The Hartford herald. [volume] (Hartford, Ky.) 1875-1926, 1907-10-16


Democratic administration, but we
have compelled them to pay upon a
fair valuation Of their property. From
his figures 1t appears that we have
doubled the valuation upon them
since his administration. The tax at
so cents on this difference would be
$57 $3.50, which multiplied by s gives
$463,6S0 more collected in taxes from
this one source in the eight years of
our administration than would have
been collected under the valuation of
the Republican administration. That
increase alone is enough to pay for
one-third of the cost of our new cap
itol. This is one of the things which
goes to explain how the Democrats,
with less tax rate than the Republi-
cans, have been able to do so much
tions. The records show that in 1892
the last year of Republican administra-
ton, there were only seven railroads
assessed in the state for taxation,
while in 1906, under Democratic ad-
ministratibn, there were nineteen rail-
roads assessed for taxation. There
has been much development of rail-
ocratic administration, and some few
lines built, but not enough to make up
the wide difference between and 49,
The Democratic general assembly of
1898 passed the McChord railroad rate
bill, measure OF vast interest to our
people, but Governor Bradley vetoed
that measure and delayed its passage
until 1900, when | became governor
and signed 1t. Under that law our
people have been saved thousands and
tens of thousands of dollars from ex-
tortionate charges and dscrimina-
tions by the railroad companies. 1t is
not surprising, therefore, that the
Republican governor who vetoed that
measure could find only seven railroad
corporations in the state to tax. The
Democratic administration has been
fair and reasonable to the railroads,
and encouraged their progress and
development in the state, but it has
also insisted that they shall bear their
just portion of taxation and be fair
and reasonable in their dealings with
tho people.
The Cause of Education.
Governor Bradley says nothing at all
about the schools and the cause of
education because he knows that moth
ing was done for them during his and
Taylor's administrations. He knows
the vast good done for them under
Democratic administration, and there
fore ignores the subject. He does not
even attempt to explain the fragrant
action of his administration in the
year 1899 in padding the school fund
and increasing the school per capita
to S2.70 for it's effect upon the cam.
paign of that year. Nor does he an
swer the charge that this inexcusablo
attempt for campaign material caused
a deficit the following year of $147,0
in the school fund, which the Demo-
cratic administration had to make
good. and caused the per capita tia
year to fall to S2.45. The Democratic
administration has raised it from
S2.45 to $40. 1t has increased the
school term from five months to six
months of free tuition throughout the
commonwealth. 1t has established
two normal schools for our teachers
1t has given generously to the State
College and to the State Colored Nor
NAL School, 1t has passed the school
book bill in the face of his and his
party's opposition, that gives to the
school children of the state their
school books at one-third less than
they formerly paid. In the face of
Republican promises, which can never
be relied upon, it presents facts like
these.
He complains that we have no plat
form. The record of the Democratic
administration is a sufficient platform,
and the people consider 1t far prefer
able to the vain promises in the Re.
publican platform. Their experience
with the Bradley and Taylor admins
trations has taught them that Repub-
lican platform promises are not worth
the paper they are written on.
BY tugglery. of figures he tries to
show that the cost of public printing
under his administration was less than
it has been under Democratic admin
istration. He states what the records
prove to be untrue, for those records
show that under Democratic admins
tration there has been a much greater
amount Of public printing done than
under the Republican administration
and at 32.567.91 less cost per year.
He also says. and quote his words:
why did the party they claim to rep
resent decline to make an appropria-
don to advance the interest of Ken
lucky at the st. Louis and jamestown
expositions? Why did they leave the
state they loved in the humiliating
attitude Of having no building?" On
the other hand | ask why does the
ex-governor. in such question. state
a proposition which he knows to be
untrue! This administration did
make an appropriation In the general
assembly of 1904 Of $4,000 for an ex-
- -. N,,fu saA