The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-03

ANO. D. GuuTtly OttDAC duJO6thAtt~ " yesterday read an extract from let ter received from the State Suoe-in- tendent of Education of Louisiana with respect to local taxation for schools in that State wherein he stated that that tax was voted usually when submitted to the people by majority In property and taxable value of property votipg at such an election. I now desire to read an extract from letter ITO" tne State Superintendent of Texas. The Constitution of Texas provides LOCAL taxation for schools provided It IS nrst submitted to a vote of the Quaheeu electors upon whom the tax bears. ana that it shall be voted for by two thirds majority thereof voting at s1cn election. The Superintendent says:
 Answering your letter of the lItn inst, | beg leave to send you unoer separate cover copy of our scnooi laws, a copy of the last report or tnis department. copy of circular NO. 10, from which you will be able to gather information relative to our schooi sys- tenn, methods of taxation. etc. As a general rule, the people or this State favor the special local tax rea- trre. In my opinion. this tax sueserves the highest school interests Of the uis- tricts levying the same.
 "The average school term in tnis State Is about 5 1-2 months. Now under the Constitution of Texas the Legislature of that State has 10 enact a law carrying that provision in- to effect the first section of which law reads as follows;
 "The Commissioner Court of the several counties of this State shall nave power to levy a special tax for the fur | ther maintenance of public free schools and the erection within each echool l district of school buildings therein; provided, two-thirds of the qualified property tax paying voters of the dis- trict voting at an election to be held for the purpose, shall vote such tax, not to exceed ia any year twenty cents on the one hundred dollars valuation of the property subject to taxation in such district"
 I will state that had another letter
 from the Superintendent stating that that tax had been voted in every fn-
 sance where 1t was submitted to the people.
 (Mr. white-That is for the school | district and not for the county? MT. Browne-It is for the school dis- | trict.
 Now I have letter which is sample taken from the letters of Superintend- | ents of States where the matter Is left | to the qualified electors alone. This let | ter is from the Superintendent ot Edu- | cation of Colorado, who by the way signs himself or herself Helen c. Green | fell. desire to say that this Is one
 of the best letters have received. Colorado has State and local taxa | tion for schools. The school electors | of the various districts at a meeting
 called for the purpose. or in connection ! with the annual election of school di- | rectors, vote for such tax. the ques- tion being decided by a majority in
 numbers, no property qualification be- ing necessary. Our school districts dc not consist of counties; they consist oi i cities or various areas of territory. | In my opinion, a special local tax foI schools is most beneficial in results. | Colorado appropriates no money from
 the general fund for schools. The length of term of the free schools ! in this State varies from six months 1T | the poorer districts to nine and one half months in the cities" The gentleman asks the question il l the local tax is not levied in Texas by
 school districts. It Is so levied and 1T | the report of the Committee on Taxa | ton 1t is provided that this tax shall b' only levied in counties or cities. w are not familiar with the conditions II | Texas as we are with those inAlabama 1 After careful investigation. the com mittee came to the conclusion to al | low this special tax to be voted IT | school districts would, in a very larg, number of the school districts of Ala l bama amount to taxation without rep resentation. There are numerous town ships in the State of Alabama that art school districts, where the owners o | almost all the property and in somt cases all are non-residents and don live in the district. To allow a tax tf ! be voted on them without their havins
 a voice in the matter would be practi cal confiscation of their property. IT A majority of the districts. the proper. ty holders do live within the district l and there would be no objection fl cases of shat kind to allowing thu
 school districts voting the tax in stead of the counties. But we mus make this law to suit the diferen conditions in different counties. 1 MT. watts--May I ask the gentle
 man a question:
 MT, Browne-Yes, sir.
 MT. Watts-For instance, take q coun ty like Montgomery where majority of the taxpayers and people reside in
 side the city and have to provide tol their own schools. How many would the country precincts get if the citizens I of Montgomery had to vote addltlona taxes on themselves! -
 MT. Browne--It would be owing tt the liberality of the taxpayers and citi
 zens of Montgomery.
 l MT. Lowe (Jefferson)-Will you par don an interruption?
 MT. Browne-When I get through an swering the question of the gentleman from Montgomery. The city of Mont gomery would levy the tax and woult
 get large part of it back.
 Mir. Lowe (Jefferson)-May ask th' question now?
 MT Browne-Yes.
 Mir Lowe-Does the gentleman in tend to say to the Convention that th' free schools in the country districts O Alabama must be dependent upon th'
 generosity of the taxpayers of tn
 cities and towns?
 MT. Browne--I do not, but ever! thinking man will know under thl provision the poor country school dis | tricts will get more money than the, would get if they were allowed to vot
 a tax upon themselves, because the,
 would not pay as much of that tax a they would get back. the city payinl most of the tax.
 l MT. White-Provided they can get tn city to vote the tax?
 MT Browne-Provided the cities ar liberal enough to vote the tax. If tn
 gentleman thinks this tax ought to b levied and appropriated back to tn
 school districts and townships in pro