The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-04

I desire to say If the report of the Committee on Taxation is adopted and the power of a city to Incur . debt be limited to s per cent, and only to be increased to per cent. for the pur- pose of constructing water wor$s ana sewerage 1t will absolutely tie the hands of every municipality in the State of Alabama. In addition to that. if city has debt of per cent. ana is only allowed further margin of , per cent. for the construction of wa. ter works and sewers, no city can build system of water works or sewers for such an amount of money. By was of illustration, take Eufaula. which has an assessed valuation of over $z.- oo0.o0 Three per cent. for the pur- pose ot a system of water works ana sewers would make $6o.000, and do not see how 1t would be possible for that city to build these utilities fer that sum.
 The Convention this morning adopted a provision fixing the debt limit of counties at s1-2 per cent. which un- der certain conditions might be in- creased to 5 per cent. It occurs to me with debt limit of 31-2 for countfes a debt limit of per cent. for cit.es. making the entire debt limit of city and county a total of 10 per cent. might be a reasonably safe proposi. ton.
 Upon this point I desire to say that I have prepared a statement showing the debt limit e every State in the United States that has Q limit and for the information of the Convention. and not to detain them. will read . few of these figures.
 Arizona, per cent Georgia, ! per cent Illinois. 5 per cent: Indiana, 2 per cent; Iowa, 5 per cent; Kentucky has . wary. ing limit ranging from per cent foi counties up to 10 per cent for cities; Maine, 5 per cent; Minnesota, pei cenE Missouri. the same: Montana, per cent, which may be increased fol the purpose of erecting water-worki with an exception in favor of debts ere ated for constructing water-works North Dakota, 5 per cent; Pennsylva mia. per cent: South Carolina. pei cent; South Dakota, 5 per cent; Utah { per cent; Virginia. 20 per cent; Wes Virginia, per cent; Wyoming. pe cent; Washington, 10 per cent: Wiscon sin. 5 per cent. I believe, gentlemen this is all the information I desire t bring to the attention of the Conven ton. except to further state that th' Committee on Municipal Corporation endeavored as far as possible to pro tect the various cities in the State O Alabama in fixing the debt limit, ant at the same time having in view thu fact that some limitaation was abso lutely necessary. MT. Brooks--I would ask the gentle man if the substitute he proposes \ not Section in the report of the Com mittee on Municipal CorporationsY Mir. Weakley--It is.
 Mir. Smith (Mobile)-I would like U ask the gentleman a. question. Wha class of municipal indebtedness can b think of that would be covered unde the per cent clause! | Mir. weakley-Debts created 10 school buildings. city halls. hre sta tions. street improvements. parks.
 MT. Smith (Mobile)-Street improve ments you have in the substitute! | MT. Weakley--Yes.
 Mir. Macdonald--I am entirely oppos ed to the very dangerous suggestlo made in the substitute. l asked tn 1 gentleman during the course of his ar gument whether the true understandin I of subdivision C of his substitute wa | to permit municipalities to Impose O | abuttlng property owners the entir cost of sidewalks and street improve ments ana sanitary and other sewers The gentleman did not directly answe that question, but 1t Is obvious' an will be plain. to every lawyer III thl Convention that that is direct pei rnission or a full permission to put sue burdens on the taxpayers or the city. MT. Brooks-Would not that be opv ated by inserting after the words IT cost of which is to be assessed tn words. "in whole or in part.
 MT. Macdonald-No, sir. If it IS pt
 '.in whole or in part" that will SUI give the municipality the opportunit to put the full charge for the improve ment on the abutting land owners,
 Tn this city we have had painI' axperience in regard to the action
 m,,n,cipa,ities in imposing such oui dens upon the people. We have see
 tbe property of the poor conhscate' I've have seen them compelled to se
 their homes for the purpose or paylI
 such assessments as these. l can sta.
 case after case which has occurred
 Montgomery within the last two
 three years where people nave oeen ..
 solutely deprived of their property th1S tCnaTdCICI Ot
 this suggestion carries 1t further tha
 was ever contemplated in MontsomeI
 or any other city. That was a. bad da
 for Alabama and for the inhaoitants
 tha cities of Alabama when, the 5l
 nreme Court departed from the ru
 in Dargan vs. the Mayor, when tns
 held such assessments were invalid an
 when they rendered the opinion m U
 xaerns case. Why. gentlemen, u
 municipalities of this and other citi'
 select what character of pavement
 tbev want and what character or sew
 ers and they assess the cost or on
 half of the cost up to this time' ar
 this amendment suggests they can p'
 if all upon the adjoining property owl
 CTS. and they have gone op maxi, y,
 such character of streets and sidewau
 until it seems that they are tryins
 rival the streets of New Jerusate,n |.
 the cost of the streets they are pus.n
 down here. l coulo clee yEu
 hard instances from personal exper nnce of my own clients, and here " 1 have A proposition not only endorsir
 what these municipalities have ooi
 before. but proposing to tell the clues
 Alabama that they may so aneao al , nut down any char acter Of slde"aik
 pavement. sanitary and other several
 and issue bonds and compel the peep
 to pay such bonds.
 We have some instances of that XII
 in the city of Montgomery. we na' what is known as the baby bond, whe in direct opposition to the wishes Of U
 property owners and over their pr
 test. the municipality of Montgome has undertaken to pave with brick ce
 tain streats and assess the entire co against the abutting property owner
 a,,arvona Here is A man who ow