The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1894-03-25
The BONDS REJECTED.
oiff raSLEvY NOT SUFFICIENT TO
SUSTAIN THEM.
wy Attorney stewart Tells Post Re
porter why They Were Rejected and
What VIM Have TO 40 Done
In Tho Premises.

City Attorney John s. stewart returnea
Yesterday from Austin. Mr. stewart,'s
visit to Austin was Tor the nurnosa ~
REGISTERING Sl0oOoO OF bonds Of the Cit,
o. Houston, for the erection OF n new
n'sh school. as wen as for the repair and
NVNip'eaon OF other school buildings Tho
eol'us were rejected by the com, troler and
az E stewart aad MS trp Tor nothing.
n visit was pain to air. stewards office
Yesterday, when he furnished the reporter
with the following lnteryiew in relation 10
the matter;
lhe principle objection to the h9nds IS.
% use his worus tnat the tax levy OF ane.
twehueth Of one per cent upon al taxable
pioperty IN the City OF auustun IA not
sulnc1ent 10 pay the Interest on Tic
pphus and create a sinking fund sdlfcient
70 ie9esin them at maturty.
Inc Ordinances ana tne bonds which
We're rejected were orawn up under the
'pfufislpns VI the present onarter Of the
NY u houston. 1i,ry only require 10
name "a Dunu valid. q sn.Nsng LAIN ~
per cent, tne rl.aus u tiie t.,sol,i,s, pyn-
eiHl, HowsNet, = nidt tnls iUnu ~ noe
v"euhhf ana al uruvr TO maze the pOnu
Nal,a "a s4nking tund OF stulse.eut amOent
~ ie1eea, tne BONO az maturity 10 re-
qu,rel, IN Oruer 20 prUvIue sueu aa
'iinvUalt sinAins Tind o. s rs per cent a.
ftuu.rtu m tne urhnanees anu bonus Ia
vi1er 20 redeem tnem IA thirty years, the
lnie pteslriDeu. 40 90 Nlis Il wili DO
necessary 10 provide a YAK leYy OF q sutIi-
eieut An,patit 10 uiecl tie interest on tue
bonus ana 20 proyiae the seQulruu sinkIng
lunu VI I-3 per cent.
HUnly a teW WEEKS ago the attorney gen
etal reiuseu an issue OF spe,VVJ Of pvnds
OF the city or Iailus, on lfe iuenlical
point on which Ee refused THESE nonas
kie has ihaue similar rulings, 4 unuers tand,
IN cesard 20 the bonds OF otner citivs.
edy 10 he applied TO the objection, Ar
Stewart shid.
In order 10 remedy the objection made
by tie attorney general the ely viii nave
TO pass an ordnance cancellng these
bonus and authorizing thc.s immediate
Then another ordnance VIII
have 70 be introduced which wlll satisfy
the objection mace, and u new bond Issued
attorney general adinits that MS ruling IS
perhaps technical, and TINT the SINKING
fufd as provided for IL these bonds prop
erly invested. under legal requirements
would meet the bonds Vt maturity, but he
adds tnnt he can not deal in a speculation
as to what the shaking fund may or may
not produce. He says That he must COM
fine himself solely 80 the present taxa
upon this basis Of said valuation a siaitiiig
fund OF sufficient amount be provided 10
meet the bonds at maturity"
Mayor Browne WAS also seen regarding
the objection OF the bonds He said that
his understanding at the objection was
that the ordinance had not levied a sum
eient sinking fund TO redeem the bonds AZ
The time OF their maturity,
The question ms to what method the city
would pursue to rcctify the mistake was
asked. The mayor IN answer snid thnt
he could not positively state % II Would
take considerable time anu deiiperation 70