Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-12-03
ERRORS ON THE BOND ISSUE.


ground against the proposed bond issue,
on the assumption that if the bonds are
issued the result will be to relieve property
owners who would be liable under the
curative act from the payment of their
assessments. We take this to be the
argument from the assertions Q) that can
obligation is held by contractors against
local parties, under laws which prove to
be framed in the interest of contractors
and minority property holders; (2) that
no one doubts that the curative legislation
will be the future fixed law of Pittsburg;
and that "here those interested see an
opportunity to saddle the taxpayer with
bills that they ought and must pay them
selves, if they wait until the courts pass
upon the justice of the curative act
THE DISPATCH is by no means set on
the issue of the bonds. 1t has frequently
stated that, if the majority prefer
to have the money the city will have
to pay, before it can collect the assess
ments under the curative act, raised by a
single levy in the year it falls due, it is
right that such course be taken. But in
order that the decision of the people shall
be intelligently rendered it is well to have
all the details of the matter clearly under
stood. For thas purpose it is pertinent to
say that each position quoted from our
correspondent is fundamentally erroneous.
The Obligation held by contractors is
not against private parties but against the
city. If the city can maintain the cura-
tive legislation it can on its part collect
claim which it holds in equity against the
property holders benefited; but the con-
tractors can only look to the city for pay
tract and by the specific rulings of the
Supreme Court As to the question
whether the curative legislation will be
upheld or not, it is by no means so much
of foregone conclusion as our contribu-
tor thinks. That point need hardly be
discussed at length, because it really has
no bearing on the issue of the bonds. The
assertion that by some means the issue
will relieve property owners who would
a very valid objection if there were an
truth in it; but it is wholly without foun-
dation in fact.
1t has been expressly stated that if the
curative acts are sustained the city will
proceed to collect the assessments under
them, ,and apply the money to the redemp-
ton of bonds issued for the payment of
the contracts. To suppose that the city
officials will refuse to perform this duty
when the bonds are issued is to accuse
them of monstrous and purposeless
fraud, to be carried out by men
of such standing as Mayor Gourley and
Controller Morrow Such an accusation
should not be made without foundation;
and that it is without foundation is shown
by the fact that to-day, in advance of
either the issue of bonds or the decision on
the curative act, the city is proceeding
with the levying of all the special assess
ments and preparing for their collection
as soon as their legal status is indisputa-
bly, defined.
The whole question with regard to the
issue of bonds is simply this: There are
certain claims against the city which must
be paid. If the curative act is sustained
some of them-though not majority
must be paid before the assessments can
be collected. If the act is overthrown the
city must pay them all. Whether the
bonds are issued or whether the city
raises what must be paid by general
levy, the money will be collected to repay
the city from the property benefited, pro-
vided the curative legislation is upheld.
The question for the taxpayers to decide
is, whether they prefer to have what the
city must pay raised by an increase of the
tax rate or an issue of bonds. The
fact that the latter course will entail the
payment of interest would be an objection
if it were not that, as the city can buy
the bonds for its sinking fund, it will be
paying interest to itself.
On this statement of the case the voters
can make up their minds which course
they consider preferable and decide the
question accordingly.