neigh the things which are oeirig done here are not absolutely neces bor admit that the people of the District of Columbia are sary ; they are more ornamental than useful, perhaps; yet I receiving fairer treatment than the people living in the public make no complaint because of their being Mr. CARA\VAY. Does the Senator from Florida know how He mortgaged hia household furniture when he was worth a much the Federal Government contributes toward the e~ l}lillion d9llar..s. The reports in counection with these matter~ penses of the District of Columbia? ··are vel'Y.. l:nteresting. Mr. FLETCHER. I have not the :figures now before me. ..· l\11·. "FLETOHER. Of course, such incidental cases do not Mr. CARAWAY. It is several million dollars. .~.--r:: bear on the que.<:~tion _ now before us; they are quite beside the 1\fr. KING. It is now about $10,000,000 a year. ----- subj~t. I do not· understand that this bill changes tlle prln~ Mr. CARAWAY. However, it does not make any difference, ciple of taxation or the kind of property to be taxed at all, but if I may be permitted to say it, what Florida pays, whether it I wUl say this-- is $2 or $2,000,000; do we want to legislate so that the burden 1\fr. CARAWAY. Then the Senator has not read the bill, of taxation shall fall upon people who do not enjoy any of its beealJse that iS exacUy what it does. benefits? There is not a eity in the United States where so Mr. FLETCHER. I only want to mention the fact that, so' ll!any advantages are found as in Washington; there iS not a far as taxes are concerned, I pay some taxes in the_ District pfuce in the world where taxes are so light as they are here. of Columbia, not to any large amount, and I do not know what I say that whene-ver the people of the District of Columbia the rate of tax is; I get my bills and I send my check for shall pay upon their property taxes equivalent to those paid in "the amount. I have observed, however, that the taxes which I o_ther cities in the States of the Union for mu~icipal purposes paid this year are very much higher than those paid by me last and improvements, then we should go no further ; but there is year. As to the exact rate, I do not recall; I have neve·r looked not any sense, there is not any justice, there is not any e~cuse .into that matter particularly, but I do know that ta~es this on God's earth for saying that a man who owns property here year are very much higher than they were last l·ear. So the in the District of Columbia and pay practically nothing on it rate must have been increased, or the valuation increased: for maintaining it while the people in every other State shall be I _do not know which, but I think the rate has been increased :compelled to contribute to keep it up. Somebody has got to within the last year very materially, I should say 30 to 40 per pay it. cent, and quite as much as the taxes have been increased gen, 1\Ir. FLETCHER. I think if the Senator owns property here erally over the country. he is certainly not in a position to say that he pays practically ~r. ;roNES of Washington. Mt·. President, I wish to eall nothing in the w~y of taxes. attention to the language of the bill with reference to taJCntion, Mr. CARAWAY. I pay three times as much on my property and I should like the attention of the Senator from Arkansas. in my own town of Jonesboro, Al'k .• according to the value, as Here is the language of the bill : I pay on property here in the District of Columbia, and I own Sxc. 3. That the pel' eent of appl'oved estimates to be levied and property in both places. assessed under the act of June 11, 1878, upon the taxable property and privileges in said District shall be raised by the imposition of Mr. FLETCHER. Then the Senator's taxes at home are too such rate of taxation on realty and tangible personal property as the high. commissioners shall ascertain to be necessary to raise annually. Mr. CARAWAY. Then taxes ought not to be made lower here That is the law as it is now. but should be increased. If they are already too high else Mr. CARAWAY. No; there is an intangible personal tax in where, and if the people here in the District of Columbia dodge the District of Columbia. their ta..'res, then taxes have got to be increased on the people Mr. JONES of Washington, I will show the Senatot· where in my own home town to make up the deficit. That is all that that is covered in.this bill. I call his attention to the following it means. language: I know it is said, if the Senator will pardon me, that the Government owns 50 per cent of the area and pO per cent of In combination with other District tax revenues. t:O.e property value in the District of Columbia. If t}le Senator Mr. CARAWAY. Yes, sir; but the Senator knows that the will pardon me, I will say that is foreign to the facts. If we enumeration of certain items is the exclusion of others. Tlle should charge every park and every street in the District of others will be considered excise taxes pure and simple. Columbia to the Government and call it Government property, Mr. JONES of Washington. Of com·se, if there is any doubt then we should have not one-third of the area within the Dis about that it should be made clear, but what the Sena_tor from trict of Columbia in Government ownership, although the parks Arkansas bas suggested was not the intention of the committee. are for the people and not the Government, the streets are for I wish to say to the Senator that this exact language hns been the people and not the Government. Yet it is said that the carried in at least two appropriation bills under which an in Government owns one-half of the area, when, as a matter of tangible tax has been levied. There has never been any ques fact, less than 100 acres in the District of Columbia are actually tion as to the intangible property tax which was provided used for governmental purposes exclusively. under an amendment offered by the Senator from South Dakota I was on the "town council '' in the other House, where I put [1\fr. STERLING] some years ago. Since that time there has been in two years listening to people telling me that the District of no question about it at alL Columbia was overtaxed, and during that time on one occasion Mr. KING. Mr. President, will the Senator permit an inter I went into that matter and found they were taxed then less ruption there? than 10 per cent of the average cost of maintaining city gol'ern Mr. JONES of Wa.shington. I yield. ments of like size in other communities. Mr. KING. I can state to the Senator that there are a large It is an infamous outrage, if I may be permitted to say it, to number of persons who have established their residences here require people in the States to pay taxes for the population merely for the purpose of avoiding any intangible taxation. I here. This is an " isle of refuge " for rich people. This bill, if was told this morning by a Representative from an adjoining I understand it correctly, strikes out every bit of the taxes on State--! shall not mention it-that there are three families, intangible wealth and absolutely makes Washington a place his personal acquaintances, one living in the same apartment where a man who wants to dodge taxes in the States can take house in which he lives, who have moved here and who contend up a fictitious residence here. that they pay all of their expenses of living in Washington and Mr. JOJ\TES of Washington. The Senator from Ark.. 286 CONGI-tESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEJ\IBER 13, ~lr. LENROOT. Does not the Senator think that before fix ington, whose clear mind, I am sure, is able to penetrate the ing this arbitrary ratio the cominiHee ought t~ . ,ascertain sophistry which is there suggested? Let me illustrate. whethe1· other sources of taxation ought to be utilized, as they' If some one were to say to the Senator from Washington or the are being utilized in the States, and fair taxes imposed·upon· tlie Senator from Wisconsin-both of whom, let us ay, have prop citizens of this District an It is believed that it will be much wiser and more ecobomical, b1>th are formed upon individual experiences with reference to taxa to the national and local governments, to fix upon a definite sum or proportion to be conh·ibuted by both, and it is more important that these tion. I know this: One particular instance in my State was appropriations should be made regularly il:tld ttpon some well-defined brought to my attention where property was assessed at. $350 principle than that they should be large. value. That was the basis of assessment. The rate of taxation The House committee that had up the Mapes bill in the .last was about 4-! per cent. Now, 4! per cent compared with 1! ses ion of Congress reported out that bill, and the minority of per cent sounds big, and we would at once conclude that the the committee submitted a minority report. When I say " the people of the locality where they are assessed 4! per cent are minority of the committee," in this case it does not mean the paying a much bigger tax than they are here, where they pay, smaller number of the committee. As a matter of fact, when 1!; and yet I know that while that property was assessed at you examine the record you will find that the majority of that $350 -value it was sold for $2,000 cash. In other words, the committee were against the bill that was reported, or at least tax that was paid upon that property was equivalent to no they were equally divided. This minority report is signed by, more than 1 per cent. eight members of the committee. I examined the vote on the Mr. LE!\TROOT. I would like to ask the Senator if we assess passage of the Mapes pill, and I found-it has been a year or on the basis of two-thirds of the value of the property hete? so since I looked it up-that one or two of the committee who Mr. JONES of Washington. Two-thirds of the value. did not join in this minority report voted against its passage, 1.\i:r. LENROOT. Then, generally speaking, in the State of and one or two were paired against its passage. My recollection Washington are the taXpayers compelled to pay more than 1! is that the committee was really against the Mapes bill, instead per cent, including State, county, and municipal taxes? of an actual minority being against it. Mr. JONES of Washington. I gave that instance. I do hot Mr. OARAWAY. Mr. President1 may I ask how the House know how far that goes. stood on _the Mapes bill? Mr. LENROOT. The Senator must have some general knowl Mr. JONES of Washington. Oh, they passed it. edge of taxation in his Sta-te, I presume. I have a knowledge l\Ir. CARAWAY. By an overwhelming majority? of those matters in my State. Mr. JONES of Washington. Oh, yes; they passed it. That Mr. JONES of Washington. I do not know about them in is true; and they were very strongly and very firmly in favor detail, but I know that while our Jaw provides for the assess of llavin_g a definite and fixed liability. ment of property upon the fair market value, very seldoin is it l\Ir. President, it was suggested a moment ago that the joint assessed at more than 25 per cent o:l: its value. I know it is committee created by Congress a few years ago was in favor true that in making the assessment they make it 25 or 30 per of doing away with the 50-50 plan. I asserted that it was on cent of the value of the property. That probably accounts for the theory. that the proportion of the Federal Government the high rate of taxati6n. should be larger than it is now. I may be wrong about that, but that is the way I construe the language of this report; nnd I 1\Ir. LENROOT. I d6 not know what law the Senator may have the language here, on page 19. This is what the com have in his State. I assume it is a full value Jaw. mittee says: Mr. JOI\TES of Washington. They take the fair market value. But we think that the conditions of to-day and of the few years last l\fr. LENUOOT. I w:mt to say to the Senator that in my past are so different from the conditions of 1878 that this arbitrary State-Wisconsin-from one end of the State to the other, even J:.Ul e-a rule of then seeming necessity-need no longer be applied to in the rural communities, there can not be found any such low District appropriations. rate of tax, when you con~ider State, county, and municipal That is true; the committee say they do not thirlk it is taxes, as is imposed in the District of Columbia. necessary to apply the 50--60 rule longer. Mr. JONES of Washington. This joint committee, which wns Then the District was under a great debt; to-day that debt has beeh selected br Congress, composed of Members of the House and ver:v largely paid, and the next few ye-ars will see it completely paid in the manner we have described herein. • of the Sennte, found that- Then the District was suffering from the many experimental forms It is, of course not the purpose of this committee to act as a bqard of government which had been tried in successive years almost; to-day of tax nssessm!'I1t and equalization of property within the District of the form of government is one of long existence, tried and tested. Columbia, for that work obviously was not intended to be assumed by Then the population was less than one-half of the neat·ly 350,000 this committee. But we have beard evidence of tax assessments and people who now reside in Washington. tax rates in many American cities, some of this evidence being most Then the splendid utility and beauty of the city planned on a na instructive, other of it affording interesting comparisons as the condi tional base were just beginning to be seen ; now the Government has tions tesemblecl or differed from conditions in Washington. many buildings which a.re of thE! very highest standard of architecture The annual tnx in Washington is approximately $16 per capita. . and has laid the foundation by purchase of additional areas of land In the juagment of your committee this is a reasonable tax evy at for more public buildings, parks, and reservations. this time, eRp<:>cially when we consider, as we mu t, that a large pro Now, note this language: portion of the populatioll here pays but a small amount of the taxes imposed. More and more every year is land being acquired and held foi· strictly The subjf' cts of taxation in Washington differ somewhat from th-ose governmental purposes, withdrawn from participation in assessment of many other American cities. IIere, for instance, intangible personal and taxation. property is not a subject of taxation, and taxes on franchises and earn " 'hat other conclusion can you draw than that the committee ings of public-service corporations are not classed as personal taxes. had in mind that if property is withdrawn from taxation and We find from the evidence of fair-minded men, residents of Washing ton familiar with real-estate values in general, that the present a.::;sess assessment the proportion of the Government should be greater ment of real estate for taxation is fair and reasonable. to make up for that withdrawal? l\Ir. CAUA WAY. l\lr. President, may I interrupt the Senator Mr. President, I have not given this subject the investigation there? which would enable me to set my judgm.ent up against the The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. RoBINSON in the chair). judgment of these men, who spent weeks, if not months, in try Does the Senator from Washington yield to the Senator from ing to arrive at a just conclusion with reference to this matter. Arkansas? I find that the House committee went into the same thing, atrd 1\lr. JONES of Washington. I yield. in this minority report I find that they give details, and the l\Ir. CARAWAY. What did the committee have in mind when detailed ~vidence is giwn in the report of this committee. In it said that the District had a large funded indebtedness in their report they do not analy'Ze it particularly, but they state 187 , and now that indebtedness is paid, and therefore there is the conclusion which they ha\'"e reached after studying all of no longer any necessity for raising money to pay that? that evidence. This is what the alleged minority of this com l\lr. JONE~ of 'Vashington. I do not know what the com mittee say about this question: mittee bad in mind. For the fi scal year 1918 citizens of Washington oa id a per capita The increasing needs of the Government in this, its central home, realty tax of $1G.5u. Of the GS other cities in the United States with demand and will continue to demand more land, mote buildings, more over 100,000 population, 2G paid a higher per capita realty tax, 42 a reservations. lower. All of this means that the District of Columbia and the National Government should not .be longer on any partnership basis of .contribu This committee rnny haYe been wrong about that; I can ~\Jt tion, but that the national city, the Nation's home, should be a dis say as to that. The figures they ptesent and the detaile ;· t. 288 EJONGRESSION.A_L -RECORD-SEN ...