St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-03-08
MORE oFTHE SAME.


To the Editor of the Globe: ' e
What can the taxpayers hope or ex-
pect in the way of relief from taxa
ton, from any man or set of men who
write, or approve of such an article as
that on THE Frontage Water Tax in
the Pioneer Press of Thursday? If
the present board cannot manage the
water works and abolish frontage tax
(andl if city is allowed to increase in
popu1ation) also reduce water rates,
then it is high time that the common
council take hold of the water works,
and manage them; and [ will make the
prediction that, if the water board is
abolished, these same men who are
fighting SO hard to keep up the 'front.'
age tax viii be the first to show that
they can also reduce water rates. The
writer of the Pioneer Press editorial
desired to make out strong case, i. e.,
to retain the water frontage tax, and
so instead of consulting water report,
he let loose the lofty flights of his i'm
agination; but he evidently thought
that the people were so used to the
Juggling" with city's official financial
statement that he would give them
a dose, that,would fairly paralyze them.
To think that any one should have the
temerityisto contradict an editorial in
the Pioneer Press or that any one
should examine into a water report
did not seem to enter his mind. 1t was
not intended originally that the water
frontage tax should continue but for
a short time, it was considered as a
temporary expedient. The time has
ma W ic 4
be retained. One ex-member of the
water board stated that he had been
in favor Of reducing it to five cents
per foot. If tax is not required after
1900, then why place it on again; why
this great anxiety to accumulate an
immense sinking fund in these hard
times? AS to raising the water rates,
if frontage tax is abolished, that is
used merely to Brighten people; they
do not have to raise water rates. The
Pioneer Press writer ignores the fact
that the board had on hand Dec. /,
1894, So, 812.16 cash and $206, sos due on
frontage tax, etc, or $258, SSS.24 which
can be kept as contingent fund, or a
fund to be used for obtaining more
water, if necessary. He ignores the
fact that there is $25, 900 already in the
sinking fund; he ignores the fact that
no bonds are due until 1909, or for
fourteen years; he ignores the fact
that the present revenue for water
rates pays maintenance and interest
on bonds, and leaves a yearly net rev.
nue. of over $43, 1000; he ignores the fact
that the people who own property ''in
the business and older residence por-
tons of the city, are not hunting work
at 81 per day; he ignores the fact that
people are poor and need relief from
taxation at once; in short, he ignores
all facts and figures; but one thing is
self-evident which we cannot ignore,
and that is, that he and few others
are hell bent on keeping in vogue
the present state of ruinous taxation.
Whether these people are acting
through ignorance of the true state
of affairs, or are so welded to their
idols, or for what reason they want to
stifie the growth and energy of this
city is marvel to me. Cannot self
interest be lost sight of for a short
time for. the general good? 1t is a
critical time now for all cities. Will
they not let up on the brakes and allow
this city to grow? I have the great
est confidence in the future of this
cit, If wise counsels prevail; but it
cannot grow with the same misman-
agement as In the past. 1t is time for
others to take the wheel; the old pilots
are "color blind and will run US on
the breakers. Will not the people
arouse and grasp the situation? Now
is the time to act reform, and reduce
taxation all along the line. Do you
desire a reduction of taxes or do you
think the same as the classic express
sion of one of the patriots of the
water board, that no one wishes the re-
peal of the frontage water tax except
a few damned old cranks" If the
people want the frontage tax repealed
let them speak out SO loud that all can
hear C.. w. HORR.