The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 1850-1873, 1873-06-06
who should Vote I'm Railroad
Elections.

WE are aware that there are some who
contend that in elections to determine
whether a county or town, should sub
scribe TO building railroads, that men
who have no property, are not liable to
taxation should not vote, and that ii
they do vOteit is tyranny, We do not hold
amy such opinion, and we now propose
20 give our reasons for the opinions we
hold. We contend that all men who arg
voters, have an interest in common
with all other citizens, whether they
own one hundred, one thousand, or one
hundred thousand dollars worth of prop
grty. II IS not the amount of property
that man holds, that identifies him
with the country. The labOrer who
works and creates wealth, is as much
identified with the country, is as much
interested, in its prosperity, as the man
who holds million of dollars in United
states or state bonds. If the country
prospcrs, lac prospers, if the country suf-
Iers, he suffers. 1t property is to@be the
test, then the man who owns much prop
Crty, should have more votes than the
Ipm who only has a little property, be-
CAUSE he Will have to pay more taxes
Now, il he has more property, ON which
10 be taxed, he has more property to be
benefited. and increased in value. If
because man is poor, he has no right
to vote on railroad subscription, be-
cause it may involve taxation, what
right has he by the Same method OF
reasoning, to elect men who levy taxes
TO IN Unlimited extent, without asking
The consent of tic people,?
The argument leads to the old doctrine
81 u property qualification to which we
are uhchangeably opposed, whether in
railroad OF other elections.
The fact that a man owns property,
even if it be millions, does not authorize
him to vote burdens on his neighbors, fos
bis benefit when they are not benefited
IN proportion. We DO not believe any
man, whether rich or poor, has moral
girEt TO vote burdens on the community,
without corresponding, or even greater
benefits. That is the whole question.
VIII this measure benefit the community ?
,yiII ia bring more advantages than it
vaLincur liabilities. If so, all should vote
for IL: il not. none should sustain it.
IL is not a question OF property qualifica-
ton, but a question OF benefit to the
community. It is upon this principle
that public roads, bridges, &c, are sus-
tuincd by the public. We believe
and are able 10 show that railroads bene-
n
proportion to his property, and therefore
we contend that all should pay i'll pro-
norton TO the bCaCiits they receive. The
idea Of "a country being oppressed and
Barkruptcd, Ivy the building OF railroads
Ur-otbcr improvements, is prepOsterouS
and is coutrudictedb yev day expert
once. II man should spend $1,000. ant
increase the value Of his property $1,000
,youIa this Cypress or bankrupt him
w the saule way, il a county should pay
500 .ra, and increase its property
Thereby, 100000, would any man SAL
shat he WIS oppressed? If any men VIII
i.,k stock. wee benefited by railroads
;E,n. private subscription might do, bu
,,Esu men " Eo take no STOCK, often re
..e,yr mcTe benefits than those VINO TAX
stock. tuEs IS unjust and unfair Il.
county az town subscription, all pay il
-.-.-.rr ion t1 lie benefits they receive
-rt. ,l.e rs...-, ana most equitable mod
~ subscription. IA the railroads pro
,ssed in this county, we believe tn
stock will he profitable and Therefor
,,a favor individual Us well as count.
subscription. The two should be CON
s.pe5. We arc for expressing none, an
neugnuAs all