~TE: ~ DECE~IBER 13; 1\lr. LENROOT. But the people of the District have all the just said, this joint committee report was made before we benefits of a State government which the people of a State have, adopteu the intangible tax amendment. This reads further: do they not? .. · For the same year the total per capita property tax in Wa hlngton 1\fr. JONES of Washington. Oh, no. was $20.68. Thirty of the 68 cities paid a higher and 38 a lower per l\lr. KENYON. Except the right to vote. capita tax. 1\lr. JONES of ·washington. The people of the District have That apparently covers all. I think that is a pretty signifi nothing to do with the formation of the Government, nothing cant statement. Unless Senators are prepared to show that to do with can·ying it on, or saying how it shall be carried on, that is not correct, it seems to me it is pretty overpowering, as or anything of that sort. We in the States prize that privilege far as the justice of the tax on the people of Washington is pretty highly and would not_ like to have it taken away; we concerned. It continues: would rather pay some tax than to have it taken away. But For the same year 50 out of the 227 cities i.n tbe United States which this committee evidently ·took into account everything they have a population of over 30;000 paid a higher per capita property tax thought would put the people. of the District upon a par with than Washington, while 176 paid a· lower. the people in the States, and that is the way they. compared the l\lr. STERLING. For what ·year? taxes. l\lr. JONES of Washington. For 1918. Senators may satis Mr. NORRIS. In view of the questions 1.vhich have been factorily account for these figure , but they appeal very strongly asked of the Senator, as to what was included, I wish he would to me when we come to consider the justice {)r the :faimess of read again, so that we may clearly understand, what the per the tax situation in the city of Washington at the present time. capita tax does include, as compared with the per capita tax It convinces me that the basis of taxation we have is fair and in other cities. Doe it say it is a realty tax? just and reasonable, not only to the citizens of the District but Ur. JONES of Washington. It reads this way: to the Government of the United States and the citizens of the 'l'be annual tax in Washington is appr"ximately $16 per capita. entire country. In the judgment of your committee- I uo not think I care to take. any more time of the Senate. I That is, the joint committee of Congress- know there is room for controversy with reference to tbis mat this is a reasonable ta..>: levy at this time, especially when we consider, ter. I know it has been charged from time to time that the as we must, that a large proportion of the population here pays but a people of the District of Columbia were not paying the taxes small amount of the taxes impos~. they ought to pay, and yet every investigation which has been 0 * * * * * • We find from the evidence of fair-minded men, residents of Washing made bas come to a different conclusion. I have not taken the ton familiar with real estate values in general, that the present assess time to try to controvert the conclusion arrived at by the joint ment of real estate for valuation is fair and reasonable. committee we provided. The men who composed that joint Probably I bad bette1; read the preceding paragraph. committee were men of high standing, men of great ability, and .Mr. ·oRRIS. I wanted the Senator to read, in connection many of them \Yere men of great business experience, anu I with that, the statement he read a while ago about the other want to say that I am satisfied to take their judgment, they cities. Did that relate to real estate, or did it include onJy having made the inve"tigation they diu. per onalty? Who composed that committee? Bon. W. E. Chilton, of West Mr. JO~'"ES of 'Vashlngton. I will read that after I read a Virginia, was chairman of it. The other members upon the part paragraph which I did not read before, because I did not think of the Senate were Willarll Saulsbury and John D. Works. No it bore upon this matter: more careful, conscientious, painstaking Senators ever s::tt in Tbe subjects of taxation in Washington differ somewhat from those this body than tho e three.men. On tl1e part of the Hou e there of many other American cities. Here, for instance, intangible personal were Henry T. Rainey, of Illinois, a man of long service; War· property is not a ubject of taxation, and taxes on franchises and earn ren Gard, of Ohio; and HENRY ALLEN CooPER, of Wisconsin. ings of public service corporations are not classed as personal taxes. As I said, I have not hnd the time to inYestigate this matter Since that declaration was made, we 11rovided for a certain anll attempt to f'how that these men were wroug. I mny be tax on intangibles. It may not go as far as some think it neglectful of my duty, but I am willing- to take their judgment should. This is from the minority report: with reference to the question as to whetllet· or not the people For the fiscal year 191R citizens of Washington oa.id n. per capita of Washington are paying a fair aml just rate of taxation. I realty tax of $16.55. Of the G8 other cities in the Unite'l States with believe they are, and I believe it is fair to them and fair to the over 100,000 population, 26 paid a higher per capita realty tax, 42 a GoYernment and fair to the citizens of this Republic that the lower. Govemment shoulll say in plain, unmistakable terms., that it Mr. NORRIS. I take it that had nothing to do with anything will pay 50 per cent of the necessary (>Xpenses of the Govem but real estate taxes. ment, and that the other :-o per cent must be put up by the peo Mr. JOl\TES of Washington. That is all with which that ple of the District- had to do. There are one 01; two other propo."itions in this bill to \Vlli ·h l\lr. NORRIS. That is very illuminating. I simply want to call the attention of the Senate. Undet· the l\lr. JONES of Washington. In the other report apparently act of 1878 the Commissioners of the District are prohibited it gave the full amount. It Naid: from ubmitting e. timates to Congress of the needed appropri The annual tax in Washington is approximately $16 per capita. ations for the District in excess of the estimated revenues of the l\lr. NORRIS. But they probably were referring to real District, one-llalf from taxes and one-half from the Government. estate taxes in the minority report. The result of that we feel to-clay. I remember, I think it wa. l\lr. JO~ES of Washington. These were two uifferent com last winter, when the matter of increasetl appropriation for mittees. the schools of the District was being agitated. 1\ly colleague, l\lr. NORRIS. I under. tand, but the Senator bas two reports tbe Senator from Kansas [::\lr. Cunns], ··uggests that it was Ja;~ t there. One he designates as the minority report and the other spring when the commissioners came before the Appropriations he uesi~ates as the joint committee report. I do not know Committee. We asked them why they bad not submitted tlle why he designates one as the minority report-- estimates which were necessary to put the school system here on 1\lr. JONES of Washington. I do that because it- is desig the basis on which it should be. They said they could not uo nated as the minority report of the House committee. it under the law. In other worus, the Commissioners of the l\lr. NORRIS. In that the tax is designated as the real estate District of Columbia are prohibited by law now from submitting tax, both as to Washington and as to the other cities, and it says to Congress estimates of what they consider to be the impera that in \Vashington the real estate taxes were $14.55 per capita. tive needs of the District of Cohunbia. This bill relieYes them l\lr. JO~ES of Washington. Yes; that is correct. from that limitation and aJlows them to submit to Congress l\Ir. NORRIS. So I take it that the other must refer to the estimates which they think ought to be submitted to take realty taxes, or one or the other of them is wrong, if they refer care of the needs of the District, and then, of course, it lea\es to the same year. it to Congress to make appropriation for those needs or ref-use Mr. .JONES of Washington. They refer to different years, I the appropriation, a it sees fit. think. Mr. STERLING and )Jr. ~ORRtS addressed the Chair. :Mr. CURTIS. The report from which the Senator is rea 'I'llat ·the per cent of approved estimates to be levied and assessed Mr. JONES of Washington. I think if the Senator will read undee the net of June 11, 1878, upon the taxable property and privileges in said District shall be raised by the imposition of such rate of taxation it carefully. he will see that we have not interfered with the on realty and peroonal property as the commissioners shall ascertain intangible tax. We say that the tax on real property and tan to be necessary to raise annually. . gible personal property, "in combination with other revenues," l\It·. JO~"ES of Washington. Read on. shall be so much. That includes intangible tax, license tax, Mr. STERLING. I will do so: and so on. In combination with other District tax- revenues and unexpended tax 1\Ir. KING. Mr. President, will the Senator from Washing surpluses of previous years, a sum sufficient to meet the proportion of ton yield to me? expenses to be paid by the District of Columbia under existing law. Mr. JO!\TES of Washington. Certainly. Tlte question is whether that might not impliedly repeal the Mr. KIJ.'{G. As I understand, there is no intangible tax, in provision in regard to intangible property. the technical sense, levied now in the District ; I mean that l\Ir. JONES of Washington. Not ~t all. I am perfectly will the intangible property of taxpayers is not fully reached-and ing to have Vi'ritten in whatever may make that perfectly clear, millions that should be taxed are never reached. The bill which but this language has been carried in two appropriation bills in the Senator is now championing with so much ability confirms the past and there has been no question raised about intangible the present method of taxation, whether it is good or bad. .As taxes. I know at that time the idea of the committee was that the Senator knows, if this bill becomes a law the Committee this did not affect that at all, and that the words " in combina on Appropriations will follow it. It will not change the method tion with other District revenues " simply took the tax upon of taxation or enlarge the variety of. properties which will be tangible personal property and real estate and put it along taxed ; indeed it will be an admonition to the District Commit with the intangible. tee and to the Appropriations Committee and to other commit The only purpose of that language really is to provide that tees that may deal with the question of taxation that Congress the tax now on real property and tangible personal property, has again expressed itself in favor of a perpetuation of the which is 1! per cent, can not be put lower than 1! per cent. present method of taxation and the objects of taxation. We did not think that it was wise for us to say that the in 1\lr. JONES of Washington. No; I do not believe anyone can tangible tax should be raised to 1! per cent, because that might construe the bill as an attempt to interfere with the system of be right and it might not be right. We were not intending to taxation and the taxes on property in the District, except as it affect the real tax system that we have-that is, the rate of ta.'{ doe~ give to the Commissioners of the District authority to raise ation~cept to say that it should not be less than 11 per cent. the li per cent rate upon tangible personal property and real 1\Ir. STERLING. As I understand it, the Senator said that property. such has been the interpretation of previous bills. l\lr. STERLING. Mr. President-- 1\Ir. JONES of 'Vashington. This language has been in two 1\Ir. JONES of Washington. 1\fr. President, the Senator from appropriation bills and there has been no question raised about South Dakota, I think, can answer the suggestion of the Sena it. I do not believe there can be any question. At any mte tor from Utah that we have no intangible tax. we certainly do not intend to affect intangible property. Tlle 1\Ir. STERLING. Certainly we have an intangible tax. intangible rate may be too low or it may be too high, but that is l\Ir. JONES of Washington. The Senator is the author of . a matter for separate legislation. that measure. l\Ir. CURTIS. 1\Ir. President, will not the Senator from Mr. KING. I am speaking from hearsay rather than ft·om Washington state that by reason of this limitation upon the part actual knowledge, but what I mean is that if one will examine of the commissioners, and the fact that the Congress has re the assessment rolls he will discover that property, both tan duced the appropriation, there has been accumulated in the gible and intangible, escapes taxation, and persons establish a Treasury over $4,000,000 surplus, which the District people residence, actual or fictitious, in the District of Columbia, as have been denied the use of because of the construction placed· a result of which they escape taxation in their own States and upon the matter on the part of another legislative body that it also evade a proper tax in the District of Columbia. I was did not belong to them, although they had paid it in taxes and told of a case this morning by a Congressman from an ad it is in the Treasury. joining State, a member of the joint committee investigating 1\Ir. JONES of Washington. I was just coming to that. the schools of the District, which is not an isolated one. Three Mr. CURTIS. I beg the Senator's pardon. individuals from his State have established their nominal resi Mr. J01\TES of Washington. I am glad the Senator suggested dence in the District of Columbia, and· as a result they escape it. The Senator has stated it very clearly. We propose to take taxation upon their stocks and bonds and intangible property care of that and make available for the District that $4,000,000, in their home State, and the limited amount of tax which they or whatever it is, of surplus that has been taken from the tax pay here is so small that the difference between that which payers of the District and not used on the 50-50 basis. 