The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-04-23

Within this period the city has paid oil
a bonded debt OF sllSI5l5, AMI has ex-
pended IN public buildings the sum OF
Sge5.s62.
10 do this. however, she has had to is
sue new bonds 10 the amount OF S2,53o.050,
and has Increased the bonded debt by
$l,3i2,5lJ
She has likewise in this period expended
in discount ana interest $'5,i5s, the penalty
OF having Il floating debt.
The assets acquired In public buildings,
which partially represent the increase In
the public debt, are not assets like Gas
and Water Works which may sustain
themselves, but create a charge upon our
annual income 10 carry and deplcte as
TO that extent of funds 10 meet the more
immediate and pressing needs OF the city.
In our ambition 10 be IN the front rank
OF progress, we have oyerhastily acquired
properties which tax our income 10 sus-
tain, which are incOmmensurate with our
taxable values. as compared with other
cities Of "A like population, and impose
burden for a series OF years, which in
creased values through healthfui develop
mcnt may alone relieve.
We are close 10 the charter limit OF IS
per cent. upon the assessed values of our
real estate. IL account be taken of our
present floating debt, we shall reach this
| limit by the issue of about Sj0oto0 more
| bonds II this be done we shall have
| nothing but current income 10 look to.
| Prudence. therefore, suggests That we
| should hold this margin for actual and
| pressing need.
| The question OF relief must assume one
of three CD phases-raise the charter
! limit. raise assessments, or raise the rate
| of taxation.
| To all of those plans the Democratic
| League for Good Government says mo.
| We can live within our income for the
| present. and in doing 30 shall entail less
| damage TO our future interests
| The charter limit cannot be raised save
| bv act OF the legislature, two years
| hence. 1t is already three. four, and
even five times higher than the limit inn
| posed in other cities. The attempt 10 90
| so has always been attended with so
much mischief that State law In many
OF the states fixes the limit at 10
! per cent.
To raise the charter limit under
these circumstances would give no relief
| TO the situation IL could but discredit
| the bond issues outstanding, and IL would
not stimulate a sale OF further issues ex-
| cept at rates of discount so sharp as to
show the attempt 70 be highly ihJudi-
| ciOus.
Increased assessment or Increased tax
rate are convertible terms; tax rate oil
per cent upon q per cent. OF the true
value of property Is the same as per
cent upon its fun value.
We get no light upon the sunect nor
n inst view Of the burden of taxation sim
plv by getting the rate. IL we are 10
| nroft nv our studies. assessments must
be reduced to the same basis TO make ans
Just comparison.
The census of the United states OF lss'
Second volume). published the latter par
of 1895 furnishes us with data upon TINS
subject. which may he accepted as more
accurate and more unprecedented than
that to be secured from any other source
INTERESTING COMPARISON
We submit. therefore. table compueo
from Its figures, In which tax RATE pei
cent. OF true value taxed. per capita aepe