The Opelousas courier., 1894-12-01
Taxing improvements.

To the Editor of the Post Dispatch:
Public improvements increase the
value of land only, and it is therefore
only just that the owners of land
should pay for the improvements, &C
by such improvements.
1t should, however. not be forgotten
hat improvements made on any par
| ticular street increase land values. not
only on that street. but also on the
land adjacent in proportion to the
nearness to such improvements.
This being the case, it ia manifestly
unjust to make the owners of abuttins
lots pay all the expenses for street i'm
provements.
The. Stone law. while in itself good
does not go far enough. and the few
advantages it possesses are more than
counterbalanced by the hardships it
creates.
The cas- of the poor widow. who is
to lose her home because she is unable
to pay for the improvements made in
front of her lot. is another proof of the
fallacy and viciousness of our system
of taxation. In the first place she had
to pay to a private individual q certain
amount for the privilege of exclusively
occupying a fragment of Gods foot
stool in order to be permitted to erect
a roof over the heads of herself and
children. Next she was taxed on every
nail, board. brick, stone, single and
on the mortar used in the construction
of her home.
Furthermore, she paid individual
taxes on her furniture. kitchen uten-
sis, coal, clothes, washtubs, and on
the poor romans piano-the wash
board-and on everything she eats.
drinks and wears. Having gotten SO
far the assessor raised the assessment
on the lot itself-although it is the
same old lot-and then proceeds tc
tax her direct on all her earthly pos
sessions.
Now. what is she and others in a sim
liar plight going to do about it? In
der present social conditions local OPP
ton in taxation will disentangle the
gordon knot.
Let the city be given the privilege to
LusA abo Sd1oSS oloilS. lollSA LII pl oNN-
ments alone OF personal property alone,
or any two or ali three, as it may fiId
best for the welfare of its citizens.
AS most everybody is in favor of
abolishing taxes on personally, there
remains to be taxed land and improve
ments only.
If it is just that a mans clothes, etc.
should be exempt, it is also proper that
other products of his labor should be
exempt from taxation.
What a man produces is his as against
the world. why then should we forci-
bly, take a part of the product of his
labor from him.
No man or set of men made the land
it was here before a was created.
1t has little or no value where popu-
lation is scarce and little or no govern
ment expenses and public improve
ments are needed. But it is very valu-
able where population is dense and
where, consequently, government *
penses are high and public improve
ments an absolute necessity. Why,
then, should we take private property
for public expenses? Why not pay
government expenses out of the fund
provided for by nature?
The way out" is to SO amend u
laws that only public property will be
taken for public expenses. There will
then be no shifting of taxes, no evic-
tions and no robbing of poor widows
and little children of the homes which
have been paid for with the products
of honest toll UNCLE Tom.