'Ve they pay here and that which they would pay if they were believe that in justice and equity the money belongl'l to the citi taxed in their own State enables them to live in comparative zens who paid it upon the theory and under the system that affiuence in the District of Columbia. required the Government to contribute $1 for every dollar Mr. STERLING. Is the Senator satisfied that they have a that they. contributed, and should be used on that ·theory and right to escape an intangible tax imposed by the law of the on that basis. Then we provide, of course, that if in the future District of Columbia? Is it not a rule or principle of law that any surplus arises, it can be credited on the succeeding year, personal property follows the residence of the owner for taxa and if there is any deficit it has to be made by raising the H tion purposes? Of course, · we can not change the situs of real per cent rate. estate, but personal property follows the residence of the owner. Mr. CURTIS. The Senator realizes, too, that that surplus If a resident of the city of Washington attempts to put his is a surplus which was not in part credited to the Govern money on deposit in a bank in Baltimore or in a city.outside of ment of the United States or taken from the Government, but the District, I think he is liable to the intangible property tax was actually paid in by the taxpayers of the District. on that money in the District of Columbia, if it be discovered. 1\fr. JONES of Washington. Oh, yes;· it was actually raised Mr. KING. Another case that came to my notice showed in taxes. It is contended in another body that that has gone that though the taxpayer paid tax here upon intangible prop into the Treasury of the United States and is the property and erty, he was able to save hundreds of dollars per annum because the money of the United States and that the citizens of the tax here is so much less than that he would have been com the District have no right, title, or claim to it. In the pend pelled to pay in his home State. It is claimed that under the ing bill the committee have recognized the claim of the citizens system of taxation adopted here hundreds, if not thousands, of · to that money and the claim that it should be expended for im· person of great wealth establish their residence in Washington provements of the District that we have heretofore had under in order to avoid the heavy taxation in their own States. It consideration. is also claimed that if they paid a tax in the District of Then, as I said, we provide that this rate of taxation, 12 per Columbia upon their intangible property based upon the assess cent, may be raised by the commissioners if it is necessary to ment which is levied here they would save hundreds of thou raise it in order to produce the 50 per cent which the people of sands of dollars in the aggregate in the matter of taxes .in the the District must pay. course of a year or two. In other words, the taxes are so much Mr. NELSON. If the·Senator will allow me, this amount can less in the District than in the States from which they come not be raised except on real estate and tangible property. that the individuals who seek to establish a residence here arc Mr. . JO~TES of Washington. Oh, yes; or by the intangible influenced in so doing by· the pecuniary advantages derived property tax imposed by the existing law. therefrom. Mr. NELSON. No. The provision about the increase in sec Mr. STERLING. I wish to say to the Senator from Utah tion 3 limits it to two kinds of property, real estate and tangible that when the subject was first up in an amendment which I · personal property. . had the honor to offer to the District of Columbia bill I in- LXII-W 290 O'ONGRESSION_._U RECOl{D~SENA['E. DECEJ\fBER 13 ------~~-----y------' veAtigated the rate -upon intangible property as fixed in States and ass~ssed at their fail· ~ash valne, and .as taxes on said moneys ·or by the laws of the States. The rate provided for 'here eon·e and cred1ts there·sball be paid to the tax collector of said District four -sponds to the ·rate upon intangible ·property in the State of Min tenths of 1 ..Per cent of i:be ·value thereof. nesota. The 1tendenc-y thas ,been, •I think, where there have l)een . Mr. 'KING. 1\Ir. President, befozre the -vote is taken upon tlti.s ta-xes imposed upon intangible :property in the various ·states, bill I shall offer an amendment. 'In line 6 of the first pa"'e I to lower the rate, and that on the theory that intangibles ean shall move to strike out the word " fifty " and insert the ;ord eas.ily ·escape taxation and ·th,at the temptation is, if there is a "fortyt" and in line 7, to strike out i:he word "fifty" and insert high rate, for property to be disposed of or put in some oth.er 'the wo~d ".sixty." ·mhe object of .the amendment is to change jurisdiction so it would escape taxation and· no revenue -at all the ratio or proportion from that contained in the bill so that be derived theJ:efrom. I think the 3 mills tax rate het"e is the Government will pay but 4.0 .per cent and the Di;trict 60 pe~haps now in accordance with the :general theOl·y in ·1·egard per cent. to intangible property taxes. In view of the fact •that the Conference on the Limitation of 1\Jr. KING. If the Senator ·Will pardon me, .I think :many of Arz~ament is t~lking abo-ut Tatios wit11 respect to the navies o.f the States in the Union tax_· stocks and bonds the same as they varwu~ countries, ·the Se!lato1· .from 'Vashington will probably tax real estate. They tax -according to value. be willmg to use the Tatro which I suggest. The question be Mr. STERLING. I i.hink tbat·is not true:generally I wiil say fore us seems to be perennial. It ha oceupied the attention of to the Senator from Utah. I think ·the di~osition· •in later years ·Congress at yari_ous times for many years. When the popula- bas ·been to lower the tax on intangibles·. Jt may be ·so in the tion of ~~ D~str1ct was -much less than at present, and property 'Senator's State. For a time .it was ·so in my State. values ms1gnificant, measured by the }Jresent yalue (if the real _fr. KING. If there .ha.s been a lowering·of .tax ·on intangible nud personal property within ·the District, as well as the in property there ·has been an a'Q.gmentation of tax upon ineomes. tan.gible ~'Jro~erty subject to taxation, a ratio was established '1\fr. S3JERLING. No; the theory .of ·putting the low ax on which t?1s bill seeks -to retain. ··It was then . ·acred in thi · 50--W program which is so \ehemently urged? pay a just tax, and let the Government of the United States pay It ,Yould s:eem that the property of the District of Columbia is the balance. so sacred thnt it must be protected from taxation. Let me say to the Senator that the amendment which I haYe Let me ask the Senator from ·washington, if I may have his offered provides that tl1e District shall pay 60 per cent and the attention, if lle will consent to an amendment to this bill to this Government 40 per cent. I do not justify that upon the ground effect, that all of the property within the District of Columbia, that it is logical. It may be unfair. It is just as logical as real, personal, and mixed, including franchises, and all forms the 50~50 ratio, and I know it is very much fairer, because from of intangible property, which in progressive communities is the investigations which I have made I know that the District subject to taxation, shall be assessed at the market value, and property should pay 60 per cent or more of the burdens of tax then be subjected to a just and reasonable rate or levy, and the ation in this District. re\enue deri"red therefrom to be paid into the Treasury of the But if the Senator will not accept the proposition that the United States, to be devoted to meeting the expenses of the people here shall pay a reasonable tax and a fair tax, and insists pistrict go"\'ernment, and that whatever sum or amount in addi upon a ratio, upon a proportion, then let him accept the one tion thereto may be required to meet such expenses shall be which I have suggested, which is fairer. If my recollection appropriated by the National Government. Will the Senator serves me rightly, we are already operating under the G0-40 accept an amendment of that character? ratio. The House insisted, when the Senate adhered to its Mr. JONES of Washington. :Mr. President, I would not ·ac 50-50, upon the 60-40 ratio ; they compelled the Senate to accept cept an amendment of that character. I would be willing to that, and they are operating under that now, and, as the Senator take up nny tax proposition, however, correcting any inequali from Arkansas [Mr. CARAWAY] suggests, are obtaining surplus ties in the tax laws which the Senator may propose. I pre revenues. Notwithstanding the fact that the District is now sented the reasons why I thought there ought to be something paying GO per cent, the Senator from Washington and other definite and certain with reference to the proportion which members of the District Committee are determined to force should be paid by the District and by the United States, and through the Senate a bill which will relieve the property holders I thought I gave \ery good authority for it. of the District from paying one-sixth, measured in percentages, Mr. KING. Mr. President, the .authority largely consisted of of the taxes which they are now paying. a statement by former Senator Blackburn, of Kentucky. The l\fr. LENROOT. Mr. President, this is a bill the purpose of principal reason assigned by him for his position was that if which is to reduce the taxes now imposed upon the District of one desired to purchase property he would want to know the :rate Columbia and make the people of the United States outside of of taxation to which such property would be subject. As a rea the District contribute to the upkeep of the District a larger s<>n, measured by practical experience, it is not only fallacious portion than they are now contributing. That is the effect· of but it is absurd. the bill; that is the only purpose of the bill~ and before the 1 call the attention of Senators to the fact that no one in Senate should be asked. to act favorably upon a proposition of any progressive State or municipality knows what the taxes for that kind its proponents should be able to show conclusively the coming year or the immediate future will be. Who can to the Senate that the taxes now paid by the District are so predict with certainty the rate of taxation or the value which great as not to be just and reasonable. will be placed upon property in New York, ·washington, or Wis Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President-- consin, or any city or State of the Union for the year 1923 1\lr. LENROOT. I yield to the Senator from Kansas. or 1924? Not only values but rates vary from year to year. l\Ir. CURTIS. Is not the Senator mistaken in his statement The requirements of cities and States and political subdivisions that this reduces the taxes to be paid? It will have no effect differ each year, so it is impossible to fix any sum as the cer of that kind. The present law, which expires July 1 next, tain amolmt which will be required for taxes for a given period. fixes the rate at 60-40, and the rate for tile ensuing year One year a State may be engaged in road building, the next will have to be .fixed in the next District appropriation bill. year it may be engaged in a comprehensive scheme for public The object of the pending bill, as I understand it, is to try improvement of a different character. It may want a capital. . to reach an agreement between the House and the Senate on a So it adjusts its taxes with reference to its needs, and the man policy. The bill has .fixed the rate at 50-50, because that is who buys real estate or personal property in a State or munici the existing law and has been held as the fundamental law of pality buys with the knowledge that no one can definitely deter the District by the Supreme Court of the United States. mine what his taxes will be. l\Ir. LENROOT. It is not the existing law for this year. 'Vhy should the inhabitants of the District of Columbia be l\Ir. CURTIS. I mean it is the permanent law, aud we only placed upon a different footing from persons residing in other amended it for the year in the District appropriation bill. cities? It is quite possible that real estate purchases in Wash Mr. LE~"ROOT. That is true. My statement is exactly cor ington may be increased by reason of the supposed permanent rect that the conh·ibution now is upon the ba •is of 60-40, and policy of the Government to tux the property witlrin the Dis the purpose of the bill is to make the basis of W-50 instead trict in such a manner that it will yield but 50 per cent of the of 60-40. costs of runni_ng the District government. But that is no suffi Mr. CURTIS. .Again I state that the present basis of the cient reason for ndopting an unfair system of taxation. permanent law is 50-50, and while it was changed in the appro .l\Ir. President, it is human nature, perhaps, to seek to lighten priation bill to 60-40 it can be changed again to 60-40 in the one's burdens and it seems to me that behind this measure is a next appropriation bill if the two Houses can not get together rlesire upon the part of some property holders in the District of in the p1eantime on a satisfactory basis. Columbia to escape paying a fair and just tax. I readily con 1\Ir. LE:t\TROOT. The Senator says this is for the purpose of cede the honesty and high integrity of Senators supporting this getting an agreement upon this much controverted question be bill, but I believe they are mistaken in their course and are tween the House and the Senate, ancl yet this bill proposes to unconsciously promoting an unreasonable and unjust plan. compromise by having the House surrender its position and go 'Vhy should the people of the District of Columbia, and the back to the present law, which, of course, the House will not do. property of the District, pay a lower tax than is paid in other Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, will the Senator permit an progressive cities of the United States? Do not the people here interruption? enjoy benefits? Do they not have schools? Do they not have 1\Ir. LENROOT. Certainly. ·all of the concomitants of a splendid and progressive civiliza Mr. NORRIS. I may not understand it fully, but it seems . tion? Indeed, the advantages enjoyed by the residents of the to me that the bill is almost useless. If the Senator from / District are in many ways greater than can be found in any Kansas is correct-and I presume he is-that the permanent city in the world. Yet with all these advantages, shelter is law provides for a 50-50 diYision, and in an appropriation sought under the protection of Congress in order to escape fair bill Congress disregarded that permanent law and made the and just taxation. appropriation on the basis of 00-40, what good would it do The House over and over again has denounced this scheme, to reenact existing law and provide for a 50--50 basis if Con and the Senate over and over again has approved it. Why is gress again, if it saw .fit when it comes to the next appro the Senate so zealous in extending protection to the taxpayers priation bill, could change it and put it in any other ratio for of the District of Columbia? Why are Senators so solicitous that particular year? What are we accomplishing. whether we to ha\e the property owners escape paying a fair tax? Why pass it or not? shoulrl not Senators vote for a proposition that the people of 1\Ir. CURTIS. l\fr. President. if the Senator from Wisconsin the District shall pay a reasonable, a fair, and a just tax, and, will yield further-- after having done that, whatever deficit results in the adminis 1\fr. LENROOT. Certainly. tration of the affail·s of the District, that the Government of the Mr. CURTIS. I would like to state .fir t tllat it has always United States shall pay the residue? That would be fair, and been the practice, or was up to two years ago, if one House if, upon that plan, the Government pays 50 per cent, or 60 added an amendment that in any way changed existing law, that per cent, or 70 per cent, no one could object. Let the people if the other body insisted upon existing law or the permanent 294 !'{ ·.· · CONGRESSIONAL RE ··:;:law the.bouy making -the- ~bange -would..·g.ive in o.r.