write a cost of at least $431 million for a subway system here in Washington, or whether this was a responsibility of the people of the District of Columbia.

The reason why we were able to get that bill through was that we were stressing the fact in our arguments that this was a Federal city, that this was a Federal responsibility, and that Federal interests were involved here.

There is no question in my mind but that if we had been operating under home rule at the time, it would have been practically impossible to obtain congressional approval of that subway legislation.

Now, one more question, or one more statement: As to the formula you mentioned, obviously, unless there is a Federal payment, the District of Columbia could not survive fiscally. But you are also justified in your fear that the Congress will ultimately change that formula, or even completely repeal it.

I would hate to see the representatives of the other people of the Nation, sitting here, permitting people living within the boundaries of the District of Columbia to come down here and appraise the Capitol Building or the House Office Building or the White House, set an assessed value on it, and establish a tax rate on it to make up for the necessary costs of, let us say, rebuilding the 11th precinct or something else that is needed here in the Nation's Capital.

I just say that I agree with the gentleman in his fear and his prediction that this formula will not hold up.

One more statement, about this minority vote, that the gentleman from Florida brought up; I agree with him. I think it is silly to guarantee a minority voice on the city council here.

It was put in there, I think, to pacify some of the Republicans here in the District of Columbia, because they knew that in a free election, they could not get a single Republican seat or elect a single Republican to office in the District of Columbia.

It is just to pacify them by saying they would be guaranteed one or two seats, which is an empty gesture.

Frankly, I would not want the Republican Party to share any of the blame for what would happen.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. BROYHILL. Yes.

Mr. MCMILLAN. If this Congress should pass this bill, guaranteeing this formula at this time, could not the next Congress come along and repeal it?

Mr. BROYHILL. Yes. That is what the gentleman brought out.

Mr. DAVIS. As I understand the formula, it would pay maybe $57 million to the District. And you know how we get up here and work like the devil to get 30, then 40 and in the present appropriation $43 million. So this formula would give us another $14 million. Mr. DOWDY. Temporarily.

Mr. DAVIS. Temporarily.

Mr. MCMILLAN. However, Congress has, under present law, authorized a total payment of $50 million, but only $43 million has been appropriated.

Mr. WHITENER. Are there any further questions?

Mr. BROYHILL. No, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. WHITENER. Well, Mr. Davis, thank you very much for your appearance here, representing the Metropolitan Washington Board of Trade.

There was something said here about the rather pleasant result that we had with our rapid rail transit legislation, in which I was most interested and the members of this committee were most interested.

I think it would not be fair for the members of the committee or me, as the author of the bill, to sit here and not say to you and to the membership of your organization that the success we had with that very worthwhile legislation was in large measure attributable to the active interest of the business community and your organization, the District Commissioners, the White House, and others who worked with Members of Congress who were interested in fulfilling their obligations to the District of Columbia.

With regard to your testimony, in your detailed list of some 21 items, I note that you did not mention that we have another unique situation here in the District of Columbia. That is the numbers of federally supported law enforcement groups who actually work with equal jurisdiction in certain areas with your Metropolitan Police Department.

Mr. DAVIS. That is correct.

Mr. WHITENER. I refer to the Park Police, the FBI, the Secret Service, the U.S. Capitol Police, the White House Police, the military police in certain cases, the Narcotics Bureau, and many other groups who have jurisdiction here such as they do not have in any State in the Union.

Would it not seem that this should be considered? Because certainly, the cost of local law enforcement, if you take these Federal authorities away, would increase tremendously; would it not?

Mr. DAVIS. Well, we need the White House Police, the Capitol Police, and the Park Police. They are essential to what safety we do have here in the city.

Mr. WHITENER. We need the Capitol Police, too.

Mr. DAVIS. And the Capitol Police.

Well, I would like to say that I have had the pleasure of appearing before committees of Congress in the past where I have given my testimony to one member of the committee. It was very flattering to see the great interest that you have in this problem, and to see such a turnout this morning. On behalf of the citizens of Washington, I say thank

you.

Mr. WHITENER. Well, thank you, Mr. Davis.

There was an area that Mr. Dowdy went into the other day with one of the witneses. Knowing of your outstanding reputation as a member of the legal profession here, if Mr. Dowdy would like to go into the effect of home-rule legislation upon the courts, I think you would be an ideal witness to discuss that.

Mr. DowDY. Yes. I was asking about the effect of the creation of this city-State, and what effect it would have upon the courts.

Of course, at the present time they are all Federal courts here. You do have a certain jurisdiction in what used to be the municipal court, and what is now called the District of Columbia Court of General Sessions, I believe.

Mr. DAVIS. That is right.

