The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-04-05
"a SHOT IN THE WRONG DIREC'
TJON.n


On the SlOO valuation, and no county,
city or town shall levy more than one
half of said state tax" IL VIII DE
seen from this and the former section
of the constitution we have quoted
that the alleged possibility OF tax.
inc nronerty out of the hands OF
owners Is an impOssibillty.
II the cited limitations were the
rule in practice state, county and city
taxes could lever aggregate over 81
on the 500. Will The STATESMAN
explain how it Is that the rate in It's
own CITY is far above that amount?
How is it under THE STATEsMAN's
Interpretation of this prohibitlve sec
ton of the constitution that the rate
in Galveston is So 50, in Dallas " 81,
and above these figures in other cities
of Texas? In the face of the cGnstitu'
tionaI provision which it lnVOkes
THE STATESMAN advocates "the pas
SAGE of Mr.. Breeding's bill, the pro-
visions of which subject real estate In
municipalities to local taxation at the
ontjOn of the citizens. "--GalvestoD
News.
II is certainly unbecOmiDg in
newspaper that processes to lead IN
editorial ability in the state OF Iexas
to dodge an issue so palpably. me
last sentence quoted from THE
STATESMAN by The News beginning
with "the passage of the Breeding
bill.n etc, shows plainly what the is.
sue was between The STATESMAN
and The News, and that is whether 1t
Is best to establish the system OF local
ptiOn taxation or not. What does the
fact that cities have exceeded under
special provisions the acts referred to
governing general taxation have to do
with the propriety OF local taxation?
The Galveston News is authority that
the cities of Galveston and Dallas
have exceeded their powers under the
general law. Are they more likely to
do it hereafter under local taxation
when it would require vote of two
thirds of the taxpayers to do 50?
Now we will answer the in~
terrogatories so truthfully pro-
pounded ny The News. Aus
tin has never exceeded the
authority under the constitution to
levy tax over two and q half per
cent, being "a city of over 10000 popu-
latiOn. Other cities have exceeded it
under the decision of the courts, that
Il creditor could force city to provide
by taxation, sinking fund to meet
any debt incurred previous to the con-
stitution of 1876 even If the charter of
the city did not authorize it. This
principle was decided in the case OF
Voorhees, vs. the mayor of Houston,
Texas Reports, vol 20 page 33l. In the
case of Lufkin vs. the city of Calves
ton, Texas Reports, vol. G3, page 437,
the court ruled that article ii, section
of the constitution was an exception
ID the general law and directly appli.
cable to cities of 10000 inhabitants
and over and that the Legislature had
right to grant the city council of
Galveston the power to levy ninety
nine cents on the 500 for general
municipal purposes. That and other
exceptions such as taxes necessary to
pay the public debt and for public
schools have contributed to run up
the rate of taxes of Dallas and Gal |
weston. But that does not touch |
the question at ISSUE which is would |
not there be a. much safety under |
local option taxation as there is now
under the present mode of taxation?
The very same restrictions would be
thrown around it, the very same PEG.
pie would vote upon it. The only
difference is that each county, city or
TOWN. Guild consider its own necessi- |
ties and submit to the people basis
OF taxation to meet its peculiar wants.
Why then would Galveston object to
Austin managing it's own affairs under
the same general laws, and why would |
county way up in North Texas object |
to Travis county levyinA tax to suit |
itself? The Galveston News objects to
local taxation because cities under ex-
ceptions to the general law have ex.
ceeded the limit of that general law
under the present system of taxation,
and desires us to infer that the same
cities under local option taxation with |
the same voters would tax property |
out of the hands of the present owners. |
Local option taxation might make the
owners of these impedimenta to local |
Improvement, these vacant lots lying |
idle to gather increment in increased !
valuation by the work of other men !
in improving all around the vacant
lots, pay more by applying valua-
tion 20 the lots measured by |
the adjoining improved lots,
which would be fair and just
and that is all that local option taxa
ton could do more than the people |
are doing now under the general aud !
special laws and under the constitu-
tional provision that all taxation
shall be equal and uniform