-I·eQede. "' Two ~e full $H},OOO,QOO. That leaves· .the Distriet a surplus of a years ago · the House refused to · do that, ·and the Senate, iil million· dollars, but no surplus on the part of· the Government, order to ·pass the bill, yielded to -the 60--40 basis. . The sa1pe · because the Government stops at $9,000,000. The Government thing occurred in the last appi;opriation bill. So far as I am only meets what the District uses. concerned, I do not think the 60-40 or 50--50 makes very much Mr~ LENROOT. When that million dollars for the following tlifference, except the 50-50 is the amount voted for by the. Sen year is used the Gove1·nment contributes a million dollars, does ate at all times. it not? However, there are provisions in the bill which, I think, are Mr. CURTIS. Certainly. It meets it then instead of this of vast importance to the District of Columbia. For instance, year. if the bill passes there will be no more surpluses put in the Mr. LEN ROOT. And the taxpayers are to get the benefit? Treasury, or if there is a surplus the District will be permitted Mr. CURTIS. Why not? They paid it in. to use it Under the practice which has been-followed hereto Mr. LENROOT. Let us see. The result, then, is to 1·educe fore for years little surpluses have accumulated from year to the charge upon the taxpayers constimtly if there be a surplus. year and have gone into the Treasury of the United States, . !\fr. CURTIS. If there be a surplus it simply reduces the and now amount to over $4,000,000. Last year millions or more amount of taxes for the next year and the Government does in we1·e needed to build schoolhouses in the District; when the the next year what it otherwise would have done the year be streets needed improvement, we attempted to use this surplus, fore if the money had all been used in the year before. and were preYented from doing it because the Members of Mr. LENROOT. So the Government must at all times, another body claimed that the money did not belong to the tax whether the money·is needed, match dollar for dollar the money payers who had paid it in, but that it was money belonging to raised by taxation in a given year for the purposes of that year, the United States. If this bill is passed-and these, I think, but whenever used the Government must match every · streets are in an :l:wful .cOndition' and should be improved, and create a better fe~lipg upop. the part of the Members· of· the tire blame is on the Congress. ot~er House w,ho)iotu~e · v~ews ;.they qp with reference to this Mr. LENROOT. If tlrat·is true under the 5o-50 propositio.~, ye-ry importat_lt ques-~ton. .On the· contrary, if this bill passes, it is ve11r evident that it is dne to some other cause than this I prophesy this :;lfternoon ~ that the House of Representatives propositton, because this 'iVill not help that situation. will compel th~ : sepat~ . ~gp;fe·rees again to do exJidly what they 1\fr. CURTIS. ·As I said a moment ago, I believed, as this did on the lasfoijl, or tli'e.re will.be no bill. That is one reason had been provided as tlie fundamental law, had been declared why I do not ~nk... tbis .J?Ql ou_glit to pass. virtually the constitution · of the District of Columbia i?Y the Mr. President, the 00.:50 proposal can not be justifi-ed upon any Supreme Court of the United States, that it was our duty to basis of reason. It is ap ~rbitrary proposition. Who is there stand ·by tlie 50-50 propoSition, believing further, as I did, that can say that because the seat of government is he-re that a 50 it was about as fair a basis ·a.S we could have until the two per cent ratio is just wlf~f the Government ought to pay for bodies of Congress could get together and ag,.._ee upon some the upkeep of Jhis Di~trict? thing that would be reasonable . and· fa:ir. I still believe that Senafors tallf about tlie.j;>arks here and the property that has this is the best way to do it. ' · · · been removed.~ from tii"e.· fteld of taxation. So far as parks are Mr. KI~G. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? concerned, every other city in the United States provides parks Mr. LENROOT. I yield. out of its own taxes and maintairis them out of its own, taxes, Mr. KING. T.he Senator from Kansas does not mean by which bas not been done' here in the District of Columbia. That his statement as to what the Supreme Court did that that in is true also as to many other things which tbe people of the hibits Congress from passing any sort of bill we see fit? District here enjoy; not on ·a 50--50 basis, but on a basis of the Mr. CURTIS.' Oh, certainly. I ha_ve just stated that I entire eXpe:nse being paid out of the Treasury of the United think it ought to stand until Congress dqes act. States. ?.Ir. KING. Then the Senator thinks that we ought to change, WQile it is not an argument which appeals to me, when Sena- · and change it in all fairness and reasonableness, and impose tors talk about one-half of the property being withdrawn from upon the property in the District of Columbia fair and reason- taxation and the burden of the taxpayers being thereby in able taxes? . · creased, I desire to suggest that there is not a city in the Mr. CURTIS. I certainly do. United States of the same population as Washington which Mr. KING. And let the Government pay the balance? would not be delighted to make a proposition to remove the seat Mr. CURTIS. I thilik the Government ought to pay the bal of government to their city and to 'pay every dollar of taxes. I ance, but I am not ready to say that 60-4o-although I gave repeat that, of course, that is not an argument, and yet it is in as chairman of the subcommittee for two years-is fair and quite as good an argument as some of the arguments that have just for the people of the District. been used upon the other side of this question. Mr. LENROOT. Mr. President, with due regard to the Sena It is also true that whene-ver a hundred acres are withdrawn tor from Kansas, I get rather tired of hearing about this ~w of for the purpose of a park here in the city of Washington the 1878 being the fundamental law in the nature of a constitution value of the surrounding property is immediately increased, for tbe District. · · · sometimes in the aggregate a great deal more than the original. Mr. CURTIS. I was· simply using the language of the Su value of the property withdrawn from taxation. pl·eme Court o.f the United States. · Mr. President, I do not wish to see the people of this District Mr. LENROOT. I understand that, and very proper lan pay one single dollar more of taxes than is just; I would not guage for the Supreme Court or any administrative body to wish them to pay any more in taxes than is paid upon the aver use, but for the Congress of the United States that made it age by people of other citi~, although it is true-! am not and the Congress of the United States whose jurisdiction it is speaking of the political rights now-that the people of the Dis to change it, there 'is nothing sacred about it. trict of Columbia do enjoy privileges furnished by the United Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, I have not claimed that there States Government, paid for out of the Treasury of the United was anything sacred about it. In fact, I have said I should like States, increasing the value of private property in the District, to see it changed ; I should like to see the two bodies get which people of other cities do not enjoy. together. It seems to me clear that there is but one proper, reasonable Mr. LENROOT. Yes; but I think, M.r. President, that the basis upon which the taxation question should be settled. We bodies can get together a great deal quicker and a great deal ought to have a commission.,..--and on it there should be no one easier if the Senate shall propose something that is different owning any property in the District of Columbia, I may say from existing law, which we know the House of Representatives which should ascertain what is the average rate of taxation for will not accept. The House-and I was a Member of that body all purposes in cities of the size of Washington, and, having during a part of this controversy-! may say, has not very ascertained what that average rate is, apply it. If it is one-half, much confidence in the Senate in dealing with this question. as is provided now, well and good; let it stand and let that be If the Senate would show a little greater disposition to agree the rate. Then, whatever amount is necessary in order to meet upon some reasonable basis, the two Houses would get together the deficit created by appropriations made by Congress for the a great deal easier upon this subject. I have the greatest con District of Columbia should be paid out of the Treasury of the fidence, .of course, in the members of the committee, but there United States, whether it be more than 50 per cent or whether is an impression at the other end of the Capitol that the Senate it be less than 50 per cent. in dealing with this question has paid not very much attention Mr. PHIPPS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me? to its merits, but has paid a good deal of attention to the wishes l\1r. LENROOT. I yield. of real estate owners in the city of Washington. I do not 1\Ir. PHIPPS. I should like to ask a question. How would believe that; I believe the Senator from Kansas [Mr. CURTIS] the Senator arrive at values that would be comparable for the has considered and studied this matter faithfully and is just as purpose of determining what the taxation here should be? As honest in his opinion as is any Member of the other House. sessments are not the same in any two cities in the United Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, as I have previously said, I States. They are supposed to be based on full value, but we h ave read all of the hearings contained in the report of the well know that they are not, and never have been. commission of 1878 and the hearings of 1918, and I have taken 1\fr. LENROOT. Mr. President, a commission properly con the position which I thought was right, and I feel sure the stituted could get sufficient information as to the proportionate_ Senator would have taken the stand I did if he had been on rate of assessments which is practically uniform. In some the conference committee. cities the assessment is upon a two-thirds basis or a 50 per I wish further to say to the Senator that if it had not been cent basis or a 75 per cent basis. That can easily be ascer- _ for the fact that tbe District appropriation bill carried the tained. money for the schools of the District of Columbia, the bill Mr. PHIPPS. On two-thirds or 75 per cent of what? probably would have been killed; but, as one of the conferees, I l\1r. LENROOT. Of the true value of the property. did not feel that I had the right to deprive the people of this l\1r. PHIPPS. Of the true value of the property, which is an District of the appropriations which they needed simply because estimated value. I was not pleased with the attitude of the conferees of the other 1\fr. LEl\TROOT. Of course it is. House. Mr. PHIPPS. And which is estimated differently not only Mr. LENROOT. Had I been a member of such a confer ence in different cities but in different parts of the same city. committee I should have done exactly as the Senator did, if I Mr. LENROOT.. Yes; that is true. had held his views; but I want to say, Mr. President, that, in l\1r. PHIPPS. So that a fair basis could hardly be arrived my opinion, the passage of thi. bill is not going to improve the at in that way. situation of which the Senator now speaks ; the passage of the 1\fr. LENROOT. NeYerthel£>ss, that kind of an estimate pending measure is not going to conduce, upon an appropriation would at least have some basis in judgment , whereas the propo bill or otherwise, to · a getting together of tbe two Rouses or sition for which the Senator now stands is purely arbitrary. ~ 296 .CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 13, Mr. PHIPPS. Mr. President-- · ~- : , · o; ~~ : "" ~h{t. ~-::- :t ~-:0 if you ru.·e going to have the officials and employees of the _Mr. LENROOT. I yield. different Federal departments located here you must expect to l\fr. PHIPPS. The Senator from Wisconsin preceded me In provide homes and proper facilities for them." You would not service here, anu I never bad the ho:r;~.or of being a Member of find a State off~ring to carry the entire burden; that would be the other body; but the Senator, I think, will hardly recall a unreasonable. time when there_was a dispute over the 50-50 arrangement as Mr. LENROOT. What is the difference between a State between tbe Government and the District of Columbia until we Capital and the National Capital, except relatively? became involved in the World War, when, by reason of the Mr. PHIPPS. The ·difference between a State Capital and neglect to erect school buildings, to construct roadways, and to the National Capital is that a State capital is to a great extent carry on other public works, the proportion of 100 per cent a m~re incident. The location of a State capitol in a given city which was paid in accot;ding to the estimates by the. city tax involves, perhaps, the acquisition of no more than from H to 4 payers \Vas not used and became a surplus which was held acres -of ground, even in the largest State capital in the United in the Treasury of the United States. The accumulation of States. The State capitals have manufacturing and other in that surplus is the reason why tbis proposition was advanced dustries. The Federal Capital is not intended as a manufac. by the House; otherwise 've would never ha,ve heard any criti turing center and is not maintained for any such purpose. cism of the 30-50 plan. That is the information I have.' If Mr. LENROOT. Does the Senator from Colorado think that the Senator has any different informatioot I shall be glad to the ownership by the Government of property and the activities hear it. of the Government are a bw·den and a hardship upon the pe<>ple l\Ii·. LENROOT. I can correct the Senator's information, of the District of Columbia'? for. I wp.. a l\lember of the House long before the World War Mr. PHIPPS. I think when the Federal Government brings began, and this subject was then one of the very acute subjects employees here by the thousands it must expect to do more for of conti·overl:\y. There were investigations and reports made them than if it were an ordinary city. upon this Yery proposition long before we entered the wai·. l\fr. LENROOT. No, no; the Senator will please answer my Mr. PHIPPS. Mr. President, I have been a taxpayer in two question. Does he think the Government activities in the Dis other cities of the Unites States, as well as a taxpayer in this trict of Columbia are an injustice and a hardship upon the city. I have no personal reason for wanting to see the rate of people of the District of Columbia? taxation kept low on the real estate in this city, other than that Mr. PHIPPS. Of course the answer to that question is, No. ·the citizens of the District of Columbia should be fairly treated, 1\lr. LENROOT. What would the property here be worth if but I am strongly of the opinion that the rate of taxation I am it were not for those activities? It woulu be worth about $20 called upon to pay in the District is at least as great as it has an acre. been in the other cities where it has been my privilege to live. Mr. PHIPPS. What would it cost to keep it up? It is the Mr. LENROOT. If that is true, the Senator fTom Colorauo cost of maintenance that makes taxation necessary. is very fortunate in the ownership of his property in other Mr. LENROOT. Certainly. . cities. Mr. PHIPPS. It is not the mere existence of a city. Mr. KING. l\lr. President) may I interrupt the Senator from J\Ir. LENROOT. Mr. President, I do not for an instant sug Wi cousin? gest that the people of the District of Columbia should pay all 1\Ir. J.ENROOT. I yield. that it costs to maintain the city of Washington. We ought Mr. KING. The Senator from Colorado inuicates that this to make the city of ·washington the most beautiful place in is a new que tion and if it had not been for the war and some the world, and it ought to cost a great 1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. ·. 