The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1886-03-17

generalities," make no pledges or pro-
misses whatever that they will do any
thing more than bnild a toll bridge
across Red river. They will not obi
gate themselves to locate their divis-
ion or workshops in either Pineville or
Alexandria, and they propose to use
the tax money they ask for to pay the
interest on the money used in the con-
struction of the road.
/ am told that in one of the speech
es made it was suggested that it would
be good idea for the two towns to
levy another tax to pay them the in
creased cost of building the wagon
bridge and for them to own it. Right
here is furnished the very strongest
possible argument against giving then
the $4,000 for nothing, because when
that tax is levied and for the ten years
during which it is being collected, the
taxing power is exhausted. We can
do what is proposed now, can do it
with the tax now proposed and with
guarantees that it will he used to build
a free bridge. I am, for my part, per.
fectly willing to be taxed the pro-
posed amount for that purpose. But
if we exhaust the power of taxation
now and donate the money, we are
powerless and they can own the bridge
as toll bridge for ten years at any
rate. Article 242 of the Constitution
limits the tax to five mills for ten years.
THE ORDINANCE AND TAX Is ILLEGAL.
The local parties who have the mat
ter in charge have led the Town Coun-
Gil into a grave error in law, and if
the election is held under the ordi.
nance now published, the tax can new
er be collected. Act No. 126 of 1882
says in its bill that it is intended to
carry into effect Article 200 of the
Constitution of 1879, and by its very
terms it relates to local improvements
solely and not to donations in aid of
railroads. Under this Act the Coun-
Gil may order the election on the petit
ton of one-tenth of the property tax
payers who are voters, and the cleo
ton may be ordered after twenty days
notice. The present election is order
ed under that Act. Act No. "a of
1880 is probably intended to carry in
to effect Article 242 of the Constitu-
ton, and both the Act and the Article
do relate to taxation in aid of railways
and enterprises beyond the limits of
the corporation levying the TAG. 1t is
not pretended that the Act of 1882 is
amendatory of the Act of 1880, nor is
it. They are based on separate arti-
cles of the Constitution. Under the
Act of 1880 the election can only be
ordered upon the petition of one-thiyd
of the property tao payers "who are
entitled to vote under the general cleo.
tion law" and there must be 30 days
notice of the election.
The ordinance now published is
based on one-tenth and gives 20 days
notice only. The gentlemen have pro-
ceeded under the wrong act. ! am
opposed to the tax in its present shape,
but believe in treating the railroad
people fairly. Ii the tao is ordered
and they act in good faith upon the
strength of the tar they ought to have
the benefit of it and it ought not to be
in the power, if we are to act in good
faith, of any tar payer to enjoin and
prevent the collection of the tar.
WHO ARE TO BE PERMITTED TO wore?
On this point again the advocates
of the tao are still more unfortunate
because the Act of 1880, the only one
under Which the election can be Or
dered, while it undertakes to carry out
Article 242 Of the Constitution really
mires mp that Article With Article goo
and violates the plain provision of Ar
ticle 242, when it requires the qn.s-
ton to be submitted to the property
tao payers who are qualified voters I'M
der the general election. Article 242
says "by vote of a majority of the
property tao payers in number and va
lue." If the election had been at
tempted under this Act, it would have
nevertheless have been illegal, be-
cause the Act itself is clearly uncon-
stitutional in a matter of vital import
the qualification Of the voters who
are to determine the question.
Itrequires majority of the property
tax payers in number and value both
to carry the tax.
1t looks to me, as if the legal diff
culties in the way will defeat the tax,
and if the gentlemen who were here
are to build the road, they will have
to do it without the tax, as they ought
to do, if they are going to build it at
all, in the first instance and without
asking for any tax.
Respectfully,
RoBp. p. HUNTER.