The Waco daily examiner. [volume] (Waco, Tex.) 187?-1888, 1882-05-09
CITY TAXES.
n legal Nut for The City
Fathers 10 Crack.

| The EXAMINER Is not disposed to call
! in question the Legislative wisdom of our
| "city fathers, who compose the city
council, nor the zeal of the aforesaid
| fathers IN conducting the city affairs
with conscientious prudence They are
! good citizens, all, whose very names are
their guarantees. 1t occurs to us, how
| ever, that the council has made some.
| thing OF blunder, or oversight, in its
action touching the levy of ad valorem
! taxation for the current year, 1882. The
| digest OF ordinances, now in force, con
talns the following, under the head of
! Take"
Article Az. There shall be levied and col
! ectcd annually an al valOrsm tax not exceed l
! ing three-fourths Of one per cent. upon a.
! property IN this city, made taxable for state
anu county purpos :; and the city council snail,
| AT or before the hrst regular meeting OF the
same, in March of each year. fix by ordinance
the amount OF per centrm Of such tax TO he
levied and cOllecte for the current year.
In pursuance OF this article the city
council, at its first regular meeting III
| March last, the same being Thursday,
March ID, passed the following:
An ordinance-To levy ana collect al al va
loren tax of one-fourth ofone per cent, for the
year 1881.
BE it ordained by the city council of the city
OF Waco:
sec. l. There shall be levied and collected for
the var lSs2 10 al yalorenI tax not exceeding
One-fJurth Of one per centun upon al property
in the eitS of Waco made taxable. for STATE aud
county purposes,
sec ,. That this ordinance take effect and be
in force from and after its passage.
iADproved March :, l6S2.
h \. SruRdIs, Mayor.
} BRISKERHoFF,
| Recorder ana eX-oilicio City Secretary.
| The defective nature of this ordinance
will be perceived at once. The caption
! is all right, but section one strips the
/ ordinance OF all force and value, and as
! il stands the Marshal would simply be
wasting time and get himself laughed
| at we're he to attempt to collect, by viz
/ tue of TINS ordinance an al valorem tax
/ Of twenty-five cents on every one hun
/ dred dollars of taxable property within
/ the city limits The failure to make
/ specific III section one, the amount mo
more, no less TO be levied aud collected
/ was clearly an oversight on the part
of the worthy gentlemen composing
| the city council. The matter should
be remedled, though (for we suppose
there Is a remedy without unnecessary
delay, for if allowed to remain I'M
changed there would surely be compli-
cations when the time for collecting
rolls around. The remedy, we take it,
must Of necessity be the repeal OF ar
ticle AT of the ordinances, and the en-
actment of substitute ord nance which
will give the council say until June or
! July to make the levy Then
new tax ordinance can be
| framed which will not be defective,
the present being first repealed This
/ to be sure, would be i'll the nature OF
/ ex post facto legislation, but We do not
! know that ST, legislation would be IL
/ legal under the circumstances. The law
| yers are authority on such subjects, and
! doubtless they will show the city fathers
| Il way out Of the dilemma, for surely 1t Is
/ not possible the city must lose the whole
! ad valorem tax for 1882, because of this
/ defect in the ordinance. In calling at
tentiOn to this matter we have
not done SO with any intention
Of rejecting on the capacity of the city
council or holding them up to be
laughed ut, but merely that the ordi-
nance, which is now over two months
| old and yet unrepealed, may be rene
died Legislative bodies making high
er pTetensiOns than our city council
have made graYer mistakes than this
Finally, no sgood citizen, who wishes
the city well, will desire to take advan-
tage OF the occurrence, provided it Is
| remediei, for We all know the municipal
/ government must go on and thai money
must be raised by taxation to run it.
1t sh MD be put in proper shape though,
/ and everything done according to law.