The Portland daily press., 1898-01-18
DEERING ANNEXATION.
TO the Editor Of the Press:


arguments against the annexation of
Deering and / am straightway moved to
attempt disquisition upon the vagaries
of psychological phenomena; but it will
perhaps serve me better to descend to the
elementary plane"
A man told me that "Ann T, in his
communications IN the PRESS, said that
Portland's gross debt was 7.s per cent
Of her valuation, which is above the
limit, and, therefore, Portland cannot
raise dollar for extraordinary purposes
without raising her tax rate.
| l noticed that he used such an argu
ment, but did not think he was serious.
I knew he was hard pressed, and in
genious, and, we'll, admired his pluck.
| This statement of his is not even
| technically true. It probably will soon
be true of Deering that she will have
reached her limit and cannot borrow. but
must tax; it surely will be true inside
of two years, if she continues her present
rate of getting into debt.
But of Portland, what are the facts?
i gross debt is ~ per cent, her net
i. bit about g. per cent, after deducting
marketable, available assets only. This
difference between gross and net debt
consists almost entirely of railroad and
gas stock held by the city, quick, assets,
with we'll known market price. They
are worth 81 ,348,055 cash. If Portland
wants to raiee 500, 900 she can sell that
much of them; if she wants a
million dollars, she can sell that
| amount; II more, she can sell more.
So that one of the Portland's
resources for raising money with
out assessing taxes is the difference be-
tween 3.4 per cent and 7.2 per cent of the
valuation; while behring's is only the
difference between her present percentage,
whatever. that is after she finishes her
undertakings, and her five per cent limit.
Nor is this all; Portland has another
resource not open to Deering. Portland
has reduced her debt 81, 100000 in the last
ten years. Something over million dol
lars of this has been paid directly or in
directly by taxation with the average tax
rate at tride less than $50. This pay
ment averages little over 800, 900 year,
besides paying current expenses. If Port
land had been SO unwise as to refund, in
stead of paying this each year, it would
have reduced her average rate to Sl7 30
instead of $40. She can resort to this large
amount at any time she may choose to-
adopt behring's policy of keeping in debt,
or she might keep the tax rate low at the
expense of the future,as Deering has been
doing. I said her tax rate might have
been $3.50, simply by refunding her old
debt as it matured; without allowing her
debt to increase. Butswhat about Deer
ing? Reference to the annual reports
shows that behring's average tax rate, for
the same tsn years is $18.45; almost dol
lar higher than ST.. so, and yet Deering
has doubled her debt in the meantime.
1t would seem as though such an argu-
ment as that of Cam IT, mention d
above would need no further refatation.
| 1t is just such statements that have
aroused an unreasonable feeling against
Portland among the unthinking. The
people have been duped too long by the
Office holders; they are learning the facts
about Deering and Portland. There has
been an unwarranted tax fright directed
against Portland. 1t should have been
against Deering, Recurring to the
vagaries of psychological phenomena,
Banquo's ghost. that will not down at
bidding so elegantly invoked by our
friend, would seem more likely in the
near future to make Deering permanent
rirr 20
friend will forgive me for commenting
upon his ingenuity, for he truly says
facts are what the people want, not
sentiment ana unsupported assertions. -
| But why is our friend SO strenuous in
maintaining that city, which has been
paying its debts at the rate Of over $780,
'sl40O upon Fort Allen park. " and $4,000
upon the Larrabee lot?' Does he hope to
befog his readers with insignificant items
| of detail? What bearing can such small
| items have upon the question? 1t requires
| SAC. 900 to affect Portland's percentage of
| debt tenth of one per cent.
| One other statement frequently heard
| from the lipssof the annexationists Is
quite as erroneous as that Of our friend
dAnn t." mentioned above, 1t is the
continued assertion that Portland valu-
alton is higher than behring's, and that,
therefore, behring's valuatlon Will De
Immediately raised by the Portland as
SCISSORS. All boards of assessors are sup
posed to make full fair cash valuation,
and that is what they are sworn to do.
| But assessors are human, and their Judg-
ment may not always be correct. Differ
emit boards may look at values differently;
and the same board may see things
differently at different times. aaThey may
and undoubtedly do, at times, value some
pieces of property unjustly; they may be
preiudiced or Influenced unconsciously by
| friend or foe, to lower or higher valua-
tion. But, as between cities, we can only
compare the averages of the judgments
which the law has imposed in them, and
which they have exercised as best they
could. And, after all, who shall say TINT
he is right and the assessors wrong In
| Judgment; and how can you arrive at
comparison of values, excepting as you
measure by some other standard equally
as variable as human judgment? No man
knows what is in the mind OF MS brother.
And vet we have the opinions OF eminent
" qualified men upon this point. The
annexation commissioners, after d1llgent
Investigation, say in their report: The
commission finds that similar methods Of