The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-06

arrived at after studying carefully the situation as pertains to every city in the State. ThiD section puts a limita- tion upon the power of every munich pality in the State of Alabama to con- tract debt in proportion to its ability to pay. and at the same time 1t does not put them into the hands of con- tractors and lobbyists. it does not take from them the power of constructing sewers and sidewalks and of acquiring a system of water works. The gentle man will understand that with the varying amount of debts, and the varying needs of the cities of Alabama.
 that 1t is impossible to fix one limit
 which will apply to all municipalities.
 The report of the Committee on Muni-
 cipal Corporations, as now amended.
 excepts from the limitation three dif-
 ferent characters of debt. The first is
 temporary loans Issued in anticipa-
 tion of the collection of taxes. These
 loans are generally unnecessary. You
 will bear in mind that very few cities
 collect their revenues until almost the
 expiration of a year, in fact, we are
 compelled to run the cities for
 ten months in the year before
 receiving the taxes, and there are always periods of depression and of dullness in the affairs of cities
 just like there are periods of depression and duuness in mercantile
 business. This provision enables the city to so to the bank and borrow not more than one-Quarter of its revenue. the loan shall not extend longer than twelve months and must be paid when the taxes are collected. It enables the city to meet its obligations towards the police force. Fire department. etc., and at the same time preserve the credit of the city. The other exception is debts created for sewers and water works. I can conceive of no argument which ought to prevent or preclude that a city should be prevented from acauir1- ing a sewerage system and system of water works after it has acquired a population of 5000 people. Now, gen. t1emen. the other exception is the sec tion which permits the city to incur ob- ligations for street improvements or sidewalk Improvements. where the cost of such improvements is levied in whole or in part against the abutting property. We do not contend and 'tis not the purpose of the committee on this section to regulate how much or what part of that, assessment should be paid by the property owners. but whatever part 1t may be we do not think that that ought to he included
 
 tlemen, just one word more. It does not occur to me that this Convention can afford to tie the hands of the mu- nicipa1ities of Alabama. for I say to you that the growth and prosperity of the State of Alabama is the growth and prosperity of the towns and cities of Alabama, and any restriction placed by this Convention upon these cities in the proper exercise of their functions of preserving the life the health. the safety and the comfort of the people is a restriction upon the State itself. We have heard a great deal said about the debt of the city of Montgomery, the city of Stbile and the city of Birmingham. want to say to you that the creation of these debts has increased taxable val ues in Alabama by millions of dollars, that 5000, 900 of debt incurred by the city of Birmingham has added $400D0.- 900 to the taxable values of the State of Alabama, and the addition of this tremendous amount of wealth by these towns and cities in Alabama has made it possible by system of taxation to largely increase the public school sys- tenn of the State. You do not want to stop that source of revenue.
 The President-The gentlemans time has expired.
 Mir. Reese-I yield my time to the gentleman.
 Mr. weakley-I desire to say one word in regard to the amendment which has been proposed by the gen. tleman from Walker. I say under the operation of that section in the Consti- tuition that it would be absolutely im- possible for any city in the State of Alabama which had reached 8 per cent of debt limit to contract any further debt under the plan which he proposes. The proposition which the city of Montgomery when 1t desired to pur- chase the water works system. would have been able to make to the bond buyers would be simply this. that if you will sell us your water works sys- tenn. we will give you mortgage on the plant. Who ever heard uf any man with money to lend. lending it upon such security? Isn't 1t a fact. gentlemen,-that every man who lends money fixes limitation upon the which he will lend upon a given piece of property, and is 1t not always the universal rule that no man will lend money exceeding 50 per cent. or 60 per cent. of the value of the proper ty? Do you suppose that a different rule would prevail when you begin to deal with large figures. I say to you that it would have been absolutely lm- possible TOT the city or Montgomery to have constructed or purchased it's water works system, it would have been absolutely impossible for the city of Mobile to have constructed its wa ter works system unless there had been given the city the power of ens dorsing the obligation issued for the requirement. of those properties.
 MT. Oates-Permit me to ask a oues- tion. Which do you consider the most economic and best policy. to facilitate the capacity for effecting loans. or rather to repress it. than to keep cities within their income?
 MT. Weakley-T think the best policy Is to put reasona ble restrictions upon the power to create debt. but I con- slider it fatal to the growth or prosper ity of any city. or to the growth or of any State that puts re- strictions upon the power of cities to build It's water works. to improve Its streets or construct Its sewerage sys- tems. The great cities of the world could Tot have been built under such laws as that. This Is no new propois- tion. The gentleman talks about the question of street assessments. There is only one State in the United States that prevents the construction of streets like that. and that is the State of South Carolina. and If the gentle man will go to South Carolina he will not find modern. well built. well con- structed street in the whole State.