The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-06-20
Letters to the Editor.
Greater Montgomery.

l Editor The Advertiser:
 | Since we initiate New York, calling the | city Greater Montgomery, let us con- sider the means of Justifyins the use or the term
 Now that the limits are to be greatly and 6readenins n'ts she duties @ of municipal | government. it is fit time to consider | the ways and means of making Mont | gomery city of which to be Droud-a city to justify the claim. we make for | progress and for enterprise. The limits after October l, next, will include many miles of streets. and much will depend upon the care of these as to the stand Ing of Montgomery as a progressive cty. | The object. therefore, of this article Is | to discuss the subject of street improve | ment and to suggest the means or ac- complishing the same.
 It is well known that the present sys- tenn for street improvement IS not pop I ting to the demands of the City Council some have been distressed by it's burthens. | It has caused much veaxtious and expen- sive litigation in the courts and the end | settled by the courts that no greater | amount shall be charged to the owners | Of abutting property than the amount of | benefit derived by reason of the street | improvement. The State Constitution pro- I vides that no greater amount may be | charged than the increased market value | of the property. No two pieces of prop | erty on any given street may be increased | In market value the same amount &C., | cording to frontage and hence any sys- | tenn of uniform assessment. as now prac- ticed. is manifestly wrong.
 How are We to ascertain what benefit | Is derived by the property owner, or what street improvement This becomes a | matter of personal opinion in which per sons may and will differ Where Is there au,hoIt stasntory facts? Who has the right to say by what means or process we shall arrive at just and equitable assessment7 What tribunal can know what the increased | market value of any piece of property Is | because of certain street improvement? No person is bound to submit to an arbi- trary assessment, but each and every one | may appeal to the courts for protection and any adjudication in the courts must | be determined upon the merits of each | individual case and from the proofs ad- duced. The adjudication of no one case 1 determines the question of increased mar | ket value or benefit derived in any other | case.
 1 It will devolve upon the city to show | aff1rma lively that there was authority to l improve the streets and in the manner | the same is done, and also that there is 1 authority to make the assessment and in | the manner and form this Is done. To | make proof of increased market value of | property. it will become necessary 10 pro- 1 duce in court reputable witness or wit nesses who will testify to a knowledge | of the market value of the property be- | fore and after the street improvement was made, and that by reason of the said improvement the market value of | the property is increased, and how much. | Who can conscientiOusly say ne can do this? How Is one to ascertain Gpd know the essential facts? Without the facts affirmatively shown as stated, no court will have authority to enforce demand. | Where is all this strife. expensive and l vexatious litigation to end?
 It will not be denied that the improve ments of the streets benefits the owners of abuting property. nor can 1t be denied that such bsnsts the | particular street improved. The improve ment of Commerce Street, Dexter Avenue | and other streets in the central portion | of the city benefits all property within the corporate limits, makes property more desirable and hence more valuable. Be- | sides all use these streets; the humblest citizen with equal right of any other ure the cost of improvement? By what reasoning do. we find justification in charging to the owners of abutting prop: erty the cost of improving streets of which they have no control do not own nor have interest in nor the right to use, | except in common with and as other per good reason for a different rule than is | applied to road improvement in the coun- try districts? The principle is identically the same. Road improvement is charged to the general public; street improvement | to the owners of abutting property, thus
 causing the owner of city property to pay double, yea, triple tax. Pays for street
 improvement, pays tax on the cost of | street improvement and pays tax for pub
 lie road Improvement.
 It Is we'll known that many persons have established homes outside the city limits to escape the burthens of street improvement and other onerous taxes.
 These are all to be taken in, but how
 taxation win Influence the future of | Montgomery remains to be seen-may.
 never be known; 1t Is an unknown quan- itai and prevents the establishment of
 many happy homes. How many worthy
 laboring people in limited circumstances,
 as most laboring people are, are deterred
 because of these burthens7 How much
 Montgomery Is to be retarded in her
 growth and prosperity from these causes
 1t is difficult to forecast. Let us endeavor
 to find a remedy for this evil.
 Prohibit the sale of whiskey and other
 intoxicants within the limits of Mont
 pensary system. to be managed by a
 Board of Control. Apply the profits to
 the improvement of the streets and roads
 of the city and county of Montgomery in
 county as may be fair and reasonable
 and we have the remedy In few de-
 cades we may boast of, the finest streets
 stead of stunning the ctiy because of
 oppressive taxes the inducement for in
 vestment of capital will be inviting; The
 
 in its borders will be promoted. The
 change from a loosely administered li-
 cense system for the sale of intoxicants
 will invite a better citizenship. People
 who dread and wish to avoid the demor-
 alizing and debauching influence to which
 the rising generation Is now subjected
 The refining and elevating influence oi
 these changes will be felt and acknowl-
 edged by all and then may we pro
 claim Progress and Prosperity"
 It is not intended this article shall he
 a defense of the whiskey traffic. but like
 the poor with the church, we have Il
 with us always" It seems to have come
 to stay and let us take the less of the
 two evils-dispensary or license system It Is needless to discuss the dispensary as
 compared to the license system. The re-
 straining influence and beneficial results
 of the former are too we'll demonstrated
 wherever tried to need this. Put youi
 shoulder to the wheel, expunge the word
 fail from your dictionary, and a united
 effort will accomplish this within the
 next six months. Organize dispensarS
 club in each election precinct in the
 county, and canvass every qualified voter
 in each precinct secure if practicable his
 signature to petition to the State Leg
 islature for presentation when recon.
 vensd next fall, to pass a law as indl
 cated, and providing. if deemed best, fol
 an election and ratification of the law
 by a majority of the qualified voters ol l tha county voting such election.