The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-12-29
Il AND "THE STREETS AND THE
SPOIIS

from a correspondent signing himself r.
with a brief response. The subject Is
one OF so much consequence to the peo-
pie Of Richmond that we shall answer
b. In detail this morning, not with a
view OF even attempting to triumph over
him In argument. but to bring out in the
most glaring light possible the error in
the present plan Of apportioning money
to streets.
b says III streets were improved I'M
der the spiritual dispensation OF bearing
one another's burden " our recommends
ton that pubic money should be spent
on the streets Of the city that need i'm
provement instead OF dividing II out In
equal sums TO each ward. would be the
proper plan. Now we call BIS attention
most pointedly to the fact that that is
just the plan upon which streets are i'm
proved, and all other public improve
ments are made. By taxation, we force
one mar to bear another's burden" II
is not voluntarily done by the citizen In
the Scriptural sense, but he Is forced to
| Dear dnOtHtI iIdu . DuiNth thiONbH NN
process Of taxation, all the same. And
that being so. taxation for public pur-
poses being necessarily a case In which
one man is forced TO bear another mans
burden. the question before us is TO de-
termine how the money raised by taxation
for the burdens Of others shall be spent
with the greatest prospect of justice to
all.
As each citizen Of Richmond Is pre-
sumed by the law (and when we say the
law we mean the scheme and plan on
which social order rests TO be interested
in every part OF the city, the man liv-
ing in Clay Ward who contributes money
TO the common fund is just as much IN
terested 10 see that the part of 1t which
Rockets requires to be spent on her
streets is spent there as the man living
in Rockets is, and vice versa. The man
living in Clay Ward does not confine ms
use of the streets TO Clay Ward. HIS
affairs call him often to Rockets, and
union he qoes there he is interested TO find
! streets that he can travel on.
Y saws there would be just as much JUS
tice In recurring the writer OF this artlcle
TO pay for his copy Of The Times IN
which he is going to read it, as in re-
ouiring the resident Of Clay Ward to pay
for street improvements in Rockets. But
we point out to b this fundamental dis
"tinction between the two cases. Nheh
b buys a copy Of The Times 1t Is LOT
his own use solely. The streets In Rock
etts are for the use of the Clay WARD
residents as well IS for the use or the
residents Of Rockets. If the writer Oh
this article were forced to pay for BIS
copy of The Times he would be paying Tor
something that he received no advan-
tage from. When the resident OF clay
Ward aids In improving the streets OF
Rockets his money is spent in improving
streets that he is directly Interested In
and travels on.
The truth of the whole matter is that
perfection dwells only in the bosom OF
God. In the case Of taxation, 1t Is not
possible TO spend the public money IN a
manner that will do absolutely equal JUS
tice to all. All that we can hope to do
is by reasoning and discussion to adopt
a plan that will come as near as may
be to equality and justice. In the case
of the plan upon which we proceed, we
have paid no heed whatever TO this, that
should be the controlling principle. and
nave adopted one as far as possible from
the idea Of equality and justice.
Human government proceeds upon the
theory tina a limited and defined terri
tory is assigned to one management, and
that all the people within that territory
are jointly and equally interested In all
the parts of it. The true and only theory,
then, upon which money raised by taxing
all within that territory shall be spent,
is. that it shal go TO places where the
interests of all require that it shall be
spent. The interests of all the people
of the United States require that the
harbor of New York city shall be kept in
frst-class condition for the traffic Of the
whole country that concentrates there,
and the whole country cheerfully contri-
DuteS the money necessary LOT keeping
it in this order. Now. this expenditure
on New York's harbor takes millions
from the whole people. Would B refuse
to spend it, or, if he did. would he re-
quire a million for the harbor at Freder-
icksburg every time a million was spent
on the harbor of New York?
b can see no justice in requiring one
part Of even the same ward to con-
tribute to Improvements in another part
of it. Where would b draw the line in
such a case? The pavement running west
on Franklin street stops at Harrison;
but Clay ward extends much farther.
Are the residents Of Franklin street
dwelling east Of Harrison to nave no pave
ments west of 1t until the College squares
have been built up, and the new inhabi-
tants lay pavements there? BIS policy
actually condemns the 'esidents of Frank
lin east of Harrison along with all the
other citizens of Richmond to walk Frank
lin west of Harrison in the mud, when
the whole city should pave that street.
and when the residents of Franklin would
cheerfully pave 1t themselves If they were
above 10 do so. Does Il think this
true policy? And II BIS principle we've
carried out logically. would it not result
finally in every man improving in front
of his own house. and the city being des-