Mr. Dowdy. That has a limited jurisdiction. At the present time, felony crimes committed in the District of Columbia against the laws here are tried in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Now, if your city-State is created as proposed here, the question in my mind is, What kind of courts are going to be created to try these felony cases, and what jurisdiction will be left to the U.S. district court?

I do not want this discussion to go on too long, but do you understand what I am referring to?

Mr. DAVIS. I get your point.

Mr. WHITENER. If the gentleman will permit me to inject this, we also have the situation of the Court of General Sessions being limited in their civil jurisdiction.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, to $10,000.

Mr. WHITENER. And the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has a higher civil jurisdiction.

Mr. Downy. Yes, I intended that to be included.

Mr. WHITENER. That is in addition to the criminal limitation
Mr. DownY. So, could you briefly comment on that.

Mr. DAVIS. Well, under the pending bills, the judges for the Court of General Sessions would be elected, whereas the Federal judges that handle all cases over $10,000 would be appointed by the President.

Now, whether there would have to be some other so-called State court, over and above the Court of General Sessions, to handle matters of State law, to make it similar to the 50 States, this is possibly so. Mr. DowDY. That was my point. Then we might have a whole lot of Federal courts here that were no longer necessary.

Mr. WHITENER. As the U.S. District Court.

Mr. Downy. The Federal district court.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. Downy. I think that is something that has probably not even been considered by the proponents of this bill.

Mr. DAVIS. I had not heard this question raised.

Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Dowdy raised this question the other day, and I thought it was very pertinent. In fact, a proponent of one of the home rule bills, who was then testifying, had never even thought of that problem.

I think that perhaps you and I and Mr. Dowdy can agree on this proposition: that if the home rule bill, so-called, which is the subject of this discharge petition, is enacted into law, certainly there would have to be supplementary legislation to resolve the court problem as well as that of law enforcement and many other problems which are absolutely ignored in all of the legislation that we have before us, except that promoting retrocession, where some would be taken care of, as you say, overnight by the signing of the legislation.

Mr. DAVIS. I presume the court setup would become similar to what there is in the States.

Mr. WHITENER. But you cannot presume that this bill would cover it.

Mr. DAVIS. It is not in the bill.

Mr. Downy. That is the point.

Mr. DAVIS. I don't know whether that has been thought out. I doubt it. I am sure there are a lot of things in the bill that have not been brought out.

Mr. WHITENER. I do not want to impose on you, but this is a very serious issue. Would you, either as a representative of the board of trade or as a member of the bar, be able to get the Bar Association of the District of Columbia to give us something on this, to give us the benefit of their clear thinking?.

Mr. DAVIS. I will do that and give you a report back.

Mr. WHITENER. Thank you.

Do you not think that would be well Mr. Dowdy?

Mr. DOWDY. I would appreciate that. There are so many disturbing things about this bill, and that is just one of them, I think one of the very important ones.

Is was interested in your comment, actually it was indirectly, about the political platforms that would be expetced to be advanced by candidates for office here in the District of Columbia and under this bill.

Of course, we know that in the Latin American countries, most of their platforms are based on anti-Americanism; and some of us are accused of running on anti-Federal or anti-Central Government platforms in our States.

But here, I can see that one of their platforms would be opposed to Federal intervention or Federal control of the local government. Then, probably one of the big platforms would be: "If you elect me, I am going to make the Federal Government pay all the taxes here in the District of Columbia so the rest of us won't have to pay any."

Of course, whether it would work or not would be one of the things that would remain to be seen.

Mr. WHITENER. Thank you very much, Mr. Davis. Without objec tion, the list attached to your prepared statement will be included in the record at this point.

(The list referred to follows:)

OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON BOARD OF TRADE, JULY 1, 1965-JUNE 30, 1966

OFFICERS

President: F. Elwood Davis, partner, Reasonner & Davis, 800 17th Street NW., 11th floor, No. 6.

First vice president: Leonard B. Doggett, Jr., president, Doggett's Parking Co., 722 10th Street NW., No. 1.

Second vice president: William Calomiris, president, William Calomiris Investment Corp., 1022 17th Street NW., No. 36.

Secretary: Richard A. Norris, president, Riggs National Bank, 1503 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., No. 13.

Treasurer: Philip M. Talbott, special assistant to president, National Savings & Trust Co., 15th and New York Avenue NW., No. 5.

Assistant treasurer: Louis W. Prentiss (major general, U.S. Army, retired), executive vice president, American Road Builders Association, ARBA Building, 525 School Street SW., No. 24.

General counsel: Ralph E. Becker, Brookhart, Becker & Dorsey, 1700 K Street
NW., suite 1300, No. 6.

