The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1869-05-20

IL AhS OGcn CduNhSSSu LIZ" ~ IAOLe
oughly that the deslrabllity, even ne
csssity. of the Bridge has become ap-
parent to all. There is but one opinion
about ii. All agree now that the
Bridge must be built. The question is,
how to raise the money. And there is
the pinch.
AT the last meeting OF Council, a
motion was made by Mr.. Bell to raise a
joint committee to consider the basis
upon which a tax for building this
Bridge should be laid, whether
wholly upon property directly
benefited" by the improvement,
or whether the expense should
be borne partly by such property
and partly by the city; and If the COM
mittee favored the latter basis they
were to report the proportions of adjust
ment. They were also to ok the limits
of property which they adjudged to be
"dlrectIy benefited" 10 adjust the as
sessment, &c. This resolution was lost
in the Second Branch, where 1t was
offered, by tie vote.
There Is u seeming fairness about
BILE, but we fear 1t will not bear exami
nation. 1t. is believed by some that the
rise in property resulting from the cree
ton OF this Bridge would be sufficient
to pay for building it. The presump-
ton Is that property in the vicinity on
each side of the creek would be imm e.
diately and greatly enhanced in value.
10 TO- hoh thnTuh don hk
that the rise would be so immediate or
no great as some anticipate; and 1t
would be not because the property in
that vicinity would be made more valu-
able than property distant from tho
Bridge, but because it is now far below
values elsewhere and would be simply
leveled up.
The difficulty which every one will
see at the outset will be to determine
what property is to experience this rise
and TO what degree, ard by what grada-
ton the levies on 1t are TO be regulated.
It is impossible for anybody TO say in
advance how much any specific piece
of property would be worth the day the
Bridge should be completed, or year
thereafter; or to say oven then how
much OF the enhancement in its value
was due to the Bridge and how much
due to other causes. TO adjust taxes
OH contingencies as uncertain and re-.
mote as these would render the levy
very arbitrary. Then how would It be
possible. surprising the influence of the
Bridge on prices could be fOrcseen, for
any committee ofgPntlemen to tell how
far 1t would extend ana in what d.
rection-how far up town or how far
downtown far to the right or how far
to the left of Market street? On what
particular house would the committee
tx In any direction as the last that
WAS TO feel the appreciation, while that
directly adjoining or that across the
street was not to feel it?
This Improvement, like all others
in whatever part of tho city they
may be that serve tho public con-
venience, will have its due effect in
an appreciation OF values all over The
cIty-in some parts, more than In
others, as i'll all similar cases.
The appreciation may not be sensible
except In the vicinity OF the Bridge, but
it is certain to have much wider scope.
No public improvement is ever made
perhaps without enhancing the value
OF some property more than other. It Is
I'm incident that is inevitable. And
yet no one ever thinks of grading the
taxes to make these improvements ac-
cording to the incidental advantage
anticipated or really to be derived from
them. On: the principle proposed by
Mr.. Bell thesbouldering of a street,
which enhances the value Of the pro-
perty adjoining, ought to be paid for by
the owners, either IN whole or out OF
proportion with other property. On the
same principle the twsnty-inch water
pipe which cost the Oity SO much money
ought to have been paid for chiefly II
not wholly by the property owners
along Main street. And so with every
Improvement made for the benefit
OF the public. The attempt to tax
on any such basis would be be-
wildering. The justice of this basis
Is apparent if it was possible to as
certain precisely how much benefit
everybody derived from any given i'm
provement; but the statement of the |
proposition shows its utter impractica-
bllity. It Is very delicate matter even |
in such case as this to tax one mans |
property more than his neighbours OF
equal value. 1t is entirely inadmissa- |
BILE without the cleArest evidence that
the excess is to be returned. It'll doubt
.ful whether under any circumstances
such a thing can be done without in
Justice. Certainly it would require a
great deal of nice calculation ana of &C.
curate guessing for a committee to
make such an assessment as Mr.. Bell
proposes. Even If the committee could |
make the assessment precisely right, 1t
Is hardly supposable that there |
would not be much complaint; aud 1t is
certainly an open question whether if
any one chose TO resist the payment of
such tax there is any authority in the
city to enforce it.
We do not see that In building this !
Bridge the city can depart from the rule I
that has always obtained respect
ing all other public improvements. 1t
raised as all other funds are for city
purposes. 1t is doubtless true that
some will be benefited more than 9TH
ers. That is their good fortune. AT
the same time it does not result in
ipiary to any one else. It is an actual
gain of that much to the aggregate tax
able property of the city. The property