Weekly Arizona journal-miner., 1907-01-30

meet am satisfied that inc puf poses sought tn hc accomplished by thc issue of these bonds can bc accon plislod hv 'hc ordinary method of d. rect appropriation ont of available rev orucs.
 may sny here ,n justification of and nS warrant for this assertion that inc two years just passed is inc first bi. cuninl period of which have any knowledge. in which our Territorial in. dchtcdnc~ has not been increased n single dollar. and in which there has not been n single unpaid claim against fhr Territory, and not dollar of float ing indebtedness and that within this same period the Territorial tax rate has been reduced from vj to 1j cents, and Inc county rates reduced in greater ar less proportions And may still fur thcr say that all thc improvements for which bonds have been authorized but not issued could have been made as contemplated during that period of two years. and paid for out of our current income. aud the tax rate still have been reduced below 9j cents. But because there was no legislative authority for such expenditure. it was not made. What justification. then. could there have been in the minds of prudent mon for increasing our bonded indebtedness. during the last biennial period. even though the Legislature had authorized II. when no public interest was neg lcctcdi
 Every consideration. from every point of view, In short. it seems to me. urges Us to measures looking to the early retirement of our bonded indebt. cdncss.
 You will recall that of the $2 .s29. 21J2D of funding bonds, s12s.972.i3 were for Territorial indebtedness and s2.1oO, ,J02.s6 were for tho indebted. ness of various counties and cities and chargcablc to them.
 \ total tax levy of cents on each $l0O.o0 of property valuation annually by the Territory would accumulate n sufficient sum with which to retire the entire Territorial indebtedness Gin. cluding not only that refunded but of the other issucs) within twenty years. And that tax would not, 1 think, in. crease the tax rate above that now pre-. vailing in fact, l think that the Ter. ritorial tax rate, notwithstanding the lcvics for retiring all of the bonds for Territorial indebtedness. as 1 have sug gcstcd. may be materially reduced. \ restoration of the rates of taxa. tion for 1905 would provide each year revenue more than sufficient to retire our debt in twenty years. without fur. thcr increase In the valuation of our property. Indeed. in probably but n single county would the tax rate have to be raised to that of 1905 5-and in most of them only relatively small | raisc-and with reasonable economy and prudence in the management of both county and Territorial affairs the rate need not be raised al all, and in | some counties can easily be lowered. Assessments and Taxes.
 The total assessed valuation of all property in the Territory for the pur. pose of taxation in 1906, as fixed by the Territorial Board of Equalization, was s62 ,227 ,633.5t.
 The Territorial Board of Equaliza tion, at its meeting in August, 1906, reduced the Territorial tax levy to 75 cents on each $1O0 of property assessed. This was n reduction of 20 cents. This reduction was made possible by in. | creased revenues, due 10 m increase of | wealth, and to increased valuations of property which previously had escaped taxation to n very great extent. Our law for the assessment of prop. crty is not entirely satisfactory in op- eration. To make 1t fairly satisfactory to all honest taxpayers, and to make 1t effective according to its intent, re- quires, however, that it shall be amend cd in some of its provisions, as l shall point out. Such amendments should be enacted; or, in lieu of amendments to existing law, there should be lcgisla- | tion quite comprehensive in character. The theory and intent of our law is that every property holder shall pay taxes in that proportion which the value of his property bears to the value of all other property in the Territory. In practice this theory and clear in- tent is largely dircgardcd, and burdens which are grievously incqunl are i'm posed. And, unfortunately, these bur. dcns are imposed upon the very people who are least able to bear them. Even when property k assessed on an equal ity of valuation the burden falls heav. jest upon the poor man, for the payment of the few dollars which hc is required to contribute to the Tax Collector from his mcagcr earnings, call for far great. CT sacrifices than do the thousands which may be paid on n property that yields n princely income. Indeed, in the latter ease, there is no sacrifice at all. The law seeks to protect the poor and the rich alike in oll their rights, and In return demands that the rich and the poor shall pax taxes in equal ratio to the value of the property they own.
 3ut when unequal assessments are i'm posed - when the poor many is made to pay far more than his share and the rich man is made to pay far less than his share-it is instantly evident that the law is not enforced with justice. And yet, that is exactly tho condition