The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-11-16
WILL BE A CLOSE VOTE.
THE COUNCIL DIVIDED ON THE
GROUND RENT QUESTION.

GROUND RENT QUESTION.
The Ground Renters Threaten Politi-
cal Death to the Supporters OF the
Movement to Tax Them-A Lively
Fight Looked For in Council, and the
Mayor May Have the Deciding Vote.
Alderman Falligant's Analysis ofthe
Question.
The question whether the ground rent
lots are to be assessed for city taxes is TO be
settled next Tuesday night For once there
is common cause against the star chamber
caucus Each side, confident of the popu-
larity Of its position, will demand an open
meeting of the council, 50 that the people
may know how they have voted.
The ground renters are stirred up, and
the decision Of Corporation Attorney
Adams has set them to prophesying political
death to any one who votes to tax the
ground rent lots.
The "good faith argument is used as an
excuse why the ground rent lots should not
be assessed, and il is understood that the
ground renters have engaged counsel to
present their side of the case, and that they
lave clerks at work among the old archives
Of the city, upon which the dust of q
century has accumulated, searching for
data upon which to base their dissenting
opinions.
THE COUNCIL EVENLY DIVIDED.
It has also leaked out that a close vote is
expected in the council-both sides claim
ing that the question is likely to stand, on
the final vote, 6 to 9, and that the mayor
will have the casting vote. Both sides
claim the mayor.
The ground renters in that part of the
city north of Liberty street claim that
they will be able TO defeat any one for re-
election who votes to tax the ground rent
lots but those who favor taxing them say
that Il is ST. lot holders against all the rest,
and If the city does not tax the ground rent
lots, the other property holders will refuse
to pay taxes, on the ground that the taxes
are not evenly assessed under the constltu-
ton, and therefore cannot be collected.
The ground renters claim that IL the coun-
Gil should decide to assess the lots for taxa
ton it will go into the courts, and will not
be settled for ten years, as some of the
owners are not citizens of the state, OF for
that matter of the United States, and there
fore the case will have to be determined by
the United States supreme court.
THE NoN-TAxING SIDE.
A member of council who will vote
against taxing the property said yesterday
that it Is not the province OF the city to
question it's own action. If the city has ex-
ceeded its authority in excusing ground rent
lots from paying municipal taxes, it should
not be the first 10 act on it
and repudiate its contract If there
is antagonism, he said, it should
come from parties outside, and not from
the city. The exemption from city taxa
ton was made in the early history Of the
city to encourage and develop the growth
of the city, and now, when it may aD-
pear to have been a bad bargain, the city
must stand by its bargain, whether strictly
legal or not.
Alderman Falligant, who has precipitated
the issue, says that the good faith" argu-
Inent won't hold water. He quotes from
he constitution that all contracts in viola
ton Of public policy are void, and he says
that contracts pretending TO exempt
private property from taxation forever are
in violation of public policy. The city
marshal may have said as O fact that
ground rent lots were not taxed, but the
statement did not change the character of
that fact, which was violation Of the con-
stitution. and is not cloak to pin good
faith upon for the continuance of the
wrong. Good faith to the taxpayer re-
quires that he should not be made to pay
another mans taxes.
ALDERMAN FALLIGANT'S ARGUMENT.
The alderman illustrates the Gaze as fol-
lows:
Twenty years ago, A and B purchased
two city lots side by side at 81 900 each. A
paid the entire 81 600 down and got an alb
solute fee simple deed. B paid $500 down,
owes the city $500 balance of purchasing
n,oney, on which he pays six or seven per
cent per annum interest, quarterly, semi
annually, or annually, and gets a condi-
tional fee-simple decd or a deed with
mortgage incorporate therein to
secure the unpaid balance of the purchase
md int, No. H.,
pays the city the most interest or ground
rent thereafter, A or B? The man who
owes the city the $500 will say that he alone
is paying any ground rent The city got
$1,000 from A, and, having it in its own
possession, saves borrowing that much, gets
the use of it, which is equivalent to the
interest, or employs it in extinguishing
$1,000 of its interest-bearing obligations, and
by these means practically forever after
gets the interest thereon.
The city gets $500 cash from B, on which
1t similarly obtains the interest forever
after, as in the case as AS $1,000, and b
continues to pay the interest on the remain
ing $500 of purchase money; SO that the
city gets from B also the interest Tor ground
rent on 81, 900 (200--S0U forever after the
date of sale
II any man can see where the city gets
any moro interest out of B that out of A,
Alderman Falligant says he can see more
than the Alderman can.
A PROBLEM IN FIGURES.
"But now" he adds, comes the curiosity
Of the manner in which the city has treated
the two purchasers. We will consider, for
example, that these two lots have advanced
in value at an average increase of $500 per
annum, and that they are now worth s., 600
each, and that the rate Of taxation has been
2per cent. per annum. A has been taxed
as follows:
Valuation. Tax
First year. ................ $1,000 90
Second year. 200 "a
Third year. .................. 400 %
Fourth year. ........... LOCO 80
Fifth year. .....,,............ 800 36
Sixth year.. .............. 1000 40
Seventh year .......L........2 1900 a
Eighth year. ................. 400 49
Ninth year .........,........ 1900 SO
Tenth year. Neutrality-suspicious.. $500 96
Eleventh year. ........ $40. 1900 60
Twelfth year. ................ $500 Ga
Thirteenth year. ............ 3.400 bS