, 1884-06-04

Bird Member for Christiansted WdSSardI
would, as Speaker Of the Committee that
had reported on this Draft, beg to recon-
mend the amendments proposed by the
Government. 1t will be seen from the
Committees Report on the Draft, that the
Committee found that the carrying out i'll
practice Of the Draft as originally pro-
posed would be connected with several
difficulties, The purport Of the present
amendments is to do away with those
difficulties, chiefly by providing that
owners Of small PROPERTIES shall ENJOY the
exemption from this tax only for one horse.
He thought that the evils mostly referred
to will III that way be avoided. The other
amendments now proposed nave also been
found recommendable, and he would now
therefore recommend the Draft after being
so amended, to be adopted.
LIST Member 4or thIistiansted Willard
could follow the recommendation given by
the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS in as much as the
Draft as now proposed to be amended will
embody the points suggested by the Com
mittee, and will give al the Same time the
security asked for by the minority hence,
as both sides are satisfied, the Draft must
be considered as being accepted by the
entire Committee.
9th Crownmember [KaImer1 had some
remarks to make on this whole draft he felt
10th TO express them, all the more SO as he
was not congruent with most OF The opln-
ions given in the matter, and particularly
not with the remarks from the Majority OF
the Committee; but he felt it his duty not
to withhold the opinion he has on it. He
was not able to see the fairness or business
Of this Draft. He could fully concur i'll
the view expressed by the Committees
MiOOritV u & ctoiAd i'm tho Rn1lOYf n9nonIV
that he could g not agree with the manner
i'll which the Horse Carriage and Cart
Tax is to be assessed on the one part of the
community, and exrmpting ano. her part"
And when the Draft of Ordinance con-
corning Public Roads WAS before the
Council and the voting was to take place,
it will be remembered that one Member
abstained from voting on that Draft
before the other Daft, this present one
concerning the Horse and Carnage Tax,
had been discussed and settled, as this
latter stood in close connection with the
former, in fact this Draft was i~ndiSpenSi-
bic to the Road Ordinance; to that ihe
Superior Authority had remarked that
there was no connection between the two
Drafts. But i'll that respect, he (kalmer)
considered that the honorable Member who
abStained from voting was perfectly right.
This Draft was submitted simultaneously
with the other on the Roads, and it'staudS
by its very contents and motives in close
connection with the Road Ordinance. The
exemptions from taxation proposed by this
Draft IS intended expressly as a Oonlpen-
sation for Road Work done by one party,
and at the SAM time the tax 50 removed
Nfrom the one class, is to be placed on
another class Of the community. lie
found this distinctly borne out by the
remarks attached to this Draft. This is,
then, the origin and genesis Of the Draft.
IN that view he could not, however, agree.
1t might be, that the plan is just and
equitable; but it has at least not been
proved to be SO. He can understand that
there could be a desire to exempt parties
assessed in road work firm the payment of
Horse and C~arriage-Tax; but the question
as: is that a fair and just compensation?
1t does not appear to be so, viewing the
work actually to be done, and the amount
to be gained by the tax exemption. Now,
with regard to the organic connection
between these two things, the road work
and the exemption, he could not find it
anywhere; it might be SAID thar all who
repair the roads have the right to use
them but even then it could only be that
each party within The limit of what he
individually has repaired, should have
that right. AS the matter stands now, 1t
appears to be simply that a premium is to
liza mt IN Lou11inO bOruoc md oarrioO pSs