The age-herald., 1900-09-22
LET THE TAXPAYERS SAY

l LET THE TAXPAYERS SAY To the Editor of the Age-Herald. l It is proposed to put the city further in debt to issue more bonds to build a city l hall
 1 A few days ago the city issued bonds to 1 pay interest on the bonded debt of the | city, piling up interest on interest. l The income of the city is not now sui l ficient to meet current expenses and pay l the interest on the bonded debt now exist l ing; but now the Mayor and Aldermen of Birmingham as enterprising, progressive
 monument builders, are proposing to fur | ther incumber the city by issuing more l bonds.
 l few years ago the hue and cry was
 "save the honor of the city by a constitu- l tonal amendment increasing the tax rate,' and yet with that increased tax rate there | is deficit each year, and notwithstand- l ing these facts the Mayor and Aldermen
 of Birmingham are proposing to further | involve the city. The result is enevitable;
 in the course of a few years there will be
 another clamor for a higher tax rate to save the honor of the city" l It is an easy matter to be progressive, 1 liberal, generous with the other fellows
 money. For the information of the public
 let the Mayor and Aldermen of Birming- 1 ham publish statement showing the | amount that each member of that board | contributes to the support of the city, l both as taxes and as licenses, so that the | public can see whether they are progres- | sive with their own money, or with some l body elses money.
 l It may not be true in this case, the facts would demonstrate whether it is or not, | but it is usually true that the fellow who demands most in the name of progress, de-
 mands it at the expense of the other fel- l low.
 l Increased indebtedness demands in
 creased taxes, increased license, or else | default is inevitable.
 Every man knows that low tax rate is | worth more to induce capital to invest | here than fine city hall When capital is | looking for investment is it the fine city | hall or the low tax rate and low license 1 rate that challenges attention? The Legislature exempted cotton factories
 rom taxation for ten years. What was the result? Hundreds of thousands of dollars l invested in cotton factories in the State, 1 notwithstanding we have a very shabby old capitol building at Montgomery II this city were living within its income l 1t would be a much greater inducement to 1 capital seeking investment than would a l fine city hall with an increased bonded | deDt and deficit continually piling up to 1 end in an increased tax and license rate or | bankruptcy of the city.
 But it is claimed there will be an income | from renting stores in the new city build l ing.
 If the city is going into the rental busi- ness why not let it also branch out in the
 mercantile business? The city, paying no l taxes and no license, ought very success | fully to compete with parties in the same | line who have to pay taxes and licence to l support the city.
 If an individual lives in a modest little | house with a mortgage on it, and cannot pay the interest, you would call him fool l ish, silly, to want to spread out and borrow | money and build and live in a great big | fine house.
 What is the difference between an in l dividual in debt and @ city in debt? There l is this difference, the city can appeal flor
 the sake of saving dts honor for higher 1 taxes and higher Hcence. The bond manipulatorS would not touch | your city bonds if it were not for the fact | that they are willing to gamble on getting l the tax rate increased after the debt is | contracted. To take the bonds at a high I | deficit it now is, then to get an increase | in the tax rate would be fine thing, espe- | cially if in the interim the city should make | default, and bond spectators could buy
 .ne bonds up at less than par. | 1 ask the tax payers of the city. which | would you rather have, a fine city hall | with increased tax rates, or the old city l hall with the present tax rate? | I ask men in business, which would you 1 rather have, d fine city hall with a higher l license tax or the present city hall with the present license tax? (And God knows l it Is now high enough).
 l few tax payers who have property | close to the city hall and will be benefited 1 by the improvement may favor the new | city hall, but the great mass of tax payers l are opposed to it.
 | Would it not be the right thing to do to | at least take vote of the tax payers be- l fore issuing the proposed bonds? k. D. NABERS.