Thomas County cat. [volume] (Colby, Kan.) 1885-1891, 1889-03-07
sonps, sonosu sompsl!s

About this time last year Thomas
county was beginning to be agitated
over the idea of bonding to secure the
building of the c. K. & N. Ry. through
it. Many of our citizens were oppos-
ed to such bonding, but at the bond
election the majority of our citizens
exclusive of the 387 votes in Morgan
township in which Colby is situated,
were in favor of such bonding. This
paper, deeming it for the interests of
the county, boldly advocated the bon
ding-the road was built, and the
good results, so far as the county is
concerned, were secured in the COM
pletion of the road. So far as Colby
was concerned, the results that were
anticipated from the construction of
the road have not all accrued, as the
railway company saw fit not to put
their division station here. To say
that Thomas county has not been
largely benefited by the road in every
way, in our opinion is to argue against
we'll known facts. True it is, that last
year brought Encouragement to many
- -,,.. eo..,o,,o ,vJ 1,,,o:nooc NM, h,,<
that discouragement is largely owing
to circumstances in no way connected
with the railroad. AS things now are,
since the voting of the bonds to the
Rock Island, something like S. miles
of railroad have been constructed in
our county, adding fully one-third to
the taxable valuation of the property
in the county, and, consequently. re-
ducine the rate of county taxes in
large measure on the individual citi-
zen, and this reduction will be still
greater in the coming year-it being
borne in mind that railroad or no rail
road owing to growth of the county
heexpenses correspondingly increase.
As the law now is,a mantle stinjustice
prevails, the school districts through
which railroad passes get the benefit
exclusively of school taxes on the
railroad property. A more equitable
law would be, where county aid has
alone been voted to railroad, to COL
lect a school tax and apportion it pro
rata throughout the several school
districts in the county. The late Kan
sas legislature, although directly petit
toned for such change of the law,
simply ignored the wish and benefit of
the people in that regard. A COM
plant comes in now that the rate of
township, school and other taxes in
our county is largely in excess, this
over last year. In numerous school
districts people are talking bonds to
build school houses-bonds for sugar
works, bonds for seeds, bonds for this
that and the other and we deem it our
duty to sound note of warning. For
example, Colby. or rather school dis
trict No. 4, in which Colby is situated
has bonded for $4,000 to build a
school house. Colby has a municipal
indebtedness besides this of $4,000
bonds; besides this, she has her share
of the $50, 600 county bonds to the
railroad, and her share of $4,000 of
other county bonds to meet. Where
does this all tend? These are debts.
and will have to be met, somehow,
when due, and the interest from year
to year will have to be kept up. Col
by, with about one-third of the taxable
property in the county. can easily meet
a much larger Indebtedness than she
has, SO could outlying townships and
school districts, but whittier does it
all tend? To taxes, which are sure as
death. Unless decided and immedi-
ate benefit can be secured to our peo-
pie from the creation of Indebtedness.
it should not be incurred. If town.
ship or school district can reap ben
eft, there can be no valid objection,
where future generations get the same
beLeit, to making them share pro
portion of the burden. But we are
gravely informed that it is proposed
to build three school houses in one
school district which now has 19
scholars, and bond the district for that
NnrnOSo Ic not kh;o v,ro;oo< 4. ,><l,,o