297 the United States, and, if finally covered in, reduce the Govern - Mr. ·LENROOT. I think they ought to pay here in the Dis ment's contribution by that amount? trict the average rate, as nearly· as it can be ascertained, that Mr. LENROO'l'. Why should the Government contribute any they would pay anywhere in the United States under like cir· more than.is necessary to make up the deficit after a reasonable cumstances. rate has been imposed? That is my question, and that is what Mr. GLASS. But what I want to know is, how are you going I have failed to get an answer to. to adjust the rate of taxation to the requirements of the District l\fr. PHIPPS. The question of a reasonable and fair rate of Columbia? When you apply a rate of taxation to any given is a moot question, and it is one on which we do not agree. community it is the rate of taxation required for the necessities The Senator thinks that 50-50 is not fair to the Federal Govern of that particular community. - ment. With all the study I have been able to give it since I Mr. LENROOT. Certainly. Then I would have paid out of have been here, I think it is. the Federal Treasury all that ·is necessary beyond that, whether l\lr. LENUOOT. What does the Senator base his 50-50 it is 50 per cent or 60 per cent or 30 per cent. proposition upon? I should like to know what reasonable l\Ir. GLASS. But there would be nothing beyond that if you ground there is for it. Why does the Senator say that the Gov applied to the property owners of the District of Columbia the ernment should contribute just 50 per cent, -and not 45 per cent tax rate-necessary to meet the necessities of the District. or 55 per cent? l\Ir. LENROOT. Oh, no; I did not say the tax rate necessary Mr. PHIPPS. Probably for the opposite of the reason that to meet the necessities of the District. I say that if, for in the Senator says it should be 60-40. stance, the average throughout the United States of cities of 1\fr. LENROOT. I have not said that. 500,000 people is 1-! or 2 per cent upon the full value of the Mr. PHIPPS. The Senator is making an argument along property-and that can easily be ascertained-that should be those lines. the fixed rate here upon realty in the city of Washington. l\Ir. GLASS. l\fr. President, with i·espect to the surplus, bow Mr. GLA"SS. Suppose that rate should nieet all of the re does the Senator arrive at the conclusion that the surplus is quirements of the District of Columbia? composed of revenue derived from the taxation of property in l\Ir. LENROOT. Then there is no reason in the world why the District? any money should be paid out of the United States Treasm·y. l\ir. PHIPPS. Becal!se it comes from no other source what l\lr. GLASS. That is what I sought to draw from the Senatot·. ever. No Government money is paid excepting that which goes The proposition is, if the District should raise it all, theJ;l there d1rectly to the ·liquidation of the expenditures incurred. would be no obligation upon the GoYernment of the Unitecl Mt·. GLASS. Say, for example, that $9,000,000 of Government States to supply a dollar. funds is appropriated, and $9,000,000 assigned to the District of Columbia to be derived from taxation. Mr. LENROOT. Not a dollar. Mr. PHIPPS. Yes. l\Ir. KING. That is my contention, too. Mr. GLASS. Is the entire $9,000,000 apprepriated by the l\Ir. LENROOT. Mr. President, in addition to that, it can not Government used? be denied that 'Vashington has became the haven and the refuge of people from all over the United States, one of the purposes Mr. PHIPPS. Yes; it. is. ! do not say the main purpo e, but one of the inducements-being Mr. GLASS. Then, how do you arrive at the conclusion that that their taxes will be less here in the District of Columbia the $1,000,000 carried to surplus is totally derived from local taxation? than elsewhere; and it eems to rue that before \Ye attempt to make permanent this arbitrary [)0~50 proposition, at least we Mr. PHIPPS. Because the rate of local taxation was based should apply here in the District the system of taxation that . on a figure that would raise $10,000,000, and the $10,000,000 was is being applied in other States. There ought to be an inherit raised and paid into tl1e Treasury; but the appropriation for the ance tax. This ought not to be a place-the only place, I District was only $9,000,000, one-half of the $18,000,000 carrieu believe, in the United States to-day-where a man can move by the bill. Therefore there remained a surplus of a million with his family and feel that wJ1en he dies there will be no local dollars. inhcri tance tax to pay. There ought · to be· a reasonable income l\fr. GLASS. But the example cited by the Senator was that tax, similar to that which is imposed by the States, in audition of a total revenue of $18,000,000. to the Federal income tax. Mr. PHIPPS. No; I beg the Senator's pardon-a total ap propriation of $18,000,000, of which the Government was to pay In other words, the man who lives here in 'Vashington, getting one-half and the District one-half. the privileges tl1at lle does in the way of Government activities Mr. GLASS. Yes. and what the Government furnishes for his pleasure and his Mr. PHIPPS. The taxation raised by the District was comfort, ought not to enjoy an advantage here in the way of $10,000,000, or $1,000,000 more than the amount require(} to taxation. All I ask is that those matters be equalized, that men pay its half of the total appropriation, and therefore that mil should be called upon to pay as much here as elsewhere. If it is lion dollars remained as a balance. That is merely illustratin:; H per cent, as proposed in this bilJ, I am content. · in round figures the fact that during the past few years those People talk about the difficulties ·of ascertaining it. In my surpluses haYe accumulated year by year until, as said by the State we have a State tax commission whose duty it is undet· the Senator from Kansas, they exceed $4,000,000 to-day . in the law to ascertain, for the purpose of fixing a rate of taxation Treasury of the United States. upon railroads, the aYe1·age taxation of the State, based upon 1\lr. GLASS. In other words, the fund derived from taxation the full Yaluc of the property. It does it every year. It does it as the District's share was, we will say, a million dollars more to the satisfaction of the public and the railroads, and there is than was appropriated by Congress as the Government's share'? not the slightest difficulty about it. So a commission could l\.fr. PHIPPS. It would average about that over a four-year ascertain the average rate of taxation in half a dozen or a dozen period. cities comparable to Washington in population and fix it as the Mr. GLASS. Then, I would say that that funrt belongs to rate of taxation for the Dish·ict of Columbia. If it is H pe.:.· the District of Columbia. cent, let it stand at H per cent; if it is 1f per cent, make it H Mr. PHIPPS. That is our contention; but the contention of per ceut; and then let Congress appropriate whatever is neces the House is that that $4,000,000 belongs to the Federal Govern sary to make up the difference, whatever it may be, whether it ment. be more than ;:;o per cent or whether it be less than 50 per cent. Mr. LENROOT. Mr. President, of course the result of thi ·, Mr. OARA WAY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? as is desired by the Senator from Colorado and as will be pro l\lr. LENROOT. Yes. posed by this bill, is this: l\:lr. CARAWAY. Before the Senator takes his seat, I shoultl Take the illustration that the Senator gives. He will correct like to suggest to him a proposed amendment for his considera me if I have not understood him correctly. We will say that tion, if he cares to have me uo so. there is $10,000,000 raised by taxation. There is $18,000,000 ap Ta1.'ing the bill as offered, let this part of the language stand, propriated, leaving a million dollars surplus. · The Senator "that the general expenses of the District of Columbia shall be would have that million dollars deducted the next year from chargeable to and paid out of the Treasury of the United States." the amount to be raised by taxation, irrespective of the fact Then, after the word "States," in line 5, page 1, strike out all that the $10,000,000 that '"as raised by taxation was no more the balance and insert the following as section 2: than the taxpayers reasonably ought to pay for the benefits they The rate of taxation in the District of Columbia shall be fair and enjoy here in the District. . reasonable, and the revenues thus derived shall be covered into the Mr. KING. Less than what they reasonably ought to pay. Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts. . l\lr. LENROOT. That is the proposition. That would obviate all the difficulty the Senator from Kansas Mr. GLASS. How do you arriYe at what the taxpayers of the referred to about surplusage. They simply put tlleil· money ioto District of· Columbia reasonably ought to pay? the Treasury, and out of the Treasury come all the expenses of 298 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEl\IBER 13, the government of tlre'· District of Columbia. - It takes care of Mr. LENROOT: There_h~ _ ' no~ been the contest in the las·t every other suggestion ·in the bill. few years. ·Mr. LENROOT. How would the rate be ascertained? Mr. KING. The_Senator ·· is referring to the Appropriations 1\fr. CARAWAY. Congress, of course, will have to fix the Committee? · · rate. I understood the Senator from Washington wanted to fix Mr. CURTIS.· The Subcommittee on · Appropriations has re· some definite means by which we could proceed, and the position _fused to hear the real ~~~ate ~deal~rspr' the D,lstrlct of Cplumbi1,1; of the Senator from Wisconsin is, as I understood him_-and I and we have passed upon tlie'District app1'9priation bills upon thoroughly agree with him as I understood him-that tlie peo. ·the record as we could get if''nnd· our own information. We pie of the District of Columbia should pay a fair and a reason· called in the })eopie we believ.ed· Iill_ew about the condiHo.ns, and able tax, and then the Govet·nment should pay the diff,!¥'ence. if they did not have the information we have made them get it The bill then would provide that the expenses of the Distr.ict for us or we have gotten it for ourselves. of Columbia should be paid out of the Treasury of the United Mr. DIAL. Mr. President, I would like to ask the Senator States, and section 2 would provide that- from Kansas if-it is nof true' that we provide in these bills The rate of taxation in -the District of Columbia shall be fair and where th-e money shall be sperit, on what streets, and so on? reasonable, nnd the revenues thus derived shall be covered into the Mr. CURTIS. That is true, except that there is a fUJl.d fo'r Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous recei-pts. general repairs, which may be used by the District Commis· 1\ir. LENllOOT. The difficulty I see with that is in fixing the sioners in their discretion, but usually Cgngress designates rate. I am frank to say that I .would rather fix the rate in the where the money shall be used or what streets shall be paved bill at one and a half, just as it is, and get the correct principle and that certain others shall be . repaired. There is a general adopted, and let. the one and a half stand until we can get an fund out of which the commissioners may repair those which ascertainment of what is a fair average rate. J they think most need it under certain circumstances. l\1r. CARAWAY. It is a tentative amendment I have sug· l\fr. ·KING. The designation of the places where the money gested for the consideration of the Senate. I should not ob· should be spent has been made as the result of testimony which ject if we provide that the rate of taxation shall be as now pro· came before the committee. vided in the law, until we change it. l\fr. CURTIS. I do not like to take up so much of the titne 1\fr. LENROOT. That woUld establish the correct principle. of the Senate, but the members of the committee in the last I do not desire to seek to increase the taxes in the District of four years have made it their practice to go over all the streets Columbia, unless they ought to be increased, and that only and determine for themselves, after looking over the various upon a fair, impartial investigation; but there is no foundation sections, what sti·eets should be improved. that can be based in logic for this 50-50 proposition. It ought Mr. DIAL. Would it not be well to leave that to the com to be done away with, and the same is true of the 60-40 propo- missioners? Congressmen are very busy, and do not have time' sition. That is not any more logical than the other. to study all those things out. · The Senator from Kansas has intimated that Congress will Mr. CUR'l'IS. The committee took time to do it. Last year not make the necessary appropriations for the District of Colum- I think every member of the subcommittee went out; that is bia unless this 50-50 proposition be adopted, but I call the at- my recollection. tention of the Senator from Kansas-who knows it even better 1\Ir. DIAL. The reason I asked the question was to d_evelop than I-to the fact that as long as we have had this 50-50 prop- the fact that a short time ago I viewed a great development osition, there has been co·nstant complaint here in the District on the edge of the town, and it seemed to me to be much 1lne'r of Columbia that we have not made sufficient appropriations, and more expensive than the surroundings required, and per and I do not think that this will have anything to do with that haps the city would have been better off if that money had been question one way or the other. otherwise expended. .. Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, r have been on the District__ sub- _ Mr. CURTIS. I judge the money referred to was used out committee of the Appropriations Committee for many years, of the general fund. The subcommittee made no recorrimenda· and I never heard any serious complaint about the amount tion, uuless they were certain that the improvements were appropriated until about three or four years ago ~ In other actually needed. · w·ords, the commissioners seemed to be well satisfied up to that Mr. CARAWAY. I suggest for the consideration of the Sen~ time, and that was when the surolus commenced to accumulate. · a tor from Wisconsin as an addition to the amendment that there Mr. LENROOT. The Senator has been on the Committee on be added section 3, to read as follows: Appropriations, and I ask the Senator if he has found any oppo- Until otherwise provided by law the rate of taxation shall be as now sition here on the floor of the Senate to appropriations made existing. for the District of Columbia? Mr. LENROOT. I think that ·would. be a very desirable 1\fr: CURTIS. I would have to say yes. amendment to make. Mr. LENROOT. I do not remember it. Mr. CARAWAY. May I suggest, then, what the amendment Mr. CURTIS. We have sometimes had pretty hard fights here would be if the bill were passed? over the bill. Before I became chairman of the subcommittee 1\Ir. LENROOT. Certainly. I remember that we used to take about three weeks to pass 1\Ir. CARAwAY. First: the bill. I think the two times I have handled the bill, one time That the general expenses of the District of Columbia shall be we passed it in 45 minutes and the other time in a day and a chargeable to and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. half. Then strike out all the remainder of the bill and insert: 1\fr. LENROOT. Wllenever the Senator from Kansas has SEc. 2. The rate or taxation in the District of Columbia shall be fair handled the bill it has gone through very rapidly. and reasonable, and the revenues thll.S derived shall be covered into Mr. CURTIS. I am not throwing any bouquets at myself- the Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts. Mr. LENROOT. It is a fact. SEC. 3. Until otherwise provided by law, the rate of taxation shall be 1\Ir. CURTIS. I am simply stating that to show the Senator as now provided. that there has at times been some opposition. I remember once That would be the way the bill would read. it took three weeks to pass the bill. I remember the Senator Mr. GLASS. That would not increase the sources of taxa ·from New Hampshire, Mr. Gallinger, was once taken sick, about tion in any respect. What is to become of the peTsonal property eight years ago, and I was asked to take charge of the bill,. and and securities now exempt? What is to become of the objection we were at least a week passing it. · raised by the Senator trom Wisconsin that there is no local 1\fr. LENROOT. I remember when there was controversy income tax and no inheritance tax? over the District bill, but I never heard of any controversy over Mr. CARAWAY. That would all be a question for Congress. the items in the District bill with reference to schools and other If it proceeded to fix the rates of taxation, all those questions absolutely necessary things for the District. I do know of a would be taken care of. I think, myself, the Senator from Wis great deal of controversy over items in the bill with reference consin is entirely correct in saying that we ought to have an to acquiring property, where there was more or less suspicion inheritance tax and an income tax in the District of Columbia, as to who the beneficiaries of such action fuight be. as they have in Virginia, and it merely fixes a workable basis Mr. CURTIS. I think the Senator is right. I do not remem until Congress shall have disposed of the question. - ber of any particular opposition as to schools, but tli'ei:e ·-was... in l\fr. KING. 1\Ir. President-- one of the Congresses quite a fight on the schools. The PRESIDING OFFICER (1\Ir. POINDEXTER in· the chair). Mr. LENROOT. The Senator knows there-,ver.e quarrels be .noes the Senator from Wisconsin yield to the Senator from tween rial estate men here in the city of Wasliiniton--- tliat did Utah? bring on such contests. Mr. LENROOT. I yield. Mr. CURTIS. I state for the _committee that during the lnst Mr. KING. It seems to me, from the questions propounded four years we have refused t9' - ~~t the real estate men of this by the Senator from Virginia, as well ns the general discus District come before our co~ttee to be heard. sion, that this bill is premature, as well as being exceedingly 1921 . .. CONGRESSIONAL RE00RD-· SENATE. ·t · l' ; ~=-···1. 299 • 1 I ~ r ·J 1 c • 1 • •·imperfect. • It establishes no· principle: I does not- determine who is nec-essarily ·absent. I transfer that-pair to the Senator the chaiacter of· taxation; It Uoes not determine whether we from Rhode Island [Mr. GERRY] and vote "nay.'' · shall have an income tax. or . an estate tax, or what not. . It. , Mr. GLASS (when his, name was called)·.· I have a general leaves those questions ·for future determination. It merely pair with the- Senator from Vermont [Mr. DILLINGHAM]. In provides that the District shall only pay 50 per cent of the his absence I withhold my vote. burdens of running the District of Columbia, and then it leaves Mr. TRAMMELL .(when his name was called). I transfer it for future legislation to dete1~mine how the taxes which the my pair with the senior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. C-oLT] District shall pay are to be raised. to the senior Senator from Arizona [Mr. ASHURST] and vote It does seem to me that we ought to pass a comprehensive "yea." taxation bill, providing a reasonable inheritance tax or estate Mr. WARREN (when his name was called). I inquire if the tax, a reasonable income tax, and a fair and just method of Senator from North Carolina [Mr. O~M.A.N] has voted. assessing the value of property in the District, and fixing a rea The VICE PRESIDENT. That Senator has not voted. sonable rate, such as obtains in progressive cities of the United Mr. '\-V ARREN. I have a pair with that Senator, which I States which receive such advantages, or approximately the transfer to the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BBANDEGEE] ~tnu adYantages, because none receive as great as are enjoyed by vote" nay." the inhabitants of this District; and then provide that after The roll call was concluded. assessing the property along those lines, and obtaining that Mr. FERNALD. I have a general pair with the senior Sen amount of reyenue, whatever deficit results the Treasury of the ator from New Mexico [Mr. JoNEs]. I transfer that pair to the United States shall be called upon to meet. junior· Senator n·om Arizona [Mr. CAMERON] and vote "nay." Mr. LENROOT. Mr. President, I agree with the· Senator Mr. KELLOGG. I transfer my pair with the senior Senator from Utah, and if this bill does not pass the Senate, I am very from North Carolina [Mr. SIMMONS] to the junior Senator confident that the c-ommittee will take this matter in charge, from Indiana [Mr. NEW] and vote "nay.'' and, I hope, will present to the Senate a comprehensh·e bill, l\Ir. TRAMMELL. I desire to announce the temporary ab based upon some sound principles, which this bill clearly is not. sence of the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. OvERMAN) on I call attention to another feature with reference to taxation, official business. . what is known as the Borland Act, which passed a few years Mr. KING (after having voted in the affirmative). I have ago, assessing to the abutting property part of the cost of pav a general pair with the senior Senator from North Dakota ing and street improvements. There is very great opposition to [Mr. McCUMBER). I transfer that pair to the senior Senator that here in the District of Columbia. Citizens' asssociations from Texas [Mr. CULBEBSON] and allow my vote to stand. are passing resolutions for the repeal of it. Under it the tax 1\Ir. KENDRICK. I haYe a general pair with the senior payer in Washington is compelled to pay 50 per cent of the Senator from Illinois [Mr. McCoRMICK], which I ransfer to cost of the paving upon half of the street abutting his property. the senior Senator from Nebraska [Mr. HITCHCOCK] and vote They are objecting to that. "nay." In the city of Superior, where I live, we pay every dollar of Mr. JONES of Washington (after having voted in the nega the eost of such improvements under what are known as special tive). The senior Senator from Virginia [Mr. SwANSON] assessments, and nearly every State of the Union imposes upon is necessarily absent. I agreed to take care of him during the abutting owner every dollar of such cost, and that is re that absence with a pair. I find I . can transfer that pair, flected, I say to the Senator from Washington, in the rate of howeYer, to the junior Senator from Missouri [Mr. SPENCER], taxation here, while it is excluded in all the rates you get from which I do, and 'allow my vote to stand. other cities, because it is not included in the general tax rate at Mr. CURTIS. I desire to announce that the Senator from all. That is another advantage citizens here have.. Yet they North Dakota [Mr. McCuMBER), the Senator from Utah [Mr. are trying to accomplish the repeal of that aet. SMOOT), the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. McLEAN], the Sena The only possible thing which can be urged against the propo tor from Indiana [1\Ir. WATSON], the Senator from North Caro sition which I have made, that a fair rate should be imposed lina [Mr. SIMMONS], and the Senator from Massachusetts [1\Jr. upon the Distl'ict and that Congress should make up the differ \V.ALSH] are detained from the Senate in attendance upon a ence, whateYer it is, is that . tated by the Senattlr from Kansas, meeting of the Committee. on Finance. that under such a system Congress will not appropriate the I desire also to announce the following pairs: moneys which ought to be approp1iated to make Washington The junior Senator from Delaware [Mr. DU PoNT] with the what it ought to be.. Senator from Louisiana [Mr. RA~SDELL]; If that is true, it ,,.ill be the fault of his own committee, be The Senator from New J'er ·ey [Mr. EDGE] with the Senator cause the Senate will pass, as the Senate bas passed ever since from Oklahoma [Mr. OwEN] ; I have been a Member of thi body, anything for the District of The Senator fi•om New Jersey [Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN] with the Columbia which the Committee on Appropriations is willing to Senator from Montana [1\Ir. ' VALSH]; - give to them, and I belie-ve that in an time to come· Senators The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. LODGE] with the Seua and l\Iembers of the House will have sueh pride in the city of tor from Alabama [Mr. UNDERWOOD] ; Washi1,1gton that they will be much freer to vote whatever The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. McLEAN] with the Sena ought to be voted out of the Treasury of the United States tor from Montana [Mr. MYERS]; when they feel that the citizens are paying their fair share The Senator from Nevada [Mr. 0DDIE] with the Senator than a share, under this present ystem, which is so unsatis from Ohio [Mr. Po:MERENE]; factory to so large a percentage of the House and of the Senate. The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. PENROSE] with the I believe that in the interest of the District itself, in the in Senator from Mississippi [Mr. WILLUMS]; and terest of the two Houses getting together, this bill should not The Senatm· from ~faryland [Mr. WELLER] with the Senator pass. If it does pass, in my judgment it will only increase the from Louisiana [1\fr. BROUSSABD). distance between the two Houses; it will only accentuate the .The result was announced-yeas 17, nays 26, as follow differences between them. I am satisfied that the House will AYES-17. never agree to this 50-50 proposition, and to pass it now, in the Caraway King . Robinson Trammell face of the agreement which has been made for this current Dial La Follette 8bields Wil1is Harris Len root Smith year, I say to the Senator from 'Vashington [:Mr. Jmms] and Harrison McKellar StanfiE>Id the Senator from Kansas [Mr. CURTIS], both of them on the Heflin McNary 8utherland Appropriations Committee, that if this is passed it will eause trouble, in my judgment, in the next appropriation bill, and they NAYS-26. Bur sum Fletcher McKinley Sheppard ·will not get any further in what they seek to accomplish than if Calder France Moses Sterling the bill is killed, as I think it ought to be. Capper Hale Nicholson Townsend Mr. KING. Mr. President, in view of the discussion which Curtis Jones, Wash. Page Wadsworth Elkins Kellogg Phipps Warren bas taken place, I feel sure that Senators desire further Ernst Kendrick Pithnan time to consider this measure, and I believe that the District Fernald Keyes Poindexter Committee ,,.ill be glad to consider it further. I therefore ~OT VOTING-53. move that the bill be recommitted to the District Committee. .Ashur t Cummins Hitchcock Myers Mr. JONES of ·washington. On that question I ask for the Ball Dillingham - Johnson Nelson Borah duPont Jones, N.Mex. New yeas and nay . Brandegee Edge Kenyon Newberry The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Assistant Secretary Brou. sard Frelingbuysen Ladd Norbeck proceeded to call the roll. Cameron Gerry Lodge Norris Colt Glass McCormick Oddie - Mr. FLETCHER (when his name was called). I ha\e a gen Crow G<>oding McCumber Overman eral pair with the senior Senator from Delaware [Mr. BALL], CulberRon HarreJd McLean Owen CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEJ\IBEB 13 300 ' Penros SimmaM Underwood Weller other in the county of Santa Ro a, Fla..," and to insert "at a · rome rene Smoot Walsh, Mass, Willimns Ransdell Sp ncer Walsh. Mo:nt. po-int saitable to the interests of navigation, between said coun Reed Stanley Wa:tson, Gai. ti-es, and at or near Century, Fla."; a.n grade) in tbe Navy, by promotion from aid, with relative rank l\1aj. John Fleming Clapham1 Infantry, from November 26, of ensign in the Nav:r, in the United States Coast and Geodetic 1921. Surrey, in the Department of Commerce, vice Leo C. Dyke, To be nwjors. promoted. Capt. Eugene Owen Hopkins, Finance Department, from De PROMOTIOKS IK THE REGULAR ARMY. cember 16, 1920. To be colonel. Capt. Elmer Ellsworth Lockard, Finance Department, from December 16, 1920. Lieut. Col. Laurence Halstead, Infantry, from ~ovember 26, Capt Dana \Voods Morey, Finance Department, from Decem- 1!>21. ber 17, 1920. · To be lieutenant colo11cls. Capt. Selden Brooke Armat, Finance Department, from De. Maj. Robert John Binford, Infantry, from December 16, 1920. cember 19, 1920. Maj. John Augustus Brockman, Infantry, from December 19, Capt. George Zinn Eckels, Finance Department, from Decem 19~0. ber 21, 1920. Maj. Charles Conaway Burt, Coast Artillery Corp , . from Capt. Jerome Clark, Finance Department, from December 21, December 21, 1920. 1920. ~faj. Sheldon \Vebb Anding, Infantry, from December 22, 1920. Capt. Louis Maloney Thibadeau, Finance Department, from ~1aj . William Gai.ther Murchison, Infantry, from December December 21, 1920. 23, 1920. Capt. Frank B. Shel1y, Finance Department, from Deeember Maj. Jo. eph Howard Barnard, Quartermaster Corp~ , from 22, 1920. D c mbcr 27, 1920. Capt Clarence Maynard Exley, Finance Department, from Maj. Rodman Butler, Quartermaster Corp·, from January 6, December 23, 1920. 1921. Capt. Otto Wilhelm Cralund, Finance Department, from De Maj. Howard Stanley Miller, Coast ArtiHery Corps, from cember 27, 1920. J'anuary 19, 1921. Capt. Horace Grattan Foster, Finance Department, from. De Maj. Clarence Lininger, Cavalry, from January 26, 1921. cember 28, 1920. Maj. Edward Murray OfHey, Cavalry, from January 28, 1921. Capt. James MacKay, Finan(!e Department, from December Maj. John Cocke, Cavalry, from January 29, 1921. 31, 1920. 302 · CONGRESSIONA·L R.ECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 13, Capt. Tllomas Scott rugb, Finance Department, from January Capt. Edward Goring Bliss, Corps of Engineers, from March 1, 1921. . . 16, 1921. Capt. Stcph{'n Roscoe Beard, Finance Department, from Janu- Capt. Horace Logan l\IcBride, Field Artillery, from l\Iarch ary 5, 1921. . 18, 1921. Capt. George Nicoll Watson, Finance Department, from Janu- Capt. Ra1pll Gillett Barrows, Corps of Engineers, from March ary 6, 1921. 18, 1921. . Capt. Guy Russell Doane, l"inance Department, from January Capt. Holland Luley Robl>, . Corps of Engineers, from 1\Iarch 7, 1921. 18, 1921. Capt. Emmet Crawford Morton, Finance Department, from Capt. Hamilton E"·ing 1\Iaguire, Field Artillery, from March January 13, 1921. 19, 1921. Capt. Harold George Salmon, Finance Department, from Jan- Capt. Ray Corrigan Rutherford, Field Artillery, from March nary 14, 1921. 24, 1921. Capt. Ed Norment Enders, Finance Department, from Janu· Capt. Frederick Walker Bonfils. COt·ps of Engineers, from ary 19, 1921. l\larch 29, 1921. . Capt. Archie Henry Willis, Finance Department, from Janu- Capt. Robert Reese Neyland, jr., Coeps of Engineers, from ary 20, 1921. April 12, 1921. Capt. Edward Tiffin Comegys, Finance Department, from Capt. William Morris Hog{', jr., Corps of Engineers, from January 21, 1921. April 23, 1921. Capt. Harrison \Villard Smith, Quartermaster Corps, from Capt. William Roscoe 'Voodwanl, Field Artillery, from April January 26, 1921. 27, 1921. Capt. Horace Grant Rice, Finance Department, from January Capt. Stanley Lom:o Scott, Corps of Engineer , from April 27, 27 1921. . 1921. Capt. Charles Russell Insley, Quartermaster Corps, from Capt. ·Tatt.nall Daniell Simkins, Corps of Engineers, from January 27, 1921. April 27, 19~1. Capt. Ernest Palmer Hoff, Finance Department, from January Capt. Henry. Crampton Jones, Field Artillery, from April ':..7, 27. 1921. 1921. Capt. 'Vilhelm P. A. T. von Hartung, Finance Department, Capt. Leslie Thomas Saul, Infantry, from April 27, 1921. from January 27, 1921. Capt. Carl Lee Marriott, Coast Artillery Corps, from April 27, Capt. Montgomery Taft Legg, Finanee Department, from 1921. January 28, 1921. Capt. James Arthur Pickering, Field Artillery, from April 27, Capt. James Asa Marmon, Finance Department, from January 1921. 28, 1921. Capt. James Knox Cockrell. Cavalry, from April '27, :1921. Capt. Walter Davis Dabney, Finance Department, from Janu- Capt. Hugh Allen Ramsey, Coast Artillery Corps, from April ary 29, 1921. 27, 1921. Capt. Percy Gabriel Hoyt, Pionnce Department, from Jaun- Capt. William Spence, FielU Artillery, from .d.pril 27, 1921. ary 29, 1921. Capt. John White Rafferty, Field Artillery, from April 27, Capt. William James Lisle, Finance Department, from Janu- 1921. arv 30, 1921. Capt. Willis McDonald Chapin, Coast Artillery Corps, from Capt. William .Alexander MacNicholl, Finance Department, April 27, 1921. from February 1, 1921. Capt. Fred Beeler Ingli ~· . Field Artillery, from April 28, 1921. Capt. Carl Halla, F'inance Department, from February 1, Capt. Rol>ert Bruce McBride, jr., Field Artillery, from April 1921. 29, 1921. Capt. Charles Franklin Eddy, Finance Department, from Capt. Paul YincE:'nt Kane, Field Artillery, from May 9, 1921. February 1, 1921. Capt. De Rosey Carroll Cabell, jr., Onlnanc Department, Capt. "-'illiam 1\Iaynard Dixon, Finance Department, from from l\lay 9, 19~1. February 1, 1921. Capt. Ralph Irvine Sasse, Cavalry, from l\lay 9. 1921. Capt. Richard Le Roy Cave, Finance Department, from Feb- Capt. \Villiam Ewen Shipp, Cavalry, from 1\Iay 9, 1921. roar~· 2, 1921. - Capt. Carl Smith Doney, Con t Artillery Corps, from May 9, Capt. Alfred James Maxwell, Finance Department, from Feb- 1921. ruary 2, 1921. Capt. William Hisatt Cureton, Field Artillery, from l\Iuy 9, Capt. Orva Earl Beezley, Finance Department, from Febrn- 1921. ary 2, 1921. Capt. Fay Brink Prickett, Field Artiller~'. fr·om Mar 9, 1921. Capt. Frank Elmer Parker, Finance Department, from Feb- Capt. 'alvin De \\'itt, jr., Cavalry, ft·om May 10, 19~1. ruat')' 4, 1921. . Capt. James l\litcllell Crane, Field Artillery from 1\:lay 10, Capt. Edwin Fairbrother Ely, Finance Department, from 1921. February 8, 1921. Capt. Lucien Samuel Spieer Berry, Camlry, from 1\Iay 10, Capt. Raymond George Moses, Corps of Engineers, from Feb· 1921. ruar~· 9, 1921. · Capt. Victor William Beck Wales, Cav:::tl[·r. from l\lay 11, 1921. Capt. Wilhelm Delp Styer, Corps of Engineers, from Feb· Capt. William Earl Chambers, Infantry, from l\Iay 11, 1921. ruary 10, 1921. - Capt. Joseph l\Ierit Tully, CaYalry, from June 18, 1921. Capt. Charles Holmes Cunningham, Corps of Engineexs, from Capt.· James de Barth 'Valbach, Uoast Artillery Corps, from February 10, 1921. June 19, 1921. Capt. Dwight Frederick Jolms, Corps of Engineers, from Feb- . Capt. Warner· William Carr, Infantry, from June 21, 1921. ruatT 11, 1921. Capt. Hugh Mitchell, Signal Corps, from July 1, 1921. Capt. 'Villiam Arthur Snow, Corps of Engineer·, from Febru- Capt. Robert LeGrow \Valsh, Air Service, from July 1, ·1921. ar·:v 16, 1921. Capt. Richard l\Iar Lev~-. Coast .Artillery Corps, from July 1, Capt. Thomas Dewees Finley, Infantry; from February 16, 1921. 1921. Capt. Thomas Lyle Martin, Infantry, from July 2, 1921. Capt. Elroy Sandy Jackson In·ine, Corps of Engineers, ft•om Capt. Geoffrey Prescott Baldwin, Infantry, from July 3, 1921. February 26, 1921. Capt. John· Bennington. Bennet, Infantt·y, from July 14, 1921. Capt. Stanley Eric Reinllart, Field Artillery, from February Capt. Clarence Scott Maulsby, Cavalry, from July 15, 1921. . 27, 19~1. Capt. Kenneth Macomb Halpine, Infantry, from July 17, 1921. Capt. Notley Young Du Hame.l, Corps of Engineers, fr·om Capt. George Sidney Andrew, Cavalry, from July 29, 1921. ~'ebruat·y 27, 1921. Capt. Roland Paget Shugg, Field Artillery, from August 2, Capt. Wilburn Henry Henderson, Col'ps of Elngineers, ft·om 1921. February 271 1921. To ue captains. Capt. Robert George Guyer, Cot-ps of Engineers, from March . 2, 1921. First Lieut. Hugh Whttt, Quartermaster Corps, from Decem- Capt. Dean Hudnutt, Field Artillery, from March 4, 1921. 1 ber 16, 1920. . Capt. Louis Emerson Hibbs, Field Artillery, from l\larch 4, I First Lieut. Edward Hayward Raymond, Corps of Engmeers, 1921. from December 16, 1920. . Capt. Robert Allen Sharrer, Corps of Engineers, from March 1· First Lieut. Cllarles Frederick \Vtlson, Quartermastet· Corps, 12 1021. I from December ·17, 1920. . Capt. Ludson Dixon Worsham, Corps of Engineers, from : First Lieut. Fred William Crisp, Coast Artillery Corps, from March 13, 1921. l Decembet· 1!), 1920. ' 1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 303 First Lieut. Ray Aloysious Dunn, Air Ser ice, from Decem-" Fh·st Lieut. Carl Bierwirth Sem.·ing, Infantry, from February ber 21, 1920. 2, i92i. . First Lieut. Irwin Wilson Guth, Quart-ermaster Co:rp8, from Fn-st LLeut . . Robert Lake Miller, Quart.ermaster Corps, from December 21, 1920. FebFuacy · 3, 1921. First Lieut. Crawford 'M:cMann Ke-llogg, Chemieal Warfare First' IAei::It .. Ralph Eli !Fleischer, Quartermaster Corp , "from Service, from December 21, 19~0. Fel)'ruary4, 1921. First Lieut. William Frank JohnS®, Infantry, ft.om Decem First. Lieut... Robert Oliver White, Quartermaster Corp., from ber 21, 1920. Febr11iry -4~ lQ.21. First Lieut. Frank Dennison Wheeler, Quartermaster Corps, Fii-st Lieut. William Foelsing, Quartermaster C-orp , from from December 22, 1920. F.ebruary ~ S. 1921'. First Lieut. Herbert Allen Gardner, Quartermaster Corps, First . Lieut. Charles William Dietz, Quarterm~ster Corps, from December 23, 1920. froin" Februtil~y 9, _19_21, First Lieut. F~·ed Place, .A:-ir ~~_rvic_e,_~ fE.~~ D,e~llll?er 24, ., !9,~ Jl'irst Lieut. Wa~r Lane Shearman, Quartermaster Co0rps, First Lieut. Albert Lobitz, Quartermaster Corps, from De.. cember 25, 1920. from Febryfi_ry '9, ., 1-:~~- · Fi:rst Li~Iit. $p.~~l How.es .Baker, Quartermaster Corps, First Lieut. Birnie Lee Brunson, Finanee Department, fr.om from Feb~~Y.- 10, -1~1. Decemb-er 2a, 1920. First Lieut. EliShtt.,.Kenneth Henson, Quartermaster Corps, First Lieut. Simon Jacobson, Quartermaster Corps, from De from -February i~~. e-ember 27, 1920. io. ... First Lieut. John Is.ham _ ~_pore, Air Service, from Febnrary First- Lieut. Edward W..i.lliam Lachmiller, Quartermasrer 11, 1921, sulijectJo;exa.riitnatian required by, law. Corps, from December 28, 1920. First' Lie_ut. .J;J.cj§d "Milton Garner, Quartermaster Corps, from First Lieut. Talmage Phillips, Quartermaster Corps, fl-oro FeOruary 16, 1921. December 29, 1920. First· Lieut. John Parr Temple, Air Service, from Febr.uary First Lieut. John Paul Tillman, Quartermaster Corp , from 16, 1921. December 30, 1920. First Lieut. Vance Lawton Richmond_, Infantry, from Feb First Lieut. George "Y!l_!?l!l M~Enjire, - ~ Service, from De cember 31, 1920, subject to examination.'l'eql'lired by law. ruary 17, 1921. First Lieut. John-Ne'Wport Greene, Cavalry, from January 1, First Lieut. Earl Trask Loucks, InfaDtry, from February 22, 1921. 1921. First Lieut. Harris Markham Findlay, Field Artillery, fr-om First Lieut. Frank Arthm· Mertz, QuaTt-ermaster Corps, Janu February 26, 1921. ary 1, 19~, subjeet . to .~ exar:Qw.atio¢requiroo b;y~aw. First Lieut. William McK.ee Dunn, Field Artillery, from Janu- , First Lieut. Alfred Dorrance Cameron, Infantry, from Feb ary 5, 1921. ruary 26, 1921. First Lieut. .Asa Jeremiah Ethe·i-dge, Air Servi-ce, from Janu- First Lieut. Russell Cray First Lieut. Arthur Foster Gilmore, Coast Artillery Corps, . F~rst Lieut. Donald Sutter l\fcConnaugby, Field Artillery, from April 12, 1921. _ frot.U _JlJ~ 2, 1921. 1' irst Lieut. Lawrence Walter Marshall, Infantry, from April ' !first Lieut. .John Theodore Sunstone, Infantry, from June 2, 13, 1921. 192).. ]i... ir t Lieut. .John August Otto, Infantry, from April 1,31 1921. First Lieut. Richard Brownley Gayle, Infantry, from June 7, 1.i''irst Lieut. .Joseph Burton Sweet, Infantry, from April 13, 1921. 1921. . First Lie-ut: Frederick Webster Deck, Corps of Engineers, First Lieut. William Quinntullus .Jeffords, jr., Coast Artillery from .June 18, 19~1. Corps, from April 16, 1921. First Lieut. Jo·seph Houston Payne, Infantry, from .Tune 18, First Lieut. Robert Chandler Knowlton, Cavalry, from April 1921. 17, 1921. First Lieut. .Jesse Benjamin Smith, Infantry, from June 19. First Lieut. Garland Cuzorte Black, Cavalry, from April 23, 1921. 1921. First Lieut. Guy Edward Dillard,- Cavalry, from .Tune 19, l 1'irst Lieut. George Anthony Patrick, Coast Artillery Corps, 1921. from April 24, 1921. First Lieut. Robert Tappan Chaplin, Coast Artillery Corps, First Lieut . .Joseph Andral Nichols, Infantry, from April 27, from June 19, 1.921, 1921. I . First Lieut. Ititymond Edwin Vermette, Infantry, from .June ~'irst Lieut. Leon Lightner Kotzebue, Infantry, from April 27, 21, 1921. 1921. First Lie!Jt. Abraham Robert Ginsburgll, Field Artillery, from ll'irst Lieut. Walter Christian Thee, Coast Artillery Corps, J tme 23, 1921. from April 27, 1921. First Lieut. Elijah Garrett Arnold, Infantry, from June 23, First Lieut. Thomas Reed Holmes, Infantry, from April 27, 1921. 1921. First Lieut. Benjamin Witwer Pelton, Infantry, from .June First Lieut. Roscoe Irwin McMillan, Infantr·y, from April 27, 25, 1921. 1921. First Lieut. Henry Carrington .Jordan. Infantry, from .July First Lieut. Nicholas Dodge Woodward, Infantry, from April 1, 1921. 27, 1921. First Lieut. Robert Elting Woodward, Infantry, from .July 1, First Lieut. Edgar William King, Coast Artillery Corps, from 1921. April 27, 1921. . First Lieut. Farlow Burt, Infantry, from .July 1, 1921. First Lieut. Riley Edward McGarraugh, Coast Artillery First Lieut. Warren .Joseph Clear, Infantry, from .July 1, Corps, from April 27, 1921. 1921, sul>ject to examination required by law. First Lieut. Allan Preston Bruner, Coast Artillery Corps, First Lieut. Arthur Arnold Baker, Infantry,- from July 2, from April 27, 1921. 1921. First Lieut. Egbert Frank Bullene, Cavalry, from April 27, First Lieut. Joseph Nathan Arthur, Infantry, from .July 2, 1921. 1921. First Lieut. Mark Gerald. Brislawn, Infantry, from April 27, First Lieut. Dean Ambrose Jones. Cavalry, from .July 3, 1921. 1921. • First Lieut. James Henry Howe, Infantry, from .July 3, 1921. First Lieut. Carleton Burgess, Cavalry, from April 27, 1921. Fil-st Lieut. Robert Artel Case, Infantry, from .July 8, 1921. First Lieut. Arthur Eugene Fox, Field Artillery, from April First Lieut. .John Russell Deane, Infantry, from .July 10, 27, 1921. 1921. First Lieut. Robert Francis Kelley, Infantry, from April. 28, First Lieut. Richard Zeigler Crane, Ordnance DE'partment, 1921, subject to examination required by law. from .July. 14, 1921. First ·Lieut. Carleton Smith, Infantry, from April 29, 192i. First Lieut. Paul Carson Febiger, Cavalry, from .July 14, 1921. First Lieut. Hall Conover Grippel', Signal Corps, from April First Lieut. Hilliard Vincent MacGowan, Infantry, from July 29, 1921. 14, 1921. First Lieut. LeCotmt Haynes Slocum, Field Artillery, from Fir t Lieut. Norman Bemis Chandler, Infantry, from July 15, April 29, 1921. 1921. I~"lrst Lieut. Edwin Fry Barry, Ordnance Department, from First Lieut. Richard Ogle Welch, Infantry, :from July 17, 1921. May 2, 1921. First Lieut. Leslie Walter .Jefferson, Coast Artillery Corp·, First Lieut. Hinton Fort Longino, Field Artillery, fron1 May from July 19, 1921. 4, 1921. First Lieut. Dirnetrio Peter Harkins, Cavalry, from July 22, First Lieut. Frederick Harry Black, Field krtillery, from 1921. 1.\Iay 8, 1921. Fil-st Lieut. Bruce l\Iagaw :McDill, Cavalry, from July 23, First Lieut. Josef Robert Sheerz, Field Artillery, from l\Iay 9, 1921. 1921. Fit·st Lieut. James Fairbank Smith, Infantry, from July 23, First Lieut. Warren Slaughter Robinson, Field Artillery, from 1921. May 9, 1921. First Lieut . .John Reigel Embich, Chemical Warfare Service, First Lieut. Charles Paul Cullen, Infantry, from May 9, 1921. :from .July 29, 1921. . First Lieut. Fred William Koester, Cavalry, from July 31, First Lieut. Fre Seco nd Lieut. Arthur Jennings Grimes, Infantry. Second Lieut. Carroll Heiney Deitrick, Ordnance Department. Second 'Lieut. Walter Dm·al Webb, jr., Field Artillery. Second Lieut. Burton Larrabee Pearce, Field Artillery. Second Lieut. Ernest Starkey 1\loon, A).r_Service. Second Lieut. Alan Dean Whittaker, jr., Coast Artillery Corps. Second Lieut. Lee W. Haney, Infantry. 'l'o be (inst lieutenants 'With mnk tmm, Att!fl.tst 4, 1921. Second Lieut. Leon Crescencio Reyna, Ordnance Department. f4 ('cond Lieut. Charles Emmett Cheever, Quartermaster Corps. Second Lieut. David William Goodrich, Air SeiTice. Second Lieut. Paul Gustav Wehle, Air Service. Second Lieut. Franklin Mitchell, Infantry. Second Lieut. Vesper Anderson Schlenker, Field Artillery. Second Lieut. George William White, Infantry. Second Lieut. Harry Meyer, Corps of Engineers. Second Lieut. Arnold Hoyer Rich, Infantry. Second Lieut. Peter Anthony Feringa, Corps of Engineers. Second Lieut. Philip Fisher Robb, Field Artillery. Second Lieut. John Russell Perkins, jr., Field Artillery. Second Lieut. William Hypes Obenour, Field ATtillery. Second Lieut. WaiTen Catlin Hamill, Infantry. Second Lieut. Wallace Ellsworth Niles, Infantry. Second Lieut. Edward Barber, Coast Artillery Corps. Second Lieut. Lewis Edward Weston Lepper, Field Artillery. S~ cond Lieut. Edward Hall Walter, Corps of En.gineers. Second Lieut. Edward Harris Barr, Field Artillery. Second Lieut. David Albert Morris, Corps of Engineers. Secob.d Lieut. l\1elecio Manuel Santos, Philippine Scouts. Se"OQ. LXII--20 GONGRESSIO.t ~ A:·L ~R. EOORD-SEN ATE. DECE1\IBER 13, .... M.ED'IC.AL -cORPS. Byron McCandless. George C. Pegram. To be captain. William E. Eberle. ·Theodore G. Ellyson. Fir t Lieut. Joseph ~\.aron Mendelson, Medieal Oorps, from John W. ·wncox, jr. Russell'Willson. November 15, 1921. Leigh Noyes. Arthur L. Bristo1, jr. DENTAL CORPS. j. Lieut. Commander Frank J. Fletcher to be a command~ in tlle Navy from the ·25tli.>(Jay of ·June, 1921. To be captains. Lieut. Commander ·:walter' F. Jacobs to be a commander in the First Lieut. Henry Allen Winslow, Dental Corps, from NO· Navy from the 1st day of July, 1921. vember 14, 1921. The following-named lieutenants to be lieutenant ·commanders First Lieut. Ernest Frank ·s1wrp, Dental CorJ:JS, f1·om No~ in the Navy from the 3d il:rv ·-of Ju-ne,"l921: vember .17, 1921. Harold T. Smith. Edmund S. R. Brandt. First Lieut. Clarence Roy BeniJey, Dental Corps, from No Arthur S. Dy-sart. Freeland A. Danbin. vember :21, 1:921. WallaceJJ. Lind. Vir_gir.T. Dixon. CHAPLAL"'·S. Charles E. Re01•dan. Clifford E. Van ·Hook. To be chapladn at.ilih the mnlv of eapt~ ·in. 1\fark C. Eowman. \Valier E. Brown. Chap1ain Om Ja on Cohee, :from October .4, 1921. Charles ~I. Entler. MilUn.gton B. ·l\IcComb. Han-y W. Hosford. 'Stanley_!R. Canine. VETERINARY -COXPS. Melville S. :Brown. Henry B. Cecil. To be first Ueutenan·t. llenjamin V. McCandlish. . Second Lieut. Nathan l\Ienzo Neate, Veter·inary Oorps, from . Lieut. Robert T. Young to be a lieutenant commander in tlie November 24, 1921. Navy from the "1st day of "Ju:ly, 1921. Lieut. (Junior Grade) George E. 1\faynard to be a lieutenant APPO.INnfENTS I~ THE REGULAR :AltMY. in the Navy ..from the 1st dey- ·of Jtrly, 1920. .GENERAL t(')FF!CERS. • Ensign Leonard 'Doughty, jr., to be .a lieutenant (junior Brig. Gen. Harry Foote Hadges to ·be major general from grade) in the Navy from the 3oth,day, of-March, 1920. . . December 21, 1921, vice Maj. Gen. John F. Morrison, who is to Ensign George E. Maynard to be a iielitenant (junior grade) be retired from aetive erv-ice December :20, 1921. in the Navy from the:28th-day of June, 1920. Brig. Gen. Omar Bundy to _be major .general, vice :Maj. ·Gen. "The following-named -pass-ed assistant surgeons io be surgeons Harry F. Hodge-s, who Will be retired immediately upon con· in the Navy with the rank of lieutenant commander from tlie firmation l1nder the acLap:proved March 4,' 1915 (Piinama Canal 11th ·day of May, 1921: a('t). . Harry E. Jenkins. Col. Benjamin Andrew Poore, Infantry, to be brigadier :gen Stanley D. Hart. Nal, vice Brig. Gen. Harry·F .. Hodges, to ·be appointed major Robert G. Davis. general. Asst. Surg. Joseph iff. Durrett to ·be ·a ·f)assed .:assistant sur CoL George Van Horn Moseley; Field 'A1·ti11ery, to .be brjga. geon in the Navy \Vith tlle rank of lie11tena-nt from the 30th ·day uier gener:xJ, vice'Brig. Gen. Omar Bundy, to be appointed major of January, 1"920. general. Asst. Surg. William C. Dm'Win to be ra .pa.