The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-03-17
AGAINST THE COUNTY BONDS.

Salt Lake City. March Is. 1895.
To the Editor OF The Herald:
I have Just received Statement of the
county court to the taxpayers of Salt
Lake county urging the taxpayers to
vote bonds-yes. In reading said state
ment can come to but one conclusion.
which is this-''jump out of the frying
pan into the fire" The showing made by
the Statement" is far from assuring,
and in presenting the figures the state
ment" declares that it will be impossi-
bic 10 ever pay the Indebtedness from the
annual income and revenue of the coun-
ty;' and again, on page of the state
men, paragraph ,, this language is
used: From the above statement it is
shown that with strict economy and by
making reduction varying from % per
cent TO 10 per cent. in all county ex-
penSes, 1t Will not be possible 10 save
more than $4,000 of the county's income
ana revenue for the year 1885, which is
little more than one-Jhird of the interest
that will accrue in 1895 on the valid out
standing warrants. AT this rate the in
deDtedneSS as we stated above can never
be paid out Of the revenues Of the coun-
" and each year will be increased from
$1,000 to $4,000 by accruing interest"
NOW from the statement there is no
pretenSe that more than $4,000 can be
saved even by strict economy, from the
county revenues over and above current
expenses for 1895. which the Statement
says is little more than one-third the
interest which will accrue during the year
1855. This is of course on the basis of
per cent. interest on outstanding valid
warrants. The interest on the valid in
debtedness, to-wit. 1898. 600 Ct deal only
with even thousands), is $27, 900 per an
mum. leaving deficit of SIT 900 of interest
annually 20 be provided for outside of the
countys legitimate revenues. saw nothing
about the $4,000 already accrued interest
when must also be provided for. The
statement in this respect states the truth
when 1t says that at this rate the indebt-
edness can never be paid out of the rev.
enues of the county, and that the indebt-
edness will be increased from $4,000 to
$4,000 by accruing interest annually
Now suppose the bonds are issued as
roposed-S375, OCO-at per cent. interest
per annum, the interest on which will
amount to in round numbers S19 600 De-
duct from this amount of interest the
$4,000 saved by strict economy and stu
we have a deficiC of $1,000 per annum on
be provided for? Only in two W ways
creased taxation or sale of more bonds.
The statement further uses this Ian
guage: The same law that authorizes
a sinking fund, etc. In this way small
amount invested each year as the law
directs, will provide fund with which
these bonds can be paid at their rnaturi-
~, and which fund invested as set aside
Will earn interest to at least one-half of
the total interest that will be paid on the
and misleading than this statement? 1.-THE
county has neglected to inform the tax
payers where this small amount to be in
vested each year as the law directs, etc,
is to come from? But I see. 1t comes
from the $1,000 annual deficit No the
taxpayers must go down into their pock-
cts to pay the interest on the bonds and
the bonds themselves if the voter bonds
yes. The members of the county court
in the Statement" pledged themselves
to spend every dollar of premium which
the bonds may sell for. This ought to
stimulate the taxpayer to vote bonds
yes. But we have had too much of ex-
be in a hurry to incur further Indebted
ness for luxuries and then feast on them,
for payday will surely come But sup
pose we only nav per cent on warrants
outstanding instead of : per cent on a
bonded indebtedness. What of It? In
the first we pay the interest to our peo-
pie: or. in other words, to ourselves;
while in The second we nav with inter
est and principal to New York or London
bankers. and beyond question they would
demand that both PRINCIPAL and interest
be Payable in gold coin that which is now
payable in silver coin or lawful money
AS misleading. unfair and deceptive as
attention of the taxpayers to The covert
threat of the county court that they will
issue the bonds whether the taSnavsrs
vote yes or no. which is the worst fea-
ture of This whole business I trust the
taxpayers win say most enrhaticalIy on
who are the masters by doing as they
have done two times before. and say
BONDS-NO. and in so emphatic a man.
ner that no further EXPENSE will be in
CURED in holding an election on bond
matters. OLD RESIDENT.