The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1873-05-30
The Gas-Pipe Ordinance.

The City Council. at lis meeting last Tues
day evening. referred the ordinance taxing
sr,> aud water-ppcs to the City Attorney for
the purpose, OF course, of learning what his
opinion is IL to its constitutionallty. Every
body knows that it is unjust. On this ques-
tlon no lawyers opinion is needed.
The city receives from the gaS-conslimcrs
annually about $4,000. The Finance
Committee estimates the said receipts for the
current year at S152.O00. This sum pays for
all the sas that is made in the city: and of
the gas so made and paid for the city con-
sumcs at least one-fourth, and pays nothing
for it. SO that the consumers of gas pay a
tax of about forty thousand dollars per an
mum on gus which is consumed for the COM
mon benefit. That is to say, man whose
sa>-biIl amounts to 3 a month or s24 year
Ohe smallest bills cannot be much le>s) pays
ST year for lighting the streets, and the
man whose gashill amounts to $1,000 Il year
pays 500 for lighting the streets, or what is
elna TO the tax on twenty thousand dollars
worth OF property, whilst other men. per-
hals more wealthy but having Use for little
Or no gas, Iay little or nothing to light the
streets. The City Council, wishing to equal
lie this lax, st to work in the most extra
ordinary way. and put another special tax
upon these of the people who are least able
to pay it.
The City Council says it is not right TO
q make the consumers of gas pay all the eX-
pcnsc OF Lighting the streets. So say we.
But what is the remedy! Surely Il new tax
upon them. and upon the poor fellows who
own let's in the outskirts of the city, is not
the remedy. The plain, simple, just remedy
is 10 sell the gas to all consumers at cost, and
tel the city pay for the Gas She burns out OF
the common fund. Thus would every man
lay in proportion to the value of his pro-
perry. H. the Constitution requires. Reduce
til" price of g;ts to S2.25 per thousand GU
biz feet. and let the city pay for what she
consumes and the very object which the
Council had in view in passing The ordi-
nance in question will be accomplished.
n to the con>ttutionaIitv of the ordinance
IL question. The City Attorney will report in
,u. time. He can find any number of eases
in lii law-bookS in which tue courts have
decided that such taxes were constitutional,
but under constitutions very different from
that of Virginia. These cases, however.
were hardly cases contcStinS the constitu-
tiunlIity of such Il tax, but the constltu-
1inniI!ty ul an assessment to pay for putting
down "a> or waler-pipc> i'll front OF II mans
property We doubt whether Il tax (as con-
1lad>tugui>hcd from IN aS>c>smonU on gas
or watcr.pipc> would he decided to be con-
stitutional i'm any State, especially if levied
twenty years after the pipes were laid, and on
parties who plid for the property IA if the
assessments hid alI been satisfied. 1t is hardly
~ t,c doubted that at the time IA pipe Is put
down the Owner OF the lot may be made to
,av for at least Il part OF lis value but in Il
60. where the lilr was paid for twenty
year. ago it would scarcely be consider
cd right to make the present owner
pay for it. Who. for instance, ought
10 pay for the large IT, OF lS-inch
Wtlcr-pipe now being laid in Cary street
"rhc city" every councilman will reply
certainly, every councilman who lives on
Cary street. But why? Because the pipe
l. Il large ono: 1t is only large enough to
convey all tn" water needed; and the gas
pip' i large enough to convey all the gas
needed. But the water j. intended for ALI
the people along and neal Cary street. SO
i the gas that passes along The same street. |
il is not conveyed by SMITHS house or lot for
hi benefit, but for the common beueIit.
There is no necessity for this new tax, and |
lei the opinion OF the City Attorney be what
it may. the ordinance ought to be repealed. |
The twenty-five cents additional tax on pro-
perry was put on to avoid the necessity for |
this unequal! tax. Let us have done with it.