The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1881-04-19

In changing from carpet-bag to Bourbon rule,
what material benefits have accrued 70 the poo
pie Of Floridaf Where b the reform promised
by the Democratsl The rule OF the carpet oag-
gers " as bad enough, but l. that Of the bouf0ons
any betterf The people are finding out 10 their
cost that the Democratic cry Of reform was mere
sand thrown into their eyes, and that they have
been outraged by those OF their own household.
The tacreGss Of t0nafoR to nearly fsco per cenf %
he last Legislators Is q burden - heavy as any
complained Of under Republican rule. 10 be
oppressed by persons having no liked interests
in the State was bad enough but oppression
under reformed Conservatism so-calied, - far
worse. In the latter case. deception Is coupled
with oppression. The men who are Justly respon-
slble FOR this deception and subsequent oppres-
sion, are not unlike those who obtain goods I'M
der false pretensee. 10 obtaining control OF the
State Government, the reform cry was used as
an entering wedge rs against Republican abuses
A lower rate OF taxation was promised, expenses
were 70 De cut down, and needful reforms were
TO be erected in every branch of the public SER
vice. The so-called reduction of taxation which
Governor Drew effected was miserable sham.
IL was SIMPLY postponement of taxation, and
not reduction. The present burden is the nat
urai result OF this postponement The double
dealing with the confidence and best interests of
the people, will likely recol on the heads Of the
responsible parties at the next election.
This is formidable indictment, or rather
true. The Key asserts that p" the increase" in
in taxation made "by the last Legislature"
amounts to nearly tacO per cent" The truth is
the increase is only Onstenth Of per cent, and
the entire State tax Is mills is only eghttenths
Of ono per cent, or 80 cents on the $780, This
glazing misstatement (excusable only on the
ground of sheer ignorance) readers the Key
finances. 'h"ritv on the subject of
The hey asks, what have the people gained I"
by change of rules and then proceeds to an
swer in effect and to its own evident satisfaction
that the gam has been little or nothing; and
here, too, it is as much at fault as it has shown
itself TO be in the matter of the increase of taxes
"by the last Legislature" If that paper confines
its inquiry TO the simple matter Of comparative
taxation under carpet bag" and Bourbon I"
rule, it need not go beyond the limits of its own
county TO ind conclusive answer to its oues.
ton. The textbooks of Monroe furnish signi6
cant facts They show that the people of that
county have gained much by the change and
we underwrite for it, that with their experience
as to the cost to them between Radical and Dem
ocratic government, they would look upon
restoration Of the old rule as monstrous calam-
ity. Shall we furnish our contemporary with the
facts? Let the Key take the three last wears Of
Radical rule-1874, 75 and 76-and compare the
taxes assessed by the Republicans during that
period with those assessed for the last three
years-l91S, 70 and 'S0-under a Reform govern.
ment and we think il will see cause 10 alter lis
tune