The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-06

In Birmingham. we are told by the
 learned gentleman from Jefferson (Mr
 Lowe). that people are 60 ciausoring foI
 the opportunity of paying taxes foi
 sewers and streets, that they abso-
 lutely break down the cordon of police
 they have put around the City Coun. l ell % that they may have the oppor- tunity to impose taxes. That may be
 true as to Birmingham. but that is not
 so in other municipalities. The tax gatherer in Montgomery is not earnest
 ly sought after, nor is the City Coun. ell clamorously importuned to impose taxes.
 Gentlemen speak of strangulatins municipalities, stopping them in their march of prosperity and progress. They seem to forget that there are other ob- jects of strangulation that these muni- cipalities are engaged in strangulating and bankrupting taxpayers. We have 6 remarkable picture of that in this city. We have contracted debt In this city since 1875 of over s1. .75o, ,ooo----
 MT. sanford---s1, 900, 900.
 MT. Jones (Montgomery)--$1,s ,s7s. 900. not including the baby bonds. from the ofiicial reports.
 Mfr. Lomax--What about the L.. and N. Railroad and the market bond tax ?
 MT. Macdonald (Montgomery)-And thereby hangs the tale. This city is- sued bonds to aid in the construction of the SoxrH and North Alabama Rail- road. and, as I am reliably informed. has been collecting for fifteen or twen- ty years s1o.00o . year more than enough to pay the interest on those bends, and has not paid one of those bonds and has never used the excess for the purpose of creating sinkins fund for the payment of those bonds' but has absolutely been using 1t in vio- Iation of constitution and law for their own purposes.
 MT, President, I received this morn ing a communication from gentleman in this city who Is perfectly familiar with the facts he states, and l would like to have it read by the clerk as . part of my remaEks, and read with that power of voice ani excellence of enun- citation for which he is known.
 The communication was read by the clerk as follows:
 Hon. Gordon Macdonald. City. Dear
 Sir:
 notice that in considering the ques- ton of a debt limit of cities. the status of local assessments for street and sidewalks was the subject of d'scus- sion at tiDe evening session of the Con- vention. Under the amendment onsred by MT. weakley the obligations or bonds issued for raising means to pay for street and sidewalk improve ments, o, storm water sewers the cost of which is to be assessed against adjoining property. Is not to be in- c.uded in computing the debt ot a city.
 It seems to be a curious fact that most of the gentlemen who spoke Tor the amendment have at one time or another been Mayors. City Attorneys or Aldermen of some city and 1t may pc that Col. Sanford was not aitoxether wroEg in saying that you could nor find an ex-Alderman or an ex-Mayor or an ex-City Attorney who Is not in favor of all these exactions in favor of municipalities. The Convention eer- tainly furnished no examples. Members who seek to limit the right to contract debts by the city for the citizens to pay are said by MT. Graham to be 'thaving their hands upon the thrqat of the municipalities of this State ana attempting to choke the very life out Of them" though he admits further on that the city of Montgomery under the beneficent administrations of the local authorities is in debt two and half millions and unless relieved by. ieEis- lation in this Constitution will go to the wali."
 The President-The gentleman's time has expired.
 mans time be extended to permit him to finish his remarks.
 Mir. Oates-I will yield my time to oantlaunaA.
 The President pro tefn.--The Chair had not recognized the gentleman from Montgomery and he has no time to yield. T
 MT. Oates-If 1t Is admissible l thought 1t would be saving of time rather than having a vote to extend the time.
 The President pro tem.-The Chair will hold that the gentleman from Montgomery not having been recog- nized has no time to yield.
 A vote being taken the motion to extend the time was carried and the reading was continued as follows;
 l respectfully suggest that the local authorities who are responsible TOT this condition should not be allowed to continue in the debt contract ousiness' I notice also that none of the gentle men have any provision for preventing all the cost of these so-called improve ments from being assessed against the property of the citizen. MT. Watts blandly remarks that this section does not make any assessments against property, but any man who reads the section will know that there is enough in the section for that practice | to have every city official claim full | power to do so. under It.
 It is we'll to consider the history of | these municipal authorities. since 1875 l and note their attitude toward the | of the State. Our city had | a debt of almost $750.00 at the adop- | tion of that Constitution and 1t has | created aabout $1.750.000 since. By that | the city was allowed 70 | cents on the $100 for general expenses | and allowed in addition to levy suffi | cient to pay the debt 1t owed when 1t | was adopted. For the last twenty years | the benehcent municipal authorities have levied 62 1-2 cents ostenHibly to | pay the interest on the debt existing in | 1875 when 1t was not needed for that l purpose. and in defiance of Constitu- ton and law have used 1t at their own sweet will. For the last fifteen years there has been collected in excess of | at least $10.00 a year and the fact re- mains that the debt has not been re- duced a single cent. It Is justified or condoned on the plea of necessity. This course was pursued when Mir. Watts was an Alderman and was so plainly and palpably in violation of law that