Sergeant at arms: William K. Norwood, 3231 Patterson Street NW., No. 15.
Executive vice president: William H. Press, 1616 K Street NW., No. 6.

DIRECTORS

1966, J. Arnold Anderson, vice president and division manager, Safeway Stores, Inc., 6700 Maryland Boulevard, Landover, Md.

1967, Donald S. Bittinger, president, Washington Gas Light Co., 1100 H Street

NW., No. 5.

1

Everett J. Boothby, 1725 K Street NW., suite 1108, No. 36.

1968, Dr. Alfred E. Brown, president, Harris Research Laboratories, Inc., 6220

Kansas Avenue NE., No. 11.

1966, Edmund O. Carl, chairman, board of directors, Call Carl, Inc., 1250 24th Street NW., No. 7.

1967, Edward F. Cave, president, Mid-City Sales Corp., 1401 Rhode Island Ave. nue NE., No. 17.

1966, Edward J. Clarke, president, C & C-Elite Linen Service, Inc., 14th and R Streets SE., No. 20.

1966, Joseph H. Deckman, president, R. Robinson, Inc., 2021 Shannon Place SE.. No. 20.

1966, George W. DeFranceaux, president, Frederick W. Berens, Inc., 1120 Connecticut Avenue NW., No. 36.

1968, Robert V. H. Duncan, president, Bob Duncan Real Estate & Insurance, 322 South Washington Street, Alexandria, Va.

1966, R. Roy Dunn, president and chairman, board of directors, Potomac Electric Power Co., 929 E Street NW., No. 4.

1967, William H. Dyer, executive vice president, Perpetual Building Association, 500 11th Street NW., No. 4

1966, Mark Evans, vice president for public affairs, Metromedia, Inc., 5151 Wisconsin Avenue NW., No. 16.

1968, W. Frank Gatewood, advertising director, Washington Post, 1515 L Street NW., No. 5.

1966, Richard D. Gibbs, vice president, Peoples Drug Stores, Inc., 60 Florida Avenue NE., No. 2.

1961, Leonard L. Gorrell, general manager, Sheraton Park Hotel, 2660 Connecticut Avenue NW., No. 8.

1967, Frank A Gunther, president, Security Bank, Ninth and G Streets NW., No. 1. 1968, John L. Hamilton, Hamilton & Hamilton, Union Trust Building, No. 5. 1966, Harry N. Hirshberg, Jr., vice president and general manager, The Hecht Co., F Street at Seventh NW., No. 13.

1967, L. A. Jennings, chairman, board of directors, Riggs National Bank, 1503 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., No. 13.

1968, Howard W. Kacy, president, Acacia Mutual Life Insurance Co., 51 Louisiana Avenue NW., No. 1.

1

C. William Martin, Jr., president and chairman, board of directors,
Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Washington, D.C., Inc., Pepsi Place, Cheverly,
Md.

1967, Walter F. McArdle, president, McArdle Printing Co., 2319 M Street NW., No. 7.

1967, Harry L. Merrick, president, Kal, Ehrlich & Merrick Inc., 2141 Wisconsin Avenue NW., No. 7.

1968, Brig. Gen. James A. Mollison (U.S. Air Force, retired), vice president, David Volkert & Associates, Inc., 5104 MacArthur Boulevard NW., No. 16.

1

E. K. Morris, chairman, board of directors, Security Storage Co. of Washington, 1701 Florida Avenue, NW., No. 9.

1 Charles E. Phillips, president, Equitable Life Insurance Co., 3900 Wisconsin Avenue NW., No. 1.

1966, Gerald P. Price, president, Car Leasing, Inc., 1028 Connecticut Avenue NW., No. 36.

1

John C. Pyles, Jr., senior vice president, Riggs National Bank, 1503 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., No. 13.

1967 Joseph H. Riley, vice president, National Savings & Trust Co., 15th and New York Avenue NW., No. 5.

1968 Donald C. Rosinski, president, Carl G. Rosinski Co., 601 13th Street NW., No. 5.

1 Victor O. Schinnerer, president, Victor O. Schinnerer & Co., Inc., Investment Building, No. 5.

1968 Charles E. Smith, chairman, board of directors, Charles E. Smith Co., 1101 17th Street NW., No. 36.

1967 Ben Strouse, president, Station WWDC, 1627 K Street NW., No. 36.

1966 Mark Sullivan, Jr., general partner, Auchincloss, Parker & Redpath, 1705 H Street NW., No. 6.

1 John W. Thompson, Jr., vice president and assistant to president, the Evening Star, 22d and Virginia Avenue SE., No. 3.

1 Indicates ex officio director.