~ . ·etl .assistant ., nr INFANTRY. ·geon in the Navy wit11 the rank ·of lieutenant nom ·the··Oth day To :be · econd lieutenant 1:oith t:ank trom N01H3'1nber 2, 1921. of December, 1920. ~>\sst. Sm·g. Paul V. -Greedy to be a passed .a;- ·istant surgeon George W-&l'k :Marvin, ·of Calif01:nia. ' in the Navy with the rank of 1ieutenant from the 6th day of APPOINTMENTS BY "TRANSFER IN TRE REG.ULA..R ARMY. June, 1920. Passed Asst. Dental·Sm·g. Jarne. L . .Br.own to ·be a :(}ental nr· •·ORD~ANCE .D:EP.ARTloiENT. geon in the Navy· with the rank of ilieutena·nt commander from Capt. Arthur Ca&iJe Hawkins,- Coast AI;tillery Corps, 'Novem- the 11th day of Cary Johnson to be postmaster at Hot Springs, Ark., in place ~ · Elza F. Gorrell to be postmaster at Newton, Ill., in place of of R. H. Smiley, resigned. Elmer E. Burton. Incumbent's commission expired August G, Henry C. \Vade to be postmaster at Batesville, Ark., in place; 1921. ' of S. W. Deener, resigned. :Frank S.·Vandersloot to be postmaster at Farmington, Ill., in Perry W. Hampton to be postmaster....,at Glenwood, Ark., ilf place of B. J. Ritson, resigned. place of William B. Gould. Incumbe·nt's commission. expired Christ .H. Staats' to be postmaster at Downers Grove, IlL, in January 12, 1921. · place of J. D. Downer. Incumbent's commission expired Janu John Barnes to be postmaster at Leslie, Ark., in place of .al"y '8, 1.921. G. B. Greenshaw, resigned. August Koehne, jr., to be postmaster at Sibley, Ill. Office became presidential January. 1, 1921. COLORADO. Charles A.. Pease to be postmaster at Malta, Ill. Office became May D. Thomas to be postmaster at Eagle, Colo., in place of presidential July 1, 1920. R. T. De Foor, resigned. . Henry C. Minton to be postmaster at Alto Pass, Ill. Office Darli~ R. Greigg to be postmaster at Greeley, Colo., in place · became presidential April 1, 1920. of Hubert Reynolds, resigned. Edwin Temple to be postmaster at Tampico, Ill., in place of Charles H. Pollard to be postmaster at Cortez, Colo., in place J. H. Daley. Incumbent's commission expired June 23. 1920. of Minnie Johnson. Incumbent's commission expired 1\Iarch 29, Charles S. Russell to be postmaster at Neponset. Ill., in place 1920. of M. 0. Scott, resigned. 1\Iary J. Fuller to be postmaster at Two Butte , Colo. Office 'Villiam C. Henley to be postmaster at NashYill£>. Ill., in place became presidential July 1, 1921. of E. F. Bieser, deceased. Arthur R. Noll to be postmaster at Eureka, Colo. Office be Peter Thoms£>n to be postmaster at Fulton, Ill., in place of ~me presidential April 1, 1921. F. K. Bastian. Incumbent's commission expired January 10, CONNECTICUT. 1920. Ellward H. Bailey to be postmaster at Danbury, Conn., in Emil Straka to be postmaster at Berwyn, Ill., in place of t"lace of J. E. Cuff. Incumb£>nt's commission expired June 2, George Petertil. Incumbent's commi ·sion expir£>d January 10, 1920. Albert T. McLane to be postmaster at At·cola, Ill., in place of DELAWARE. John 1\IcCann, resigned. __ · Ralph W. Emerson to be postmaster at Wyoming. Del., in Gordon Winks to be postmaster at Alma, Ill. Office became place of J. H. Gooden. Incumbent's commission expired June presidential April 1, 1921. INDIAN . 27, 19~0. John ,V. Godwin to be postmaster at Felton, Del., in place of Ernest G. Meyer to be postmaster at Vincenne , Ind., in place J. G. Jester. Incumbent'!::i commission expired June 27, 1920. of R. 1\I. Robinson, resigned. FLORIDA. William A. William to be postmaster at Rome City, Ind., in place of J. A. Jennings. Incumbent's commie:sion expir(>(l DE-- Francis C. Leavins to be postmaster at Ponce D£> Leon, Fla. O.ffke beeame presidential April 1, 1921. cember 20, 1920. Willi~ D. Handley to be postmaster at Monon, Inti .. in place E. J. Freiwald to be 11ostmaster at Valparaiso, Fla. Office of W. H. Bennett, resigned. became presidential April 1, 1921. John J. ·wood to be postma. ter at Hobart, ln(l., in place of Thomas J. Bulford to be postmaster at Hilliard, Fla. Office William Kostbade. Incumbent's commission expired July 21. became presidential April 1, 1921. Mattie D. Perry to be postmaster at Floral Citr, Fla. Office 1921. - Charles ~- Jon£>s to be postmaster at Hazleton, Ind., in place became presidential April 1, 1921. of C. W. Walters. Incumbent's commission expired- March- 1G; William T. Graves to be po. tmaster at Cottondale, Fla. Office 1921. became presidential April 1, 1921. Leo Yount to b(> postmastet· at Brookston, Ind., in place of (:EORGIA. J. ,V. 'Vright, resigned. James T. Dampier to be postmastet· at Adel, Ga., in place of Mar.v A. Dooley to be postmaster at Montezuma, Ind., in plac~ John ,V. Wells, resigned. of W. J. Rierden. Ineumbent's commission expired June 1~ Claude M. Proctor to be postmaster at S{tmmit, Ga. Office 19~0 .. became presidential April 1, 192{). Frank l\1. Harwood to b£> postmaster at I.yons, Inti., in place James M. Wright to be postmaster at Screven, Ga. Office of John Davidson. Incumbent's commission expired July 21, became presidential October 1, 1920. 1921. Noel H. Bragg to be postma. . tet· at Gray, Ga. Office became GE!orge W. Overmeyer to be postmaster at Culver, Ind., in presidential January 1, 1921. place of S. J'. Lenon. Incumbent's commission expired March Joe B. Saunders to be postmaster at Ringgold, Ga., in place 16, 1921. - of D. A. Trundle, resigned. Anton R. Gustafson to b£- postmaster at Chesterton, Ind., in Jimmie R. Studstill to be postmaster at 1\filan, Ga. Office place of Charles L. Hasl£>t. Incumbent's commission expired became presidential January 1, 1921. July 21, 1921. · IDA.HO. Luella W. Geier to be postmaster at Reynolos, Ind. Office Emma C. Weber to be postmaster at Burke, Idaho, in place of beeame presidential July 1, 1920. G. W. Harris, removed. Lillie Robbins to be postmaster at Oolitic, Ind. Office became Elizabeth Helmer to be postmaster at Bovill, Idaho, iu place preside.ntial April 1, 1921. of R. A. McDonald, resigned. Walter L. Oster to be postmast(>r at Georgeto\"m, Ind. Office became presidential July 1, 1920. ILLINOIS. Robin H. Heath to be po~tmaster at Sb(>lburn, Ind., in place Bertha M. Smith to be postmastet· at Savanna, Ill., in place of J. '"· Payne, removed. of F. S. Gt·eenleaf. Incumbent's commission expired January IOWA. 10, 1920. Arty T. Parke to be postmaster at Keswick, Iowa. Office be Aquilla E. Miller to be postmaster at Salem, Ill.) in place of 1, 1921. Mollie Webster. Incumbent' · commission expired· February 7, came presidential April 1920. - . KaNSAS. Mary E. Sullivan to be postmaster at Riverside, Ill., in place of Charles A. Connel1y to be postmaster at lnuependence, Kans., M. E. Sullivan. Incumbent' commission expired July 14, 1920. in place of J. 0. Ferguson. Incumbent's commission expired Benjamin A. Kent to be postmaster at Morrisonville, Ill., in July 23, 1921. place of D. E. Noonan. Incumbent'· commission expired Sep Frank E. Enlow to be postmaster at Galesburg, Kans., in tember 7, 1920. place of Jaii)es P. Newman, resigned. Hugh H. Bolton to be postmaster at Joliet, Ill., in place of Rose R. Stapleton to be postniaster at Fulton. Kans., in place J. F. Quinn. Incumbent', co~mission expired January 10, 1920. of Mary E. Shaffer. Incumbent's commission expired July 23, Clarence H. Loveridge to be postmaster at Alexis, Ill., in place 1921. of W. M. Humphreys, re ·igned. Mi-nnie -B. Fretz to be postmaster at Canton, Kans., in place Gilbert R. Huffstodt to be postmaster at Wyanet, Ill., in place of L. D. Gassier. Incumbent's commission expirNl July 23, 1921. of Glenn P. Wyatt, resigned. . V. Gladys Reed to be postmaster at Williamsburg, Kans. Elmer E. Adams to be postmastet~ at Winnetka, Ill., in place Office became presidential October 1, 1920. of Arthur M. Kloepfer. Incumbent's commission expired Au Essie l\1. Hosman to be. postmaster at Potwin. Knns. Otlice gu ·t 17, 1921. became presidential July 1, 1920. E\·erett L. Buck to be po. tmastN at Normal, Ill., in place of Paul H. Quinn to be postmastf'r at Gf'tulu ~J)I'ings, Kaus. George Rankin, removed. Office became presidential January 1, 1!)21. CONGRESSIONAL RJOCJORD---r~ENATE. DECEl\fBER 13, Earl D. Jones to be po tmaster at Elbing, Kans. Office ,b"e._, MONTANA. came presidential July 1, 1920. 0 u E G iffi t b John W. Baker to 'be postmaster at De Soto, Kans. Office •be- -. ar~o · r n ° e postmaster at•Glendive, Mont., in place . '11.f; :rohil F. Butler. ffncumbent's -connni ·on · >:pired January ame presidential January 1, 1921. 11-, 1920. KENTUCK~. Jes~e~ D. ~~r~ingto be1postmaster at Wilsall, Mont., in place Joseph R. ~immel to be postma-ster at Drakesboro, 'Xy. Office _ of ..A. M. ifohns. Incumbent · commi sion expired December 20, ·became pre idential January 1, 1921. 1920. · Hebron La"\-nence to be postmaster at Tompkinsville, ·l{y., .in Edgar_.P .. Mizell to be rpostmastar at Troy, Mont., in place of place of B. L. :Bradshaw. Incumbent's .coii:l.Diissioii' expireo ne- · Hallie Savage. Incumbent's commis, ion expired March 16, cember 20, 1920. 1921• ..Jobn P . .Balee to be postmaster at 1Guthrie, Ky'l in .place of" Elbert L. Stackho~e to be ,postmasteJ.• at Thompson Falls, Thomas Mimms. Incumbent's commission eipi:red Jnly 21j Mont., in place of William Moser. Incumbent's commission ex- 1!>20. 'pired August 3, 1920. L01JISIANA. NEBRASKA. Berne e S. Mnrquart to be postmaster at Lake Arthur, La., in Clu·ence J... McEntaffer -to be rpostmaster at ·Emerson, Nebr., place of Clifford C. Anderson, jr., resigned. in place .pf Wliliam Sweeney, resigned. Mable B. Leland to be postmaster at K_intler, ~a., in place of Charles C. Wake to be post-p1aster at St. Edward, NE~br., in Will A. • teidley. Incumbent's commission expired July 21; place of W. G. Law:rence. Incumbent's commis~ ion expire·d 1921. April 24, 1920. George A. Rau to be postmaster at Gretna, La., in place of Luther A . ..Howard •to be •postmaster .at Hyannis, Nebr., in Geo1·ge H. Thoede, resign~. place of Sadie E. Flaherty, resigned. Leslie 1\1. Hill to be postmaster at Crayens, La. Office became Charles A. Smiley to be ,postmaster at Shubert, Nebr. Office presidential July 1, 1920. became presidential July 1, 1920. John H. Allen to be postmaster at Plain Dealing, La., in _place ,of J. H. Allen. lncumbent's commission expired March 16, NEW "JERSEY. 1921. Christian Kuhlthau to be postmaster at Milltown, N. J., in Johnnie D. Stagg to be postmaster at Longville, La., in place place of John V. L. Boorael!l, 1·esigned. of H. L. Rhorer, resigned. William -S. Kershaw ·to be postmaster at Neshru;Iic Station, Bernard Isaacs to be postmaster at Gueydan, La., in place of N. J., in 1place .of W. R. Huff. Jncumbent~s commission e-xpir d C. N. LeBlanc. Incumbent's commission expired April 19, 1921. l\Iarch 16, 1921. Alice I. Redmond to be postmaster at Delhi, La., in place of NEW ~ORK. B. M. Hulse, remoYed. Howard Spurr to be postmaster at Red preek, N.Y., in pl~~ MAINE. of William G. Phippin. Incumbent,s commission expired Feb Eugene S. "Thurston to be postmaster at South West Harbor, ruary 3, 1920. Me., in place of W. J. Tower. Incumbent's commission expired Frank P . Daley to be rpostmaster at Port .Henry., N. Y., in 'December 20, 1920. place of George H. ·Barwise, ·resigne<1. Anatole L'Heureux: to be postmaster at Chisholm, 1\le., in Elmer G. Miller to be postmaster at Phelps, N. ~Jn,place of p1ac of George F. Treat, resigned. George W. -Salisbury. Inaumbent's-commission expued :tranuar~ 18, 1920. ' MASSACHL'SETTS. Harland N. Brown to be postmaster at Ma,yfie},dkN' Y., iR Henry B. ._;amp on to be postmaster at South Lancaster, place of Charles L. Graham. ·Incumbent's commfss1oh~·~r~a l\Ia ... in plac of J. H. Whelan. Incumbent's -commission ex Ma1·ch 16, 1921. pired May 14, 1921. Thomas M. Keegan to be postmaster at ~ernd~~ - ~~ -- "¥·l ·W. John T. Toomey to be postmaster at Oxford, 1\Iass., in place place of T. M. Keegan. Incumbent's commission expiieO. Jan of J. T. Toomey. Incumbent's commission expired September uary 8, 1921. fl, 1920. NORTH CAJWLIN-A. '!IICHIGAN. .Roscoe C. Chandley to be postmaster at GFeensboro, N. C., in GlE>n H. Doyle to be postmaster at Cedar Springs, Mich., in place of A. W. Cooke, resigned. place of R. C. Blackburn, resigned. .A.bram W. Titman to be .postmaster at Lowell, N. C. Office Robert Darntou to be postmaster at Adrian, "l\Iich., in place became presidential July 1, 1920. f M. L. Gillen, resigned. Chester A. Hughes to be postmaster at Elon College, N. C,, in Platt A. :Mumaw to be po tmaster at 1\far hall, Mich., in place of H. D. Lambeth, resigned. place of James . Beckwith, deceased. George D. Childs to be postmaster at Bay View, Mich., in NORTH DAKOTA. place of Sara "E. C. Irish. Incumbent's commission expired Mark Johnson to be postmaster at Ellendale, N. D~~ .• in place :J\larch 16, 1921. . of L. G. McGinnis. Incumbent's commission expire'd :August 8, Volney R. Reynolds to be postmaster at Waldron, Mich. 1920. Office became presidential July 1., 1920. Theodore S. Qverby to be postmaster at Finley, N. Dak., in George EJ. Meredith to be postmaster at Minoen City, Mich., place of A. K. Cochrane, resigned. in place of A. C. Kulish, resigned. Frank K. Shearer to be postmaster at Dnz~y, N. I)ak., in place Harold B. Whalley to be postmaster at I{alkaska, "Mich., in of F. K. Shearer. ~ncumbent's commi sion - ~xpire Randle B. Hickman to be poRtmaster at ·wilberforce, Ohio, in VIR.GINIA. place of J. D. M. H.ussell. Incumbent's commission expired Otis J. Borden to be postmaster at Toms BrQok, Va. Office 1\Iarch 16, 1921. :became presidential July 1, 1921. J'esse Gamble to be postmaster at Shadyside, Ohio, in place of Blanche DeBusk to be postmaster at North Holston, Yo. L. E. Jones, deceased. Office became pl~idential July 1, 1921:.. Fred C. Troxel to be postmaster at Apple Creek, Ohio, in place James 1\I. Denton to be po§tmyster at Big Island, Ya. Office of J. c. E. Jacot, deceased. became presidential July r, 1920. .. Edwin D. Cox to be postmaster at Leesburg, Ohio, in place of John P. Middleton to be postmaster at The Plains, Va., in H. R. Grandle. Incumbent's commission expired December 20, place of J. T. Cochran. Incumbent's commission expired July 1920. 25, 1920. OKLA.HOYA. James R. Miller to be postmaster at Strasburg, Va., in place James M. Johnson to be ,postmaster at Terral, Okla. Office of J. E. Rogers. Incumbent's commission expired July 21, 1921. became presidential April 1, 1921. William T. Hopkins to be ·postmaster at Newport News, Va. Sandy H. Singleton to be postmaster at Loco, Okla. Office in place of C. W. 1\Iugler, removed. •. became presidential January 1, 1921. Charles W. Wickes to be postmaster at New Market, Va., Charles W. Straughan to be postmaster at Wakita, Okla., in in place of C. E. Clinedinst. Incumbent's commission expires place of ·H. A. Garrett. Incumbent's commission expired July January 24, 1922. 25, 1920. Isaac A. Luke to be _postmaster at Holland, ·Va., .in place of OREGON. B. 'IN. Councill. Incumbent's commission expired January 8, 1921. Tony D. Smith to be postmaster at Union, Oreg., in place of Jennie G. Phillips to be postmaster at Gloucester, Va., in place 0. J. Skiff. Incumbent's commission e:x