1384. > CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS. 
Mr. McComas. I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Penn- 
sylvania [Mr. Atkinson]. 
Mr. L. E. Arxrnson, of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I have serious 
doubts whether the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations 
would oppose concurrence in the Senate amendment if he had exam- 
ined into this question as carefully as perhaps he might have done. If 
I understood his remarks he stated that the title to this land is vested 
jointly in the United States and in the District of Columbia. Am I 
right as to that? 
Mr. Cannon. I said, or should have said, that this property was 
bought with an appropriation made payable one-half from the District 
revenues and.one-half from the Federal Treasury, but bought under 
the direction of Congress, Congress being supreme as to the District 
treasury as well as the Federal Treasury. 
Mr. Arxrnson, of Pennsylvania. I wish, then, to call attention to 
the fact that although the District of Columbia contributed half the 
money for the purchase of this land, yet the title was vested in the 
United States by virtue of the act of Congress making this appropria- 
tion. That act declares that— 
The value shall be paid to the owner or owners; and the United States shall be 
deemed to have a valid title to said land. 
That is the act of March 2, 1889, passed only a little more than a 
year ago for the purpose of acquiring title to this land. The title is 
not in the District and never can become a portion of the property of 
the District without an act of Congress. 
Mr. Cannon. But so far as that is concerned (if the gentleman will 
allow me), Congress is supreme; and when as a matter of convenience 
the title was deemed to be in the United States, the District revenues 
paying one-half the expense, the gentleman understands that the Dis- 
trict has a half interest in the property. 
Mr. Arxrinson, of Pennsylvania. It does not so appear upon the 
face of the papers. 
Now, the question arises whether it is proper to impose an addi- 
tional burden upon this District for that which is declared in the act 
a national enterprise, established for the benefit of, science. Is this 
District in such a financial condition that it should have additional - 
charges imposéd upon it, especially without good and sufficient rea- 
sons? Any one taking up the annual report of the Commissioners 
of the District of Columbia will see that there is already resting 
upon this District a debt of almost $19,000,000. There is more than 
$14,000,000 of bonded indebtedness bearing interest at 3.65 per cent, 
the rest bearing interest at a higher rate. If the debt of this District 
were compared with that of almost any other city in the United States 
it would be found that it is greater in proportion to the assessed value 
of the land than the indebtedness